Summary:
changelog: [internal]
Add more clang tidy rules to prevent common class of bugs.
Reviewed By: javache
Differential Revision: D39245194
fbshipit-source-id: 5521c5c4653d7005b96ebba494e810ba5075afbc
Summary:
Fixes https://github.com/facebook/react-native/issues/34120
The new React Native architecture doesn't check `needsCustomLayoutForChildren` so it wrongly positions native views on Android. In https://github.com/facebook/react-native/issues/34120 there are videos comparing the positioning of a native action view in the old and the new architecture.
This PR passes the parent tag to the `updateLayout` method of the `SurfaceMountingManager`. The `SurfaceMountingManager` calls `needsCustomLayoutForChildren` on the parent view manager (copied the code from the `NativeViewHierarchyManager` in the old architecture).
**NOTE** - I wasn't sure where to get the parent shadow view from so I've put in my best guesses where I could and left it as `{}` otherwise.
## Changelog
[Android] [Fixed] - Migrate `needsCustomLayoutForChildren` check to the new architecture
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/react-native/pull/34254
Test Plan:
I checked the fix in the repro from https://github.com/facebook/react-native/issues/34165. Here is a video of the action view closing using the native button that is now visible in the new architecture.
https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/1761227/180607896-35bf477f-4552-4b8a-8e09-9e8c49122c0c.mov
Reviewed By: cipolleschi
Differential Revision: D38153924
Pulled By: javache
fbshipit-source-id: e2c77fa70d725a33ce73fe4a615f6d884312580c
Summary:
TL;DR: For applications using JS navigation, save 50-95% of CPU during mounting phase in N>2 navigations that replace ~most of screen.
During investigation of performance on the UI thread of React Native applications, I noticed that the /initial/ render of an screen for an application using JS navigation is /mostly/ consumed (on the UI thread) by tearing-down the previous View hierarchy. In one 185ms segment on the UI thread in production, 95% of the CPU time was Remove/Delete instructions and only 5% of CPU time was consumed by actually displaying the new hierarchy (this is specific to Android and also assumes that View Preallocation is being used, so post-commit work consists of Insert and UpdateLayout mutations primarily).
There are /some/ cases where the C++ differ knows that we are deleting an entire subtree and therefore we could communicate this to the mounting layer. All that matters is that these Views are removed from the View hierarchy immediately; and secondarily that their memory is cleaned up ASAP, but that doesn't need to happen immediately.
Some additional constraints and notes:
1) As noted in the comments, we cannot simply stop producing Remove and Delete instructions. We need to produce /both/ the new RemoveDeleteTree instruction, /and/ produce all the Remove/Delete instructions, primarily because LayoutAnimations relies heavily on these Remove/Delete instructions and certain things would break if we removed those instructions entirely. However, we can mark those Remove/Delete instructions as redundant, process them only in LayoutAnimations, and not send them to the Android mounting layer.
2) We want to make sure that View Recycling is not impacted. Since Android cannot take advantage of View Recycling until /after/ the second major render (preallocation of views will happen before any views are recycled), this doesn't impact View Recycling and we'll make sure Views are recycled whenever they are deleted.
Thus, we do two things:
1) Introduce a new RemoveDeleteTree operation that can delete an entire subtree recursively as part of one operation. This allows us to avoid serializing hundreds or thousands of instructions and prevents JNI traffic.
2) Besides removing the topmost View from the View hierarchy, and ensuring it's not drawn, the full teardown and recycling of the tree can happen /after/ the paint.
In some flows with JS navigation this saves us 95% of CPU during the mount phase. In the general case it is probably closer to 25-50% of CPU time that is saved and/or deferred.
Changelog: [Android][Changed] Significant perf optimization to Fabric Remove/Delete operations
Reviewed By: ryancat
Differential Revision: D37257864
fbshipit-source-id: a7d33fc74683939965cfb98be4db7890644110b2
Summary:
Renaming the `better` utilities to `butter`:
- to prevent claims that this library is superior to others - it really depends on use cases
- to indicate ease of use throughout the codebase, easily spread like butter
Changelog: [C++][Changed] Renaming C++ better util to butter, used by Fabric internals
Reviewed By: JoshuaGross
Differential Revision: D33242764
fbshipit-source-id: 26dc95d9597c61ce8e66708e44ed545e0fc5cff5
Summary:
The new C++ Differ has been validated on Android and iOS. Delete the old code path.
Changelog: [Internal]
Reviewed By: sammy-SC
Differential Revision: D28904330
fbshipit-source-id: 2e0d8682f6b2a79f9758ed8b7b92809060835815
Summary:
react-native-windows runs with a more strict set of warnings as errors. This fixes a bunch of warnings being hit while compiling core react-native code as part of react-native-windows. In particular warnings about mismatched signed/unsigned comparisons, lossy conversions, and variable names that conflict with names in outer scopes (yoga has a global for `leading` and `trailing` that conflicts with some local variable names)
## Changelog
[Internal] [Fixed] - Fix various C++ warnings
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/react-native/pull/31399
Test Plan: I've run these changes in react-native-windows. -- Shouldn't have any functionality difference.
Reviewed By: sammy-SC
Differential Revision: D28290188
Pulled By: rozele
fbshipit-source-id: 2f7cf87f58d73a3f43510ac888dbcb9ab177d134
Summary:
Refactor a code block that is duplicated 2x. Logic stays the same besides renaming, and a ternary operator to decide between getting the children from "old" or "new" tree.
Tests can help us refactor knowing that the logic is still correct.
Changelog: [Internal]
Reviewed By: sammy-SC
Differential Revision: D28018994
fbshipit-source-id: d34a033444e67091e44ff6a747fd39846c165238
Summary:
There's a case here where we do a loop, with a map loopup, and nested map lookup inside of that. It's not particularly efficient and was done because we have multiple distinct pointers to distinct ShadowViews that are backed by the same ShadowNode. Now due to previous, recent refactoring, we can simplify this case a lot.
The code WAS correct before, just confusing and not particularly efficient. Tests can prove that this is still correct.
Changelog: [Internal]
Reviewed By: sammy-SC
Differential Revision: D28018996
fbshipit-source-id: a7c8148802650c88888960c9c099954e0f8bc357
Summary:
This is no longer true because of the "scope" mechanism.
Changelog: [Internal]
Reviewed By: sammy-SC
Differential Revision: D28018995
fbshipit-source-id: 91470234bb15f7feeb92b41613b0bbdbe42ccb27
Summary:
I am deduping a duplicated block, and adding comments to explain when we create INSERT/REMOVE mutations immediately and when we defer creation.
Theoretically the ordering of mutations will be more consistent now, which ~shouldn't matter, but is probably a decent property to have. In particular, before, in some cases
both of these orderings were possible in various scenarios:
```
INSERT X -> Y
INSERT Y -> Z
```
and
```
INSERT Y -> Z
INSERT X -> Y
```
Both of those are fine/correct/won't cause issues on any known platforms. But now, at least for the two cases touched here, only this ordering will be produced:
```
INSERT Y -> Z
INSERT X -> Y
```
meaning we build the tree from the bottom-up (the "bottom" being the root) and do out-of-order inserts less frequently.
Again, the biggest part of this diff should be readability/refactoring/de-duplicating logic, but more consistent orderings is a nice-to-have.
Changelog: [Internal]
Reviewed By: sammy-SC
Differential Revision: D28017926
fbshipit-source-id: 5941588d0c8bba8b0df7d0084d5d198f4b7c2427
Summary:
Unit test case seed 1167342011 encodes a case where the differ produces a DELETE and CREATE of the same node in the same frame, which we consider an error.
It turns out this was caused by nested "unflatten" operations and this bit of deleted code specifically. We were deleting an unmatched node from a parent call's dictionary of nodes,
which prevented it from being matched in the "old" tree later on.
This is only possible now that we attach pointers to the "other" ViewNodePair when they're matched, so we can check existence of that pointer instead of inclusion in dictionaries to decide if we need to DELETE/CREATE a node and its subtree.
Changelog: [Internal]
Reviewed By: sammy-SC
Differential Revision: D28003330
fbshipit-source-id: 305440ef20b921883c1d6e38a4a4072e5a7f95ac
Summary:
Just adding a comment for future possible refactoring here.
Changelog: [Internal]
Reviewed By: sammy-SC
Differential Revision: D28003338
fbshipit-source-id: ec307314d18d69f8c77c2b2afff1f3953ca55473
Summary:
These blocks either are not necessary due to other mechanisms, or are impossible to hit.
Changelog: [Internal]
Reviewed By: sammy-SC
Differential Revision: D28003336
fbshipit-source-id: f2321073de77c0f0173a9a0891be2a3012578b01
Summary:
Since each ShadowViewNodePair will point to any matched pair in the "other" tree during diffing, we can rely on the presence of the "other" pointer instead of
always removing nodes from `deletionCreationCandidatePairs` when they're matched.
Changelog: [Internal]
Reviewed By: sammy-SC
Differential Revision: D28003335
fbshipit-source-id: 0b886946eedc497091ca79c436f160b3d4bf3f1e
Summary:
There's a lot of code duplication in the differ. Reduce by factoring a duplicated code path into `updateMatchedPairSubtrees`.
This handles cases of updating trees with flattening or unflattening.
Changelog: [Internal]
Reviewed By: sammy-SC
Differential Revision: D28003339
fbshipit-source-id: cbbf890ba447b29d79aedea374b173de40e71334
Summary:
Simple refactor to use this struct to store lists instead of references to lists.
Changelog: [Internal]
Reviewed By: sammy-SC
Differential Revision: D28003337
fbshipit-source-id: a37fa23ed3c1e1b273f92bf5ad5179a0fd1d852b
Summary:
While I think this was a very marginal bug with no known issues in the wild, incorrect layout values were sometimes being propagated to certain nodes. This would only occur during complex nested (un)flattening operations and may only impact node consistency, specifically with setting the "previous" ShadowView of mutation instructions, specifically REMOVE and DELETE. Even in rigorous testing I had trouble hitting this case and it didn't seem to impact the "next" values in CREATE, INSERT, or UPDATE.
The issue: previously `sliceChildShadowNodeViewPairsV2` assumed that the node it's operating on is a child of a non-flattened view, and the baseline origin is `{0,0}`. You can see when `sliceChildShadowNodeViewPairsRecursivelyV2` is called, a `layoutOffset` is passed in. If we ever got a list of a node that was in a flattened parent by calling `sliceChildShadowNodeViewPairsV2`, we would incorrectly assume that baseline layoutOffset for the node is `0,0`.
Now, we store the layoutOffset in the ShadowViewNodePair and can retrieve it when getting child pairs of a node.
Changelog: [internal]
Reviewed By: sammy-SC
Differential Revision: D27759380
fbshipit-source-id: a89756190a1cb377bcc55ff31799c2afbaecdaa9
Summary:
Previously, `ShadowViewNodePair::List` owned each `ShadowViewNodePair` but whenever we put `ShadowViewNodePair` into a TinyMap, those were unowned pointer references. This worked... 99% of the time. But in some marginal cases, it would cause dangling pointers, leading to difficult-to-track-down issues. So, I'm moving both of these to be unowned pointers and keeping a `std::deque` that owns all `ShadowViewNodePair`s and is itself owned by the main differ function. See comments for more implementation details. I'm moderately concerned about memory usage regressions, but practically speaking this will contain many items when a tree is created for the first time, and then very few items after that (space complexity should be similar to `O(n)` where `n` is the number of changed nodes after the last diff).
See comments as to why I believe `std::deque` is the right choice. Long-term there might be data-structures that are even more optimal, but std::deque has the right tradeoffs compared to other built-in STL structures like std::list and std::vector, and is probably better than std::forward_list too. Long-term we may want a custom data-structure that fits our needs exactly, but std::deque comes close and is possibly optimal.
Changelog: [Internal]
Reviewed By: sammy-SC
Differential Revision: D27730952
fbshipit-source-id: 2194b535439bd309803a221188da5db75242005a
Summary:
I am fixing an extremely marginal case that probably impacts nothing in production, but in theory, could - see next diff in stack for the assert that is being hit.
TL;DR in marginal, complex cases with a lot of un/flattening, we can generate the following sequence of mutations:
```
UPDATE node V1 -> V2
REMOVE node V1
```
That is incorrect, and what we actually want is:
```
UPDATE node V1 -> V2
REMOVE node V2
```
While this, again, impacts /nothing/ in prod that we know of, it would be good to get this correct so that we can enable stricter asserts (see next diff).
This will also help with debugging LayoutAnimations.
Changelog: [Internal]
Reviewed By: mdvacca
Differential Revision: D27697788
fbshipit-source-id: 47f34fe3e8107167b3df4db841d2cc14c58cb31d
Summary:
Changes in following diffs will be gated by this feature flag.
The differ in the new file is copied from the current stable implementation and will not be modified until it's deleted.
Changelog: [Internal]
Reviewed By: sammy-SC, mdvacca
Differential Revision: D27775698
fbshipit-source-id: 03d9518ffd2b1f25712386c56a38bd2b4d839fc2
Summary:
First, I make the breadcrumbs mechanism (landed just this week) more readable - I forgot to add separators between the breadcrumbs.
Second, there is a path that I am 99% sure we never hit. I've had comments to that effect for a ~year, but now I'm adding a falsey assert. If we don't hit it in prod after a few months I'll be more comfortable just deleting the branch entirely (while probably keeping the assert).
Changelog: [Internal]
Reviewed By: sammy-SC
Differential Revision: D27697786
fbshipit-source-id: 6d74d1703b2212d069fbed510f2655ec17294458
Summary:
Introduce a new debugging mechanism for the debugger. Outside of debug mode (you must defined `DEBUG_LOGS_BREADCRUMBS` manually to enable this feature) it will have no cost or binary size.
When the debug mode is enabled, it allows you to trace the call stack to trace what the differ is doing, making logs more useful.
Motivation: tracking down a tricky bug caught by D27585136 which originates in the differ.
Changelog: [Internal]
Reviewed By: mdvacca
Differential Revision: D27667885
fbshipit-source-id: ef75a9a1c8890f9bbe3e5b2e8a8ffcde92fb22c2
Summary:
Fix warnings about implicit type truncation.
## Changelog
[Internal] [Fixed] - Fix various C++ warnings
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/react-native/pull/31002
Test Plan:
Almost all the changes here are simply making explicit conversions which are already occurring. With the exception of a couple of constants being changed from doubles to floats.
With these changes I am able to remove a bunch of warning suppressions in react-native-windows.
Reviewed By: shergin
Differential Revision: D26900502
Pulled By: rozele
fbshipit-source-id: d5e415282815c2212a840a863713287bbf118c10
Summary:
This will allow these asserts to crash on Android debug builds.
We will migrate more sites as we confirm this is stable through testing.
Changelog: [Internal]
Reviewed By: mdvacca
Differential Revision: D26409354
fbshipit-source-id: fb35cd8de29890f7c2b761435eaa02de377bdd1e
Summary:
Pull Request resolved: https://github.com/facebook/react-native/pull/30988
We have a bunch of flags scattered throughout the codebase with poor hygiene and commenting. Consolidate.
Changelog: [Internal]
Reviewed By: mdvacca
Differential Revision: D26392518
fbshipit-source-id: 2823de123a5009d6b8c358e8a3f451b9fa0e05b7
Summary:
During earlier testing I didn't fully realize that Android disables a core bit of View Flattening: Views can be concrete or non-concrete; and their children can be flattened or not. None of these properties are mutually exclusive with each other.
Except on Android - that functionality is currently disabled. A View can be either flattened and non-concrete, or non-flat and concrete. So there are some flattening edge-cases hit on iOS but not Android, due to the larger state-space on iOS.
To test, I forced Android to align with iOS and tested; and then tested on iOS; and ensured no mounting errors, assertions, or crashes were hit during some specific tests.
Changelog: [Internal]
Differential Revision: D26298872
fbshipit-source-id: 2f0f78127a7bf057c7cf109005f1dae74f0ff6ba
Summary:
Original commit changeset: 3ed8e78e31b0
Backing-out D25938851 (https://github.com/facebook/react-native/commit/69b3016171bb2f994dd4a62c34c2c4645b5a7d56) and D25935785 (https://github.com/facebook/react-native/commit/bdea479a1faa0f1f7d7c9d9162212cce94bc9720). Based on analysis documented in T83141606, I believe this issue should be fixed in JS.
Additionally, this crash actually has nothing to do with (un)flattening or the differ; it is a side-effect of stale ShadowNodes being cloned, which I believe is either UB or a contract violation. Either way, it should probably be fixed either in JS, or in node cloning. So this isn't the right solution for this issue and should be reverted.
Changelog: [Internal]
Reviewed By: mdvacca
Differential Revision: D25949569
fbshipit-source-id: 8cf1094a767da98fff4430da60d223412e029545
Summary:
Android has some optimizations around view allocation and pre-allocation that, in the case of View Unflattening, can cause "Create" mutations to be skipped.
To make sure that doesn't happen, we add a flag to ShadowViewMutation (in the core) that any platform can consume, that indicates if the mutation is a "recreation" mutation.
It is still a bit unclear why this is needed, in the sense that I would expect props revision to increment if a view is unflattened. However, there is at least one documented reproduction where that is *not* the case. So for now, we'll have a hack pending further investigation.
Changelog: [Internal]
Reviewed By: mdvacca
Differential Revision: D25935785
fbshipit-source-id: 6fb4f0a6dedba0fe46ba3cd558ac1daa70f671f5
Summary:
The `index` parameter for UpdateMutation is optional, and is normally just -1. It's not useful, so remove it. `parentShadowView` is also not relevant and is not used; in some existing use-cases the actual parent view of the updated view is available, and in some contexts the parent view is not set.
The function now will always set the index to -1 for UpdateMutations, and `{}` for ParentShadowView.
This should have no impact on iOS or Android, as this parameter is not used. It could theoretically have an impact on lifetimes of objects retained (now not retained) by not passing parentShadowView into the mutation. For example, any shared props or state associated with the parent will not be retained in the Update mutation now.
Changelog: [Internal]
Reviewed By: shergin
Differential Revision: D25342943
fbshipit-source-id: 0ddbef76a6e2eefc2629c9729f721d8674d7737e
Summary:
The "reparenting differ" has been the default differ for several months; ship it by removing config and the old differ.
Some functions can't be deleted yet because unit testing relies on it heavily; this can be refactored in the future if we care a lot.
Changelog: [Internal]
Reviewed By: mdvacca
Differential Revision: D25257205
fbshipit-source-id: 6f1dcc490bb1efe3d12506addf5f0843ca48c5c6
Summary:
changelog: [internal]
Prevents 2 type converions:
1. int <-> size_t
2. int <-> int32_t
# Why is using size_t better when working with indexes.
## 1. Type conversion isn't for free.
Take this example
```
size_t calculate(int number) {
return number + 1;
}
```
It generates following assembly (generated with armv8-a clang 10.0.0):
```
calculate(int): // calculate(int)
sub sp, sp, #16 // =16
str w0, [sp, #12]
ldr w8, [sp, #12]
add w9, w8, #1 // =1
mov w8, w9
sxtw x0, w8
add sp, sp, #16 // =16
ret
```
That's 9 instructions.
If we get rid of type conversion:
```
size_t calculate(size_t number) {
return number + 1;
}
```
Assembly (generated with armv8-a clang 10.0.0):
```
calculate(unsigned long): // calculate(unsigned long)
sub sp, sp, #16 // =16
str x0, [sp, #8]
ldr x8, [sp, #8]
add x0, x8, #1 // =1
add sp, sp, #16 // =16
ret
```
Compiler now produces only 7 instructions.
## Semantics
When using int for indexing, the type doesn't say much. By using `size_t`, just by looking at the type, it gives the reader more information about where it is coming from.
Reviewed By: JoshuaGross
Differential Revision: D24332248
fbshipit-source-id: 87ef982829ec14906ed9e002ea2e875fda4a0cd8
Summary:
In the new Flattening differ, I experimentally verified that these two code paths are not hit (or redundant) and deleted them.
One of the branches did nothing and the other produced duplicate DELETE mutations for the same tag, that is handled elsewhere.
Changelog: [Internal]
Reviewed By: fkgozali
Differential Revision: D23806161
fbshipit-source-id: 9ad2929e2d719a7b9b34640ed35f7a696103604b
Summary:
# What is this?
For a very long time, we've discussed the possibility of detecting Node Reparenting in the Fabric Differ. Practically, from the developer perspective, ReactJS and React Native do not allow reparenting: nodes cannot be reparented, only deleted and then recreated with entirely new tags.
However, Fabric introduced the idea of View Flattening where views deemed unnecessary would be removed from the View hierarchy entirely. This is great and improves memory usage, except for one issue: if a View becomes unflattened, or becomes flattened, the entire tree underneath it must be rebuilt.
In a past diff we introduced a mechanism to detect sibling reordering cleverly, and produce a minimal instruction set. This diff is very similar: we know the invariants around flattening and unflattening of views and we take advantage of them to produce an optimal set of instructions efficiently.
# What's different from previous attempts?
No global maps! Those are slow!
This seems to work and (hopefully) might even improve performance, since way less work is being done on the UI thread in cases when views are (un)flattened.
This *only* does extra work when flattening/unflattening happens, which gives product engineers a little more control over perf.
# So, how's it work?
This algorithm is intuitively simple (I think) but tricky to pull off, because there are lots of edge-cases.
In short: In the past, that information was hidden from the Differ: the differ didn't know if views were being reparented, it would see them
as entirely new views or as views being deleted if a View was flattened or unflattened. We very subtly change the information given to the differ:
all nodes are visible to the differ, but marked as Flattened or Unflattened. Thus, when the differ compares two nodes in the "old" and "new" tree,
it can tell not just if there are updates to the node but if it has been unflattened or flattened as well.
For example, take this tree, where * indicates that a View is flattened:
```
A
+
+----+---+
B* X
+ +
| |
+---+--+ +
E F Y
```
When the Differ asks for the children of A, in the past it would get a list `[E, F, X]`. That is, B* and X are both its children, but since B is flattened, it is omitted entirely from the list and
its children are substituted.
Now, when the Differ asks for the children of A, we give it this list instead: `[B*, E, F, X]`. That is: we give it a list which includes B, but B is marked as flattened.
Another wrinkle: A node `X` could have its children flattened, but still be a concrete view: so flattening/unflattening is a different operation from making a view "concrete" or "unconcrete", which can change independently of flattening.
There is one additional wrinkle: because of zIndex/stacking order, the children of `B` might not actually appear after `B` in the list. Depending on zIndex, a tree that looks like this:
```
A
+
+------+------+
B* C*
+ +
| |
+--+--+ +--+--+
D E F G
```
Could actually be linearized as: `[D G B* F C* E]` (as an extreme example; but basically all permutations as possible).
This is the reason, and the *only* reason that the inner Flattener/Unflattener
## The cases we need to handle
There are 7 cases/edge-cases of flattening and unflattening that we need to handle. Practically, all cases of reordering + flattening/unflattening, and taking recursive cases into account:
1. View A and A' (A in the old tree, A' in the new tree) are matched in the differ, and A* has been flattened or unflattened. These two cases are the easiest to handle.
2. View A' has been reordered with its siblings, and has been flattened or unflattened. These cases are slightly trickier to handle.
3. While flattening or unflattening, we encounter a child that has also been unflattened or flattened. So we need to handle four cases here in total: Flatten-Flatten, Flatten-Unflatten, Unflatten-Flatten, and Unflatten-Unflatten.
Other things to think about, also covered above:
1. Ordering. Views can be reordered and flattened/unflattened at the same time.
2. zIndex ordering: children in a certain order from the ShadowNode perspective may be stacked differently from a View perspective. We use the zIndex ordering for everything in the differ, and this prevents us from performing certain optimizations (see above: we cannot assume that children come after their parent in a list; they may come before, may be interwoven with children from other parents, etc).
# Perf Implications?
Practically, there should be very little negative overhead. There is some overhead in actually performing a flattening/unflattening operation, but... not much more than before. We don't use global maps, so the cost of flattening/unflattening is basically `O(number of nodes reparented)` - note that that's direct nodes reparented, *not* descendants.
tl;dr the perf hit should be similar to reordering, which is non-zero, but close to zero, and zero-cost for any diff operations on parts of the tree that don't involve flattening/unflattening. AFAICT this is very close to an ideal solution for that reason (but I wish it was simpler overall).
# In Summary?
I hope this works out and I think it could improve a number of things downstream: perf, LayoutAnimations, Bindings, certain crashes because of platform assumptions about mutations, etc.
Is it worth it? This new implementation is substantially harder to reason about, harder to read, and harder to understand. This is an important consideration. All I can say there is that I trust the test suite I've been using, but
the decreased readability is a big negative. Hopefully we can improve this in the future.
The rest is fiddly implementation details that I sincerely hope can be improved and simplified in the future.
# Followups?
The part that makes this algorithm the most expensive is that because of zIndex ordering, we cannot assume that children are linearized after their parents and so we rely more heavily on maps for the flattening/unflattening. Our TinyMap implementation should make these `find` operations fast enough unless trees' children are constantly being reordered, but it's still worth thinking of ways to make this even faster.
Changelog: [Internal]
Reviewed By: shergin, mdvacca
Differential Revision: D23259341
fbshipit-source-id: 35d9b90caf262d601a31996ea2cb37e329c61ffc
Summary:
Partial backout of D23123575 (https://github.com/facebook/react-native/commit/1e4d8d902daca8e524ba67fc3c1f4b77698c4d08). It's causing some crashes and there is a more efficient way of doing it, which I will land in a future diff.
Leaving unused feature-flags in place for now, they'll be used shortly.
Changelog: [Internal]
Reviewed By: mdvacca
Differential Revision: D23198625
fbshipit-source-id: 6e9cbc6b39898a604b8f4dfccf5a6dd238511a68
Summary:
# Summary
In previous diffs earlier in 2020, we made changes to detect and optimize reordering of views when the order of views changed underneath the same parent.
However, until now we have ignored reparenting and there's evidence of issues because of that. Because Fabric flattens views more aggressively, reparenting is also marginally more likely to happen.
This diff introduces a very general Reparenting detection. It will work with view flattening/unflattening, as well as tree grafting - subtrees moved to entirely different parts of the tree, not just a single
parent disappearing or reappearing because of flattening/unflattening.
There is also another consideration: previously, we were generating strictly too many Create+Delete operations that were redundant and could cause consistency issues, crashes, or bugs on platforms that do not handle that gracefully -
especially since the ordering of the Create+Delete is not guaranteed (a reparented view could be created "first" and then the differ could later issue a "delete" for the same view).
Intuition behind how it works: we know the cases where we can detect reparenting: it's when nodes are *not* matched up with another node from the other tree, and we're either trying to delete an entire subtree, or create an entire subtree. For perf reasons, we generate whatever set of operations comes first (say, we generate all the Delete and Remove instructions) and take note in the `ReparentingMetadata` data-structure that Delete and/or Remove have been performed for each tag (if ordering is different, we do the same for Create+Insert if those come first). Then if we later detect a corresponding subtree creation/deletion, we don't generate those mutations and we mark the previous mutations for deletion. This incurs some map lookup cost, but this is only wasteful for commits where a large tree is deleted and a large tree is created, without reparenting.
We may be able to improve perf further for certain edge-cases in the future.
# Why can't we solve this in JS?
Two things:
1. We certainly can avoid reparenting situations in JS, but it's trickier than before because of Fabric's view flattening logic - product engineers would have to think much harder about how to prevent reparenting in the general case.
2. In the case of specific views like BottomSheet that may crash if they're reparented, the solution is to make sure that the BottomSheet and the first child of the BottomSheet is never memoized, so that lifecycle functions and render are called more often; and that in every render, the BottomSheet manually clones its child, so that when the Views are recreated, the child of the BottomSheet has a tag and is an entirely different instance. This is certainly possible to do but feels like an onerous requirement for product teams, and it could be challenging to track down every specific BottomSheet that is memoized and/or hoist them higher in the view hierarchy so they're not reparented as often.
Reviewed By: shergin
Differential Revision: D23123575
fbshipit-source-id: 2fa7e1f026f87b6f0c60cad469a3ba85cdc234de
Summary:
This diff moves fabric C++ code from ReactCommon/fabric to ReactCommon/react/renderer
As part of this diff I also refactored components, codegen and callsites on CatalystApp, FB4A and venice
Script: P137350694
changelog: [internal] internal refactor
Reviewed By: fkgozali
Differential Revision: D22852139
fbshipit-source-id: f85310ba858b6afd81abfd9cbe6d70b28eca7415
Samuel Susla
Samuel Susla
Graham Mendick
Joshua Gross
Andres Suarez
Kevin Gozali
Andrew Coates
David Vacca