Allow binding point to be specified on flow end events.

Allow binding point to be specified on flow end events.

Committed: https://crrev.com/5e00a87e440d23e62082e8fc283d046fd05efa48
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#333797}

[yuhaoz, 2015-06-03 22:19:16]

yuhaoz@google.com changed reviewers:
+ benjhayden@chromium.org, dsinclair@chromium.org, miletus@chromium.org,
nduca@chromium.org

[nduca, 2015-06-04 04:24:28]

wanna try updating one of the unit tests to ensure that the field gets written?
i think if you read the trace_event_impl_unittest.cc you'll find something that
covers this...

[nduca, 2015-06-04 04:25:06]

want to remove the empty bug= line too

[dsinclair, 2015-06-04 13:26:21]

On 2015/06/04 at 04:25:06, nduca wrote:
> want to remove the empty bug= line too

When this lands can you also update the tracing doc to record what bp: e means.

[yuhaoz, 2015-06-04 16:19:12]

On 2015/06/04 at 13:26:21, dsinclair wrote:
> On 2015/06/04 at 04:25:06, nduca wrote:
> > want to remove the empty bug= line too
> 
> When this lands can you also update the tracing doc to record what bp: e
means.

will do

[nduca, 2015-06-10 19:05:40]

lgtm

[benjhayden, 2015-06-10 19:20:01]

Yuhao: Yufeng (miletus@) is in ui/events/OWNERS, so you need his LG as well.
Just IM him to ask him to PTAL. He's in WAT which is a few hours ahead of MTV,
so I just pinged him for you.

[Yufeng Shen (Slow to review), 2015-06-10 19:27:02]

On 2015/06/10 19:20:01, benjhayden_chromium wrote:
> Yuhao: Yufeng (miletus@) is in ui/events/OWNERS, so you need his LG as well.
> Just IM him to ask him to PTAL. He's in WAT which is a few hours ahead of MTV,
> so I just pinged him for you.

LatencyInfo lgtm.

[yuhaoz, 2015-06-10 19:36:50]

The CQ bit was checked by yuhaoz@google.com

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-06-10 19:37:09]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1152553011/20001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-06-10 20:59:53]

Committed patchset #2 (id:20001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-06-10 21:00:53]

Patchset 2 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/5e00a87e440d23e62082e8fc283d046fd05efa48
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#333797}

[dsinclair, 2015-06-11 15:21:54]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1152553011/diff/20001/base/trace_event/trace_...
File base/trace_event/trace_event.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1152553011/diff/20001/base/trace_event/trace_...
base/trace_event/trace_event.h:1144: #define TRACE_EVENT_FLAG_ASYNC_TTS   
(static_cast<unsigned char>(1 << 6))
This is going to conflict. We have the same value (1 << 6) for both
BIND_TO_ENCLOSING and ASYNC_TTS. Can you please fix that up?

https://codereview.chromium.org/1152553011/diff/20001/base/trace_event/trace_...
File base/trace_event/trace_event_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1152553011/diff/20001/base/trace_event/trace_...
base/trace_event/trace_event_unittest.cc:49: const char kFlowIdStr[] = "0x7";
Can you move this below AsyncIds so the numbers stay in order.

[dsinclair, 2015-06-11 15:33:41]

A revert of this CL (patchset #2 id:20001) has been created in
https://codereview.chromium.org/1178643008/ by dsinclair@chromium.org.

The reason for reverting is: Conflict on the flag number used between this and
ASYNC_TTS. Will cause very weird trace data..