Worker: Migrate Timer to TaskRunnerTimer in InProcessWorkerObjectProxy

Worker: Migrate Timer to TaskRunnerTimer in InProcessWorkerObjectProxy

This is a part of the project to migrate from per-renderer scheduler to
per-frame scheduler. A general design doc about the project is available here:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/10It1DFRP7H3gev9hQA-7dtTcvcMFhrxuCt3-k21yjgQ/edit?usp=sharing

BUG=624694
Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2639953002
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#444715}
Committed: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/e21c61e6e59cd91d5619a68a6634ca0fefab66d1

[nhiroki, 2017-01-18 10:13:22]

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

[nhiroki, 2017-01-18 10:13:30]

Description was changed from

==========
Worker: Migrate Timer to TaskRunnerTimer in InProcessWorkerObjectProxy

This is a part of the project to migrate from per-renderer scheduler to
per-frame scheduler. A general design doc about the project is available here:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/10It1DFRP7H3gev9hQA-7dtTcvcMFhrxuCt3-k21yj...

BUG=624694
==========

to

==========
Worker: Migrate Timer to TaskRunnerTimer in InProcessWorkerObjectProxy

This is a part of the project to migrate from per-renderer scheduler to
per-frame scheduler. A general design doc about the project is available here:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/10It1DFRP7H3gev9hQA-7dtTcvcMFhrxuCt3-k21yj...

BUG=624694
==========

[nhiroki, 2017-01-18 10:13:31]

nhiroki@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ haraken@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-01-18 10:13:44]

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

[nhiroki, 2017-01-18 10:16:58]

nhiroki@chromium.org changed reviewers:
- haraken@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-01-18 13:24:51]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-01-18 13:24:52]

Dry run: This issue passed the CQ dry run.

[nhiroki, 2017-01-19 09:55:25]

nhiroki@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ haraken@chromium.org

[nhiroki, 2017-01-19 09:55:26]

PTAL, thanks!

[haraken, 2017-01-19 11:08:01]

LGTM

https://codereview.chromium.org/2639953002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/Source/c...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/core/workers/InProcessWorkerObjectProxy.cpp
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2639953002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/Source/c...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/workers/InProcessWorkerObjectProxy.cpp:118:
Platform::current()->currentThread()->getWebTaskRunner(), this,

It's unfortunate that we have use the default scheduler, but it makes sense
since we haven't yet implemented a worker scheduler.

[nhiroki, 2017-01-19 11:57:47]

On 2017/01/19 11:08:01, haraken wrote:
> LGTM
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/2639953002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/Source/c...
> File third_party/WebKit/Source/core/workers/InProcessWorkerObjectProxy.cpp
> (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/2639953002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/Source/c...
> third_party/WebKit/Source/core/workers/InProcessWorkerObjectProxy.cpp:118:
> Platform::current()->currentThread()->getWebTaskRunner(), this,
> 
> It's unfortunate that we have use the default scheduler, but it makes sense
> since we haven't yet implemented a worker scheduler.

Yeah....

Btw, I'm now writing a design doc about a unified way to access WebTaskRunners
of a worker thread like WorkerTaskHelper/ParentFrameTaskRunners. I'll share it
later.

[nhiroki, 2017-01-19 11:58:31]

On 2017/01/19 11:57:47, nhiroki wrote:
> On 2017/01/19 11:08:01, haraken wrote:
> > LGTM
> > 
> >
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/2639953002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/Source/c...
> > File third_party/WebKit/Source/core/workers/InProcessWorkerObjectProxy.cpp
> > (right):
> > 
> >
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/2639953002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/Source/c...
> > third_party/WebKit/Source/core/workers/InProcessWorkerObjectProxy.cpp:118:
> > Platform::current()->currentThread()->getWebTaskRunner(), this,
> > 
> > It's unfortunate that we have use the default scheduler, but it makes sense
> > since we haven't yet implemented a worker scheduler.
> 
> Yeah....
> 
> Btw, I'm now writing a design doc about a unified way to access WebTaskRunners
> of a worker thread like WorkerTaskHelper/ParentFrameTaskRunners. I'll share it
> later.

And, thank you for reviewing this :)

[nhiroki, 2017-01-19 11:58:51]

The CQ bit was checked by nhiroki@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-01-19 11:59:10]

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, 2017-01-19 13:06:59]

CQ is committing da patch.

Bot data: {"patchset_id": 1, "attempt_start_ts": 1484827131323250, "parent_rev":
"63d242ee022a0b983af4263c431314023f8a67f7", "commit_rev":
"e21c61e6e59cd91d5619a68a6634ca0fefab66d1"}

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-01-19 13:07:32]

Description was changed from

==========
Worker: Migrate Timer to TaskRunnerTimer in InProcessWorkerObjectProxy

This is a part of the project to migrate from per-renderer scheduler to
per-frame scheduler. A general design doc about the project is available here:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/10It1DFRP7H3gev9hQA-7dtTcvcMFhrxuCt3-k21yj...

BUG=624694
==========

to

==========
Worker: Migrate Timer to TaskRunnerTimer in InProcessWorkerObjectProxy

This is a part of the project to migrate from per-renderer scheduler to
per-frame scheduler. A general design doc about the project is available here:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/10It1DFRP7H3gev9hQA-7dtTcvcMFhrxuCt3-k21yj...

BUG=624694

Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2639953002
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#444715}
Committed:
https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/e21c61e6e59cd91d5619a68a6634...
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-01-19 13:07:32]

Committed patchset #1 (id:1) as
https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/e21c61e6e59cd91d5619a68a6634...