`offsetLeft` and `offsetTop` were ignoring that sticky positioned boxes
can be shifted out of their normal position.
Testing: Various test improvements.
Signed-off-by: Oriol Brufau <obrufau@igalia.com>
Co-authored-by: Martin Robinson <mrobinson@igalia.com>
fxhash seems to be unmaintained (see
https://github.com/rustsec/advisory-db/issues/2185) so we should move
away from it.
Additionally, the new crate might be slightly faster.
There is still some cases depending on stylo that have the old fxhash
crate.
Signed-off-by: Narfinger <Narfinger@users.noreply.github.com>
Testing: Changes in Hash should really not show any bugs. And
performance should be comparable.
Signed-off-by: Narfinger <Narfinger@users.noreply.github.com>
It's expected that script queries be able to interact with collapsed
table rows and columns, so this change starts laying them out. They
still do not affect table dimensions, nor are they painted.
This does not fix all interaction with collapsed rows and columns. For
instance, setting scroll offsets of contained scrolling nodes does not
work properly. It does fix the panic though, which is the most important
thing.
Testing: this change includes a new WPT crash test.
Fixes: #37421.
Signed-off-by: Martin Robinson <mrobinson@igalia.com>
Parameterize and rename both `Layout::content_box_query` and
`Layout::content_boxes_query` to support the query of rendered padding
area and content area that accounts for transform and scroll. Both of
these query have been misleading for a time since they are using border
box, instead of content box of a Node.
This PR adds a new type `layout_api::BoxAreaType` to be passed from
`ScriptThread` to `LayoutThread` to query the respective area. It is
then used for the query within `IntersectionObserver` to pass several
WPTs.
Testing: Existing WPT Coverage.
---------
Signed-off-by: Jo Steven Novaryo <jo.steven.novaryo@huawei.com>
The `overflow-*` values of either the root element or the `<body>` get
propagated to the viewport. However, we were missing this part:
> The element from which the value is propagated must then have a used
`overflow` value of `visible`.
See https://drafts.csswg.org/css-overflow/#overflow-propagation
Testing:
- `css/cssom-view/scrolling-quirks-vs-nonquirks.html`
- `css/css-overflow/overflow-body-propagation-007.html`
- `css/css-overflow/overflow-body-propagation-008.html`
- `css/css-overflow/overflow-body-propagation-009.html`
- `css/css-overflow/scrollable-overflow-with-nested-elements-001.html`
- `css/css-overflow/scrollable-overflow-with-nested-elements-002.html`
- `css/css-overflow/scrollable-overflow-with-nested-elements-003.html`
- `css/css-overflow/scrollable-overflow-with-nested-elements-004.html`
- `css/css-overflow/scrollbar-gutter-scroll-into-view.html`
Failures:
- `css/css-overflow/overflow-body-propagation-010.html`
Failing because of missing support for `contain: paint`.
- `css/css-overflow/scrollable-overflow-with-nested-elements-005.html`
Failing because of wrong `data-expected-height`, but correct
`data-expected-scroll-height` which is core of this PR.
`data-expected-height` can be dealt separately.
Fixes: #38248
---------
Signed-off-by: Shubham Gupta <shubham13297@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Oriol Brufau <obrufau@igalia.com>
Co-authored-by: Oriol Brufau <obrufau@igalia.com>
This cleanup makes the interface a bit simpler and prevents problems
where the pseudo-element information is not passed by accident.
Testing: This should not change behavior, so is covered by existing
tests.
---------
Signed-off-by: Martin Robinson <mrobinson@igalia.com>
Signed-off-by: Oriol Brufau <obrufau@igalia.com>
Co-authored-by: Oriol Brufau <obrufau@igalia.com>
Reimplementation of: #35931
For a `FragmentTree` we define a scrollable overflow calculation that
includes the overflow all of it's children `Fragments`. In practice we
are using this calculation for scrolling area of the viewport and
defining the root scroll frames. However, since uncontained fixed
positioned element is located outside of the document and should not be
scrolled, and therefore it would make no sense to include them in the
calculation of its scrollable overflow as well.
Testing: New and existing WPT tests
Fixes: #38617Fixes: #38182
---------
Signed-off-by: Jo Steven Novaryo <jo.steven.novaryo@huawei.com>
Add basic support for storing layout data for pseudo-elements nested to
up to two levels. This removes the last unstored layout result and fixes
a double-borrow issue. This change does not add properly parsing nor
styling of these element types, but does prepare for those changes which
must come from stylo.
Testing: This fixes a intermittent panic in
`tests/wpt/tests/css/css-lists/nested-marker-styling.html`
Fixes: #38177.
Closes: #38183.
Signed-off-by: Martin Robinson <mrobinson@igalia.com>
Co-authored-by: Oriol Brufau <obrufau@igalia.com>
This reverts commit dcb90bb85e.
This broke scrollable overflow calculation in the following case:
```
<div id="foo" style="width: 200px; height: 200px; outline: solid; overflow: auto;">
<div style="height: 5000px; background: pink;">hello</div>
</div>
```
In this case the overflow is propagating through the `overflow: auto`
`<div>` and into the parents. When dumping the flow tree I see the root
node being 5000 pixels tall. It's unclear why this change didn't break
any tests, so it's likely that we need to add a test for this case.
Signed-off-by: Martin Robinson <mrobinson@igalia.com>
Include the scrollable overflow of a child box if either its parent or
child has `overflow: visible`
**Issue**: For the blocks having property `overflow:hidden`, their
scroll overflow is not added to parent's scroll overflow.
Causing unable to scroll the parent block aka `Root` block in our Issue
#38248 .
**Testing**: css/cssom-view/scrolling-quirks-vs-nonquirks.html
**Fixes**: #38248
Signed-off-by: Shubham Gupta <shubham13297@gmail.com>
Introduce `BoxFragmentRareData`, rare data for `BoxFragment`, which
would store the specific data that is relevant to several fragments.
This would reduce the `BoxFragment` size to 256 from 264 and add 8 bytes
for fragment that have rare data (due to the additional pointer to the
rare data).
Testing: Existing WPT coverage
Signed-off-by: Jo Steven Novaryo <jo.steven.novaryo@huawei.com>
The recent changes that cached the Scroll Tree present an opportunity to
calculate the queries that consider transform and scroll (dubbed as post
composite queries) accurately.
This PR propose a solution for this calculation by noting the lowest
scroll tree nodes that would affect a fragment. To do this, each
fragment would store a new attribute `spatial_tree_node` -- scroll tree
node id that we could use for the query. This referencing is considered
because the scroll tree node construction is managed by the fragment
itself. Therefore it would ease the managing the possibly stale
reference and future query cache invalidation considering the
development of incremental layout.
The bounding box query then could transform the bounding content rect of
a fragment using the computed current transformation matrix.
Fixes: https://github.com/servo/servo/issues/35768
Testing: Existing and new WPT
---------
Signed-off-by: stevennovaryo <steven.novaryo@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Jo Steven Novaryo <jo.steven.novaryo@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: Martin Robinson <mrobinson@igalia.com>
Co-authored-by: Martin Robinson <mrobinson@igalia.com>
`BoxFragment` had 2 fields that are only relevant for block-level boxes:
`clearance` and a boxed `block_margins_collapsed_with_children`.
This moves both pieces of data into a new `BlockLevelLayoutInfo` struct,
which is boxed.
As a result, the size of `BoxFragment` is reduced from 272 to 264 bytes.
Testing: Unneeded (no behavior change)
Signed-off-by: Oriol Brufau <obrufau@igalia.com>
Clearance only applies to block-level boxes, so it was unnecessary to
require it as a parameter. Instead, in block layout we can set it using
the new `.with_clearance()` method.
Testing: Unnecessary (no behavior change)
Signed-off-by: Oriol Brufau <obrufau@igalia.com>
It was very easy to forget about using `.with_specific_layout_info()` to
set the specific layout info, so it's better to make it a parameter.
In fact this already happened in the past: #36993 fixed the missing
specific layout info for flex items.
This patch fixes it for floats and atomic inlines. It also propagates it
in other cases where not doing so was not a big deal because the
specific layout info was None, but that was a fragile assumption.
Testing: Various WPT improvements
Fixes: #37898
Signed-off-by: Oriol Brufau <obrufau@igalia.com>
The creation of `LayoutContext` does more work than necessary if layout
just needs to do something like make a display list and not restyle and
relayout. This change makes it so that these kind of non-restyle layouts
do not need to create a display list. In addition, the creation of
`LayoutContext` is better encapsulate
Testing: This should not change observable behavior and is thus covered
by existing WPT tests.
Signed-off-by: Martin Robinson <mrobinson@igalia.com>
Co-authored-by: Oriol Brufau <obrufau@igalia.com>
This change fixes an issue and makes a few more minor improvements to
the `ImageAnimationState`:
1. Image rooting and unrooted now happens in one step from
`Window::update_animations_post_reflow`.
2. The `node_to_animating_image_map` is now stored as a shared `RwLock`
so that it doesn't need to be taken and then replaced in the
`ImageAnimationState` during reflow. This should prevent a hypothetical
issue
where image animations are restarted during empty reflows.
3. General naming and idiomatic Rust usage improvements.
Testing: This doesn't really have any obvious behavioral changes,
because all
reflows currently trigger a restyle. It becomes a serious problem with
#37677
and this change fixes the failing test there.
Signed-off-by: Martin Robinson <mrobinson@igalia.com>
Now that we are standardizing on the `_traits` crates becoming `_api`
and exposing the API of the crate that they get their name from [^1],
`script_layout_interface` becomes `layout_api` as it exposes the API for
`layout` that is used by `script` This brings the crate in line with the
naming of the other ones in `shared`.
[^1]:
https://servo.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/263398-general/topic/Organizing.20*_traits.20crates/with/396893711
Testing: This should not change any behavior and thus is covered by
existing tests.
Signed-off-by: Martin Robinson <mrobinson@igalia.com>
Previously, layout was handling scrollable overflow and srolling area
calculation separately, only excluding the "unreachable scrollable
overflow region" at the last step. In addition, `position: absolute` was
not included in scrollable overflow calculation.
This change combines the two concepts into a single scrollable overflow
calculation and starts taking into account `position: absolute`.
Finally, `BoxFragment::scrollable_overflow_for_parent` is converted to
use early returns which reduces the amount of indentation.
Fixes#35928.
Fixes#37204.
Testing: This causes some WPT test to pass, but also two to start
failing:
- `/css/css-masking/clip-path/clip-path-fixed-scroll.html`: This seems
to fail
because script is scrolling past the boundaries of the document. This is
a
failure that was uncovered by the fixed element now being added to the
page's scroll area.
- `/css/css-overflow/overflow-outside-padding.html`: One test has
started to fail
here because now the absolutely positioned element is included in the
scroll area,
and I think there is an issue with how we are placing RTL items with
negative margins.
Signed-off-by: Martin Robinson <mrobinson@igalia.com>
Instead of computing scrollable overflow while constructing the fragment
tree, we will now do it later. In the future this will also allow to
only recalculate the overflow without rebuilding the tree when transform
properties change, but that's left for a follow-up.
Stylo PR: https://github.com/servo/stylo/pull/194
Testing: One test is now passing (more investigation is needed), but
otherwise this isn't expected to have any effect.
Signed-off-by: Oriol Brufau <obrufau@igalia.com>
Co-authored-by: Martin Robinson <mrobinson@igalia.com>
Text decorations have a special kind of propagation. Instead of
propating these during box tree construction, move propagation to
stacking context tree construction. This will allow for using a very
easy type of incremental layout when text decorations change. For
instance, when a link changes color during hovering over it, we can skip
all of box and fragment tree construction.
In addition, propagation works a bit better now and color and style
properly move down from their originating `Fragment`s.
This introduces three new failures, because now we are drawing the
text-decoration with the correct color in more places, which exposes an
issue we have with text-decorations not being drawn in relation to the
baseline (taking into account `vertical-align`).
Testing: There are tests for these changes.
Fixes#31736.
Signed-off-by: Martin Robinson <mrobinson@igalia.com>
Co-authored-by: Oriol Brufau <obrufau@igalia.com>
Previously, after a layout was finished (or skipped in the case of
repaint-only layout), both the stacking context tree and display list
were built. In the case of repaint-only layout, we should be able to
skip the reconstruction of the stacking context tree and only do display
list building.
This change does that, also generally cleaning and up and clarifying the
data structure used during this phase of layout. This opens up the
possibility of a new kind of incremental layout that does both repaint
and a rebuild of the stacking context tree.
On the blaster.html test case[^1], this reduces tightly-measured layout
time from ~45-50 milliseconds to ~25-30 milliseconds on my M3.
[^1]: https://gist.github.com/mrobinson/44ec87d028c0198917a7715a06dd98a0
Testing: There are currently no performance tests for layout. :( This
should
not modify the results of WPT tests.
Signed-off-by: Martin Robinson <mrobinson@igalia.com>
Co-authored-by: Oriol Brufau <obrufau@igalia.com>
This change adds the simplest kind of incremental layout. When Servo
detects that all style changes only require a repaint, only run stacking
context tree and WebRender display list generation. This means that
these kind of restyles do not need a re-layout. Instead, the existing
box and fragment trees will be used and the styles of damaged nodes will
be updated in their box and fragment tree nodes.
This requires a new style repair DOM traversal for nodes that have had
their style damaged. In addition, careful accounting of all the places
where we store style must happen in order ot update those styles.
Testing: This is covered by existing WPT tests as it should not change
observable behavior.
We have created a test case which shows a 50% speedup when run
in Servo, even though there still a long way to go to match the speed
of other browsers:
https://gist.github.com/mrobinson/44ec87d028c0198917a7715a06dd98a0
Co-authored-by: Oriol Brufau <obrufau@igalia.com>
Signed-off-by: Martin Robinson <mrobinson@igalia.com>
Signed-off-by: Martin Robinson <mrobinson@igalia.com>
Co-authored-by: Oriol Brufau <obrufau@igalia.com>
`TextRun`s use their parent style to render. Previously, these styles
were cloned and stored directly in the box tree `TextRun` and resulting
`TextFragment`s. This presents a problem for incremental layout.
Wrapping the style in another layer of shared ownership and mutability
will allow updating all `TextFragment`s during repaint-only incremental
layout by simply updating the box tree styles of the original text
parents.
This adds a new set of borrows when accessing text styles, but also
makes it so that during box tree block construction
`InlineFormattingContext`s are created lazily and now
`InlineFormattingContextBuilder::finish` consumes the builder, making
the API make a bit more sense. This should also improve performance of
box tree block construction slightly.
Testing: This should not change observable behavior and thus is covered
by existing WPT tests.
Signed-off-by: Martin Robinson <mrobinson@igalia.com>
Co-authored-by: Oriol Brufau <obrufau@igalia.com>
Instead of resolving the canvas background properties (essentially
keeping a possible reference to the `<body>`'s style) during fragment
tree construction, wait until painting to possibly find the style on an
appropriate `<body>` fragment. This is possible now because `Fragment`
keeps a list of flags with relevant information about the root and
`<body>` elements.
A benefit of this approach is that styles aren't cached in the fragment
tree, which would be problematic for incremental layout. In addition,
the old code was making an effort to transform the `<body>`'s background
by the root element's transform. Only Safari does this and there was
a resolution the WG that this should not happen in
https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/6683.
Testing:
- `/css/css-transforms/transform-translate-background-001.html`
- `/css/css-transforms/transform-translate-background-002.html`
- `/css/CSS2/floats/float-root.html`
Fixes: #30475.
Closes: #30569.
Signed-off-by: Martin Robinson <mrobinson@igalia.com>
Co-authored-by: Oriol Brufau <obrufau@igalia.com>
Table cells share background styles with their track and track group
boxes. When a track and track group style is repaired, this new data
structure will allow reparing the style of the cell `Fragment`s without
having to lay the table out again or walk through `Fragment`s and
individually repair their background styles.
Testing: This doesn't change behavior and is thus tested by existing
WPT tests.
Signed-off-by: Martin Robinson <mrobinson@igalia.com>
Co-authored-by: Oriol Brufau <obrufau@igalia.com>
In the scrollable overflow calcutation, apply CSS transforms to boxes
and scrollable overflow of the descendant. Clip unreachable scrollable
overflow according to it's block start and inline start scrolling
direction. And, renamed `Fragment::scrolling_overflow` to
`Fragment::scrolling_overflow_for_parent` as it was calculating the
scrolling overflow contribution from a child.
Add several WPT tests, testing the transform interaction `rotate`,
`scale`, and `skew` with scrollable overflow. There are several WPT test
that are testing the interaction that not expected from current browsers
implementation according to the spec.
Testing: Existing and new WPT.
Fixes: #36031
---------
Signed-off-by: stevennovaryo <steven.novaryo@gmail.com>
This change switches `offsetParent`, `offsetLeft`, etc queries to use
the BoxTree fragments instead of walking the entire fragment tree. In
addition, fragments are stored for columns and colgroups. In general,
this greatly simplifies the flow of the query and prevents having to do
expensive tree walks.
Testing: This change is covered by newly passing WPT tests and three new
failures:
- /css/filter-effects/backdrop-filter-edge-clipping-2.html
- /css/filter-effects/backdrop-filter-edge-mirror.html
- /css/filter-effects/backdrop-filter-edge-pixels-2.html
These failures are actually progressions, because now the references
start
to render properly whereas before they did not.
Fixes: This is part of #36525 and #36665.
Signed-off-by: Martin Robinson <mrobinson@igalia.com>
Co-authored-by: Oriol Brufau <obrufau@igalia.com>
This is a followup to #36629, continuing to implement script-based
layout queries using the `Fragment`s attached to the `BoxTree`. In this
change, geometry queris (apart from parent offset) are calculated using
`Fragment`s hanging of the `BoxTree`.
In order to make this work, all `Fragment`s for inlines split by blocks,
need to be accessible in the `BoxTree`. This required some changes to
the way that box tree items were stored in DOM `BoxSlot`s. Now every
inline level item can have more than a single `BoxTree` item. These are
carefully collected by the `InlineFormattingContextBuilder` -- currently
a bit fragile, but with more documentation.
Testing: There are tests for these changes.
Signed-off-by: Martin Robinson <mrobinson@igalia.com>
Co-authored-by: Oriol Brufau <obrufau@igalia.com>
When doing any kind of query, up until now, containing block rectangles
were calculated by walking the `FragmentTree` until the node being
queried was found. In order to make possible answering queries without
walking the `FragmentTree`, `Fragment`s need to cache their cumulative
containing block rectangles.
This change adds a new `FragmentTree` pass (during construction) that
takes care of calculating and caching these values. The new cached value
is used during resolved style queries and also scrolling area queries
(with the idea that all queries will eventually use them).
In addition, extra `FragmentTree` walks used for cancelling animations
for elements no longer in the `FragmentTree` are integrated into this
new traversal.
Testing: Covered by existing WPT tests.
Signed-off-by: Martin Robinson <mrobinson@igalia.com>
Co-authored-by: Oriol Brufau <obrufau@igalia.com>
Now that legacy layout has been removed, the name `layout_2020` doesn't
make much sense any longer, also it's 2025 now for better or worse. The
split between the "layout thread" and "layout" also doesn't make as much
sense since layout doesn't run on it's own thread. There's a possibility
that it will in the future, but that should be something that the user
of the crate controls rather than layout iself.
This is part of the larger layout interface cleanup and optimization
that
@Looriool and I are doing.
Testing: Covered by existing tests as this is just code movement.
Signed-off-by: Martin Robinson <mrobinson@igalia.com>
