Chrome Version: 70.0.3538.77 (Official Build) (64-bit)
OS: Linux
See the attached (proposed) layout test. The red box that is composited escapes the clip, while the same box in non-composited works
correctly.
I believe I have also seen cases (though I'm having a harder time coming up with a simple test case) where it looks like the boundary condition assumption for the blur filter is also different. In the composited case, the filter looks like it brings in white edge pixels, while non-composited assumes that the edge pixel extends past the boundary (?). This comment probably doesn't help, but I wanted to put it somewhere. I have a convoluted example that shows this, and can attach it if desired.
|
Deleted:
blur-composited-vs-noncomposited.html
566 bytes
|
|
blur-composited-vs-noncomposited.html
566 bytes
View
Download
|
|
Deleted:
blur-composited-vs-noncomposited-expected.html
534 bytes
|
|
blur-composited-vs-noncomposited-expected.html
534 bytes
View
Download
|
|
Deleted:
Screenshot.png
14.1 KB
|
Comment 1 by viswa.karala@chromium.org
, Nov 7