<html>
<head>
<base href="https://bugs.webkit.org/" />
</head>
<body>
<p>
<div>
<b><a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_REOPENED "
title="REOPENED - [GTK] Test fast/events/message-port-postMessage-recursive.html times out"
href="https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=168570#c7">Comment # 7</a>
on <a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_REOPENED "
title="REOPENED - [GTK] Test fast/events/message-port-postMessage-recursive.html times out"
href="https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=168570">bug 168570</a>
from <span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:mcatanzaro@igalia.com" title="Michael Catanzaro <mcatanzaro@igalia.com>"> <span class="fn">Michael Catanzaro</span></a>
</span></b>
<pre>(In reply to <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=168570#c6">comment #6</a>)
<span class="quote">> So, yes, this introduced a few failures (~10) most of them image only
> failures. I'm still not sure if they are actual regressions, or the patch
> actually revealed those bugs. But timer priorities is tricky thing that
> could also impact the performance, so we should think more carefully about
> it.</span >
I get to be right every once in a while!
I'm actually most concerned about the original test, because it's testing the behavior of the timers themselves, and it shows us that our timers are definitely broken without your patch. But clearly we need to think about this some more and understand what's going on with the other tests. Timers are hard.</pre>
</div>
</p>
<hr>
<span>You are receiving this mail because:</span>
<ul>
<li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li>
</ul>
</body>
</html>