Make the rate limiting of Native Client Plugin progress events more robust.

Make the rate limiting of Native Client Plugin progress events
more robust by using time rather than bytes downloaded to determine when to fire another event.
BUG=none
TEST=manual, working on an example.
Committed: http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=111421

[bbudge, 2011-11-18 22:07:52]

Renamed 'delta' to 'elapsed'

[polina, 2011-11-23 08:23:59]

http://codereview.chromium.org/8548018/diff/4001/ppapi/native_client/src/trus...
File ppapi/native_client/src/trusted/plugin/plugin.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/8548018/diff/4001/ppapi/native_client/src/trus...
ppapi/native_client/src/trusted/plugin/plugin.cc:1849: const int64_t
kTenMilliseconds = 10000;
perhaps put this at the top of the file?

http://codereview.chromium.org/8548018/diff/4001/ppapi/native_client/src/trus...
ppapi/native_client/src/trusted/plugin/plugin.cc:1867:
total_bytes_to_be_received);
do the users know that they only get some of these events and that if they some
up bytes_received from each one, they might not add up to
total_bytes_to_be_received?

[polina, 2011-11-23 08:24:34]

Btw, are there no tests affected by this change? Do we not have tests for
continuous progress events?

[bbudge, 2011-11-23 14:09:37]

http://codereview.chromium.org/8548018/diff/4001/ppapi/native_client/src/trus...
File ppapi/native_client/src/trusted/plugin/plugin.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/8548018/diff/4001/ppapi/native_client/src/trus...
ppapi/native_client/src/trusted/plugin/plugin.cc:1849: const int64_t
kTenMilliseconds = 10000;
Since it's only used once, I kind of like it right here. For readability.
On 2011/11/23 08:23:59, polina wrote:
> perhaps put this at the top of the file?

http://codereview.chromium.org/8548018/diff/4001/ppapi/native_client/src/trus...
ppapi/native_client/src/trusted/plugin/plugin.cc:1867:
total_bytes_to_be_received);
They will always get a 'loadend' event with the received == total.
On 2011/11/23 08:23:59, polina wrote:
> do the users know that they only get some of these events and that if they
some
> up bytes_received from each one, they might not add up to
> total_bytes_to_be_received?

[bbudge, 2011-11-23 14:11:03]

On 2011/11/23 08:24:34, polina wrote:
> Btw, are there no tests affected by this change? Do we not have tests for
> continuous progress events?

Brad and I are working on an example using Mono. We don't have many multiple-dso
apps yet.

[polina, 2011-11-23 19:05:27]

lgtm

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2011-11-23 20:54:06]

No LGTM from valid reviewers yet.

[polina1, 2011-11-23 21:44:09]

On 2011/11/23 20:54:06, I haz the power (commit-bot) wrote:
> No LGTM from valid reviewers yet.

LGTM

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2011-11-23 21:59:05]

No LGTM from valid reviewers yet.