Add support for turning pointers back to references.

Add support for turning pointers back to references.

This will be used by a CL for the "breadcrumbs" project that needs
to convert from a raw-memory pointer used by a class that knows
nothing about persistent memory, back to a reference.

BUG=620813
Committed: https://crrev.com/1010504cb3b08b97f97e08398833e9db59eceb20
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#434788}

[bcwhite, 2016-11-25 19:36:31]

The CQ bit was checked by bcwhite@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-11-25 19:36:46]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[bcwhite, 2016-11-25 19:37:55]

bcwhite@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ asvitkine@chromium.org

[Alexei Svitkine (slow), 2016-11-25 19:50:06]

Looks good to me - but just wondering what's the context for making this change?

Is there some follow-up change this enables?

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-11-25 20:43:46]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-11-25 20:43:47]

Dry run: This issue passed the CQ dry run.

[bcwhite, 2016-11-28 15:44:27]

On 2016/11/25 19:50:06, Alexei Svitkine (slow) wrote:
> Looks good to me - but just wondering what's the context for making this
change?
> 
> Is there some follow-up change this enables?

Yes.  It's under development, not ready for review.  A class that knows nothing
about shared memory, just has a memory block, needs to have that address
reversed.

[Alexei Svitkine (slow), 2016-11-28 16:00:19]

On 2016/11/28 15:44:27, bcwhite wrote:
> On 2016/11/25 19:50:06, Alexei Svitkine (slow) wrote:
> > Looks good to me - but just wondering what's the context for making this
> change?
> > 
> > Is there some follow-up change this enables?
> 
> Yes.  It's under development, not ready for review.  A class that knows
nothing
> about shared memory, just has a memory block, needs to have that address
> reversed.

All other things being equal, I agree.

However, here it's a trade off between making the API surface more complex vs.
having the code to check experiment params be in separate files.

I think it would be better to keep the API surface better at the cost of
checking the params in two different places.

[bcwhite, 2016-11-28 16:05:43]

On 2016/11/28 16:00:19, Alexei Svitkine (slow) wrote:
> On 2016/11/28 15:44:27, bcwhite wrote:
> > On 2016/11/25 19:50:06, Alexei Svitkine (slow) wrote:
> > > Looks good to me - but just wondering what's the context for making this
> > change?
> > > 
> > > Is there some follow-up change this enables?
> > 
> > Yes.  It's under development, not ready for review.  A class that knows
> nothing
> > about shared memory, just has a memory block, needs to have that address
> > reversed.
> 
> All other things being equal, I agree.
> 
> However, here it's a trade off between making the API surface more complex vs.
> having the code to check experiment params be in separate files.
> 
> I think it would be better to keep the API surface better at the cost of
> checking the params in two different places.

I believe this comment was for https://codereview.chromium.org/2524363003/

[Alexei Svitkine (slow), 2016-11-28 16:10:41]

Woops, you are right - I've added the comment there - sorry about that!

For this CL, thanks for the explanation. Can you file a bug for the other
work you're doing that's under development and associate this CL with that
bug then?

On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 11:05 AM, <bcwhite@chromium.org> wrote:

> On 2016/11/28 16:00:19, Alexei Svitkine (slow) wrote:
> > On 2016/11/28 15:44:27, bcwhite wrote:
> > > On 2016/11/25 19:50:06, Alexei Svitkine (slow) wrote:
> > > > Looks good to me - but just wondering what's the context for making
> this
> > > change?
> > > >
> > > > Is there some follow-up change this enables?
> > >
> > > Yes. It's under development, not ready for review. A class that knows
> > nothing
> > > about shared memory, just has a memory block, needs to have that
> address
> > > reversed.
> >
> > All other things being equal, I agree.
> >
> > However, here it's a trade off between making the API surface more
> complex vs.
> > having the code to check experiment params be in separate files.
> >
> > I think it would be better to keep the API surface better at the cost of
> > checking the params in two different places.
>
> I believe this comment was for https://codereview.chromium.org/2524363003/
>
> https://codereview.chromium.org/2534643002/
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Chromium-reviews" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to chromium-reviews+unsubscribe@chromium.org.

[bcwhite, 2016-11-28 16:17:54]

Description was changed from

==========
Add support for turning pointers back to references.

BUG=546019
==========

to

==========
Add support for turning pointers back to references.

BUG=620813
==========

[bcwhite, 2016-11-28 16:18:26]

> For this CL, thanks for the explanation. Can you file a bug for the other
> work you're doing that's under development and associate this CL with that
> bug then?

Done.  It's for the "breadcrumbs" project.

[Alexei Svitkine (slow), 2016-11-28 16:23:41]

LGTM, thanks!

Maybe mention it's for breadcrumbs in the CL description too.

[bcwhite, 2016-11-28 21:31:53]

Description was changed from

==========
Add support for turning pointers back to references.

BUG=620813
==========

to

==========
Add support for turning pointers back to references.

This will be used by a CL for the "breadcrumbs" project that needs
to convert from a raw-memory pointer used by a class that knows
nothing about persistent memory, back to a reference.

BUG=620813
==========

[bcwhite, 2016-11-28 21:32:00]

The CQ bit was checked by bcwhite@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-11-28 21:34:28]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-11-29 00:10:02]

CQ is committing da patch.

Bot data: {"patchset_id": 20001, "attempt_start_ts": 1480368720141370,
"parent_rev": "021682540d9a8bfda78abd3006c0adeeedcd3611", "commit_rev":
"7197c044368e1f956fc474e72182963dfd3cd5ed"}

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-11-29 00:10:32]

Description was changed from

==========
Add support for turning pointers back to references.

This will be used by a CL for the "breadcrumbs" project that needs
to convert from a raw-memory pointer used by a class that knows
nothing about persistent memory, back to a reference.

BUG=620813
==========

to

==========
Add support for turning pointers back to references.

This will be used by a CL for the "breadcrumbs" project that needs
to convert from a raw-memory pointer used by a class that knows
nothing about persistent memory, back to a reference.

BUG=620813
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-11-29 00:10:33]

Committed patchset #2 (id:20001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-11-29 00:12:51]

Description was changed from

==========
Add support for turning pointers back to references.

This will be used by a CL for the "breadcrumbs" project that needs
to convert from a raw-memory pointer used by a class that knows
nothing about persistent memory, back to a reference.

BUG=620813
==========

to

==========
Add support for turning pointers back to references.

This will be used by a CL for the "breadcrumbs" project that needs
to convert from a raw-memory pointer used by a class that knows
nothing about persistent memory, back to a reference.

BUG=620813

Committed: https://crrev.com/1010504cb3b08b97f97e08398833e9db59eceb20
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#434788}
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-11-29 00:12:52]

Patchset 2 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/1010504cb3b08b97f97e08398833e9db59eceb20
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#434788}