Use StaticAtomicSequenceNumber instead of subtle::Atomic32 in IPCMessage.

Use StaticAtomicSequenceNumber instead of subtle::Atomic32 in IPCMessage.

BUG=

Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=253169

[tulloch, 2014-02-24 19:23:45]

Hi,

I thought this was a slight improvement, making the intended use of g_ref_num
clearer.

[tulloch, 2014-02-24 19:38:10]

https://codereview.chromium.org/177123004/diff/1/ipc/ipc_message.cc
File ipc/ipc_message.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/177123004/diff/1/ipc/ipc_message.cc#newcode25
ipc/ipc_message.cc:25: int32 count = g_ref_num.GetNext();
Note that now `g_ref_num` counts from 0 instead of 1.

[Tom Sepez, 2014-02-24 19:39:51]

This does look cleaner, thanks.
I noticed you're adding yourself to authors; have you signed the agreement at
https://developers.google.com/open-source/cla/individual?csw=1

[tulloch, 2014-02-24 19:59:29]

On 2014/02/24 19:39:51, Tom Sepez wrote:
> This does look cleaner, thanks.
> I noticed you're adding yourself to authors; have you signed the agreement at
> https://developers.google.com/open-source/cla/individual?csw=1

Hi Tom, thanks for the comments.

I signed the CLA agreement electronically a few hours ago.

[Tom Sepez, 2014-02-24 20:17:12]

LGTM.

[Tom Sepez, 2014-02-24 20:17:14]

The CQ bit was checked by tsepez@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-02-24 20:36:43]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/andrew@tullo.ch/177123004/1

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-02-24 21:17:29]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/andrew@tullo.ch/177123004/1

[cpu_(ooo_6.6-7.5), 2014-02-25 00:26:07]

I don't see the benefit, and it adds overhead (the - 1) there.

[Tom Sepez, 2014-02-25 00:27:48]

On 2014/02/25 00:26:07, cpu wrote:
> I don't see the benefit, and it adds overhead (the - 1) there.
I doub't you'll be able to measure the overhead.  And it gets rid of a
base::subtle call in a place where we don't need to be sublte.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-02-25 01:28:04]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/andrew@tullo.ch/177123004/1

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-02-25 07:31:04]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/andrew@tullo.ch/177123004/1

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-02-25 09:08:36]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/andrew@tullo.ch/177123004/1

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-02-25 09:26:10]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/andrew@tullo.ch/177123004/1

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-02-25 13:33:34]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/andrew@tullo.ch/177123004/1

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-02-25 15:30:16]

Change committed as 253169

[cpu_(ooo_6.6-7.5), 2014-02-25 21:33:31]

why was this committed without an owner's lgtm?

[Tom Sepez, 2014-02-25 23:19:48]

On 2014/02/25 21:33:31, cpu wrote:
> why was this committed without an owner's lgtm?
It wasn't.
$ grep tsepez ipc/OWNERS 
tsepez@chromium.org