Issue 2996006: Http Cache: Enable some checks to track a low volume crash....

Keyboard Shortcuts

	File
u :	up to issue
j / k :	jump to file after / before current file
J / K :	jump to next file with a comment after / before current file
	Side-by-side diff
i :	toggle intra-line diffs
e :	expand all comments
c :	collapse all comments
s :	toggle showing all comments
n / p :	next / previous diff chunk or comment
N / P :	next / previous comment
<Up> / <Down> :	next / previous line

	Issue
u :	up to list of issues
j / k :	jump to patch after / before current patch
o / <Enter> :	open current patch in side-by-side view
i :	open current patch in unified diff view

	Issue List
j / k :	jump to issue after / before current issue
o / <Enter> :	open current issue

Issue 2996006: Http Cache: Enable some checks to track a low volume crash.... (Closed)

Created:
10 years, 5 months ago by rvargas (doing something else)

Modified:
9 years, 6 months ago

Reviewers:
eroman

CC:
chromium-reviews, cbentzel+watch_chromium.org, darin-cc_chromium.org

Base URL:
svn://chrome-svn/chrome/trunk/src/

Visibility:
Public.

Description

Http Cache: Enable some checks to track a low volume crash. BUG=47895 TEST=none Committed: http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=52779

Patch Set 1 #

Created: 10 years, 5 months ago

Download [raw] [tar.bz2]

		Unified diffs	Side-by-side diffs	Delta from patch set	Stats (+19 lines, -10 lines)			Patch
	M	net/http/http_cache.cc	View		5 chunks	+19 lines, -10 lines	0 comments	Download

Messages

Total messages: 3 (0 generated)

Expand Messages | Collapse Messages

eroman

LGTM. Do you think it is necessary to have a TODO to remove them afterwards? ...

10 years, 5 months ago (2010-07-14 19:00:30 UTC) #2

rvargas (doing something else)

10 years, 5 months ago (2010-07-14 19:11:59 UTC) #3

On 2010/07/14 19:00:30, eroman wrote:
> LGTM.
> 
> Do you think it is necessary to have a TODO to remove them afterwards? I like
> the idea of leaving DCHECKs as CHECKs when they don't have an impact on
> performance, since they can be useful again.

Thanks.

I thinks it is better to remove them later. I think it is simple enough to
enable the relevant checks when there is a bug that needs some care, but I don't
think our CHECK macro is that lightweight, especially from the point of view of
how much extra code is added to the function (with the subsequent burden of
making the assembled code almost impossible to understand in a crash dump).

Expand Messages | Collapse Messages