Offer User Timing in workers

Offer User Timing in workers

This patch makes User Timing available in Dedicated / Shared / Service
Workers behind the experimental flag. The getEntries* methods [1] and
User Timing extension [2] of the Performance interface are added to
WrokerPerformance.

In order to make the new methods available from workers, PerformanceBase
class is introduced as a common base class of Performance and
WorkerPerformance.

[1] https://w3c.github.io/performance-timeline/#the-performance-interface
[2] https://w3c.github.io/user-timing/#extensions-performance-interface

BUG=465638, 465643
TEST=http/tests/workers,http/tests/serviceworker

Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/blink?view=rev&revision=196724

[Kunihiko Sakamoto, 2015-06-04 05:38:30]

Patchset #1 (id:1) has been deleted

[Kunihiko Sakamoto, 2015-06-04 05:38:41]

Patchset #1 (id:20001) has been deleted

[Kunihiko Sakamoto, 2015-06-04 05:38:52]

Patchset #1 (id:40001) has been deleted

[Kunihiko Sakamoto, 2015-06-04 05:39:06]

Patchset #1 (id:60001) has been deleted

[Kunihiko Sakamoto, 2015-06-04 07:21:19]

ksakamoto@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ kinuko@chromium.org

[Kunihiko Sakamoto, 2015-06-04 07:21:19]

Could you take a look?

[kinuko, 2015-06-04 08:21:23]

Looking good!

https://codereview.chromium.org/1100813004/diff/80001/LayoutTests/fast/worker...
File LayoutTests/fast/workers/resources/worker-performance.js (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1100813004/diff/80001/LayoutTests/fast/worker...
LayoutTests/fast/workers/resources/worker-performance.js:15: }
Could we also importScript LayoutTests/resources/testharness.js here?

(I found no worker tests are using that for now)

https://codereview.chromium.org/1100813004/diff/80001/LayoutTests/http/tests/...
File
LayoutTests/http/tests/serviceworker/resources/performance-timeline-worker.js
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1100813004/diff/80001/LayoutTests/http/tests/...
LayoutTests/http/tests/serviceworker/resources/performance-timeline-worker.js:27:
assert_equals(performance.getEntriesByType('measure').length, 0);
Why do we have slightly different tests for ServiceWorker and normal worker?

https://codereview.chromium.org/1100813004/diff/80001/Source/core/timing/Perf...
File Source/core/timing/PerformanceBase.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1100813004/diff/80001/Source/core/timing/Perf...
Source/core/timing/PerformanceBase.h:95: PerformanceBase(double timeOrigin);
nit: explicit

https://codereview.chromium.org/1100813004/diff/80001/Source/modules/performa...
File Source/modules/performance/WorkerPerformance.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1100813004/diff/80001/Source/modules/performa...
Source/modules/performance/WorkerPerformance.h:61:
WorkerPerformance(WorkerGlobalScope*);
nit: explicit

[Kunihiko Sakamoto, 2015-06-05 03:43:56]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1100813004/diff/80001/LayoutTests/fast/worker...
File LayoutTests/fast/workers/resources/worker-performance.js (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1100813004/diff/80001/LayoutTests/fast/worker...
LayoutTests/fast/workers/resources/worker-performance.js:15: }
On 2015/06/04 08:21:22, kinuko wrote:
> Could we also importScript LayoutTests/resources/testharness.js here?
> 
> (I found no worker tests are using that for now)

Done, and merged into single testharness.js-based test used for all worker
types.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1100813004/diff/80001/LayoutTests/http/tests/...
File
LayoutTests/http/tests/serviceworker/resources/performance-timeline-worker.js
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1100813004/diff/80001/LayoutTests/http/tests/...
LayoutTests/http/tests/serviceworker/resources/performance-timeline-worker.js:27:
assert_equals(performance.getEntriesByType('measure').length, 0);
On 2015/06/04 08:21:22, kinuko wrote:
> Why do we have slightly different tests for ServiceWorker and normal worker?

See above comment.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1100813004/diff/80001/Source/core/timing/Perf...
File Source/core/timing/PerformanceBase.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1100813004/diff/80001/Source/core/timing/Perf...
Source/core/timing/PerformanceBase.h:95: PerformanceBase(double timeOrigin);
On 2015/06/04 08:21:23, kinuko wrote:
> nit: explicit

Done. Always I forget it...

https://codereview.chromium.org/1100813004/diff/80001/Source/modules/performa...
File Source/modules/performance/WorkerPerformance.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1100813004/diff/80001/Source/modules/performa...
Source/modules/performance/WorkerPerformance.h:61:
WorkerPerformance(WorkerGlobalScope*);
On 2015/06/04 08:21:23, kinuko wrote:
> nit: explicit

Done.

[kinuko, 2015-06-05 05:52:54]

lgtm

[Kunihiko Sakamoto, 2015-06-05 05:53:45]

The CQ bit was checked by ksakamoto@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-06-05 05:53:54]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1100813004/120001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-06-05 05:59:48]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-06-05 05:59:49]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  blink_presubmit on tryserver.blink (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.blink/builders/blink_presubmit/builds/3...)

[kinuko, 2015-06-05 06:00:03]

I think you'll need lgtm's for modules/performance.

[Kunihiko Sakamoto, 2015-06-05 07:33:35]

ksakamoto@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ mkwst@chromium.org

[Kunihiko Sakamoto, 2015-06-05 07:33:36]

+mkwst@ for modules

[Mike West, 2015-06-07 14:04:30]

mkwst@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ simonjam@chromium.org

[Mike West, 2015-06-07 14:04:30]

Was there an intent to implement/ship?

I'd also prefer that you get one of the module's OWNERs to sign off on the
change; simonjam@, perhaps? If he doesn't have time to take a look, I'll stamp
it based on kinuko@'s say-so.

[Kunihiko Sakamoto, 2015-06-08 08:31:56]

ksakamoto@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ tonyg@chromium.org

[Kunihiko Sakamoto, 2015-06-08 08:31:56]

+tonyg@

I think simonjam@ is no longer working on Chrome.
tonyg@, could you review this?

> Was there an intent to implement/ship?

Not yet. I'm considering sending an intent to ship after implementing
this (and others linked from crbug.com/465638) behind the experimental flag.

[Mike West, 2015-06-08 09:00:05]

On 2015/06/08 at 08:31:56, ksakamoto wrote:
> +tonyg@
> 
> I think simonjam@ is no longer working on Chrome.
> tonyg@, could you review this?

I don't think you're going to have much more luck with Tony. :/

I'll stamp this, based on Kinuko's review (LGTM), but it would be excellent to
populate that module with new OWNERS.

> > Was there an intent to implement/ship?
> 
> Not yet. I'm considering sending an intent to ship after implementing
> this (and others linked from crbug.com/465638) behind the experimental flag.

If you're close to shipping, please send an Intent to Implement and Ship. If
you're not close to shipping, please send an Intent to Implement. This is
substantial enough change in surface area to deserve a chromestatus.com entry
and launch bug.

[Kunihiko Sakamoto, 2015-06-09 00:58:02]

> If you're close to shipping, please send an Intent to Implement and Ship. If
> you're not close to shipping, please send an Intent to Implement. This is
> substantial enough change in surface area to deserve a http://chromestatus.com
entry
> and launch bug.

Thank you for the advice. Will do.

[Kunihiko Sakamoto, 2015-06-09 00:58:37]

The CQ bit was checked by ksakamoto@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-06-09 00:59:24]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1100813004/120001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-06-09 01:03:45]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-06-09 01:03:50]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  mac_blink_compile_dbg on tryserver.blink (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.blink/builders/mac_blink_compile_dbg/bu...)
  mac_blink_rel on tryserver.blink (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.blink/builders/mac_blink_rel/builds/58123)

[Kunihiko Sakamoto, 2015-06-09 01:21:06]

The CQ bit was checked by ksakamoto@chromium.org

[Kunihiko Sakamoto, 2015-06-09 01:21:06]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from kinuko@chromium.org,
mkwst@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/1100813004/#ps140001
(title: "rebase")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-06-09 01:21:30]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1100813004/140001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-06-09 02:59:33]

Committed patchset #4 (id:140001) as
https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/blink?view=rev&revision=196724