Chromium Code Reviews
chromiumcodereview-hr@appspot.gserviceaccount.com (chromiumcodereview-hr) | Please choose your nickname with Settings | Help | Chromium Project | Gerrit Changes | Sign out
(481)

Unified Diff: net/http/http_cache_transaction.cc

Issue 2774603003: Doom and create new entry when validation is not a match (Closed)
Patch Set: Feedback addressed. Created 3 years, 6 months ago
Use n/p to move between diff chunks; N/P to move between comments. Draft comments are only viewable by you.
Jump to:
View side-by-side diff with in-line comments
Download patch
Index: net/http/http_cache_transaction.cc
diff --git a/net/http/http_cache_transaction.cc b/net/http/http_cache_transaction.cc
index 9bc83264feab97d61d1c8acdcd567b2442cc5ea9..e2c2f6067eddef67fa1bf152693d8ecd10d50142 100644
--- a/net/http/http_cache_transaction.cc
+++ b/net/http/http_cache_transaction.cc
@@ -164,6 +164,7 @@ HttpCache::Transaction::Transaction(RequestPriority priority, HttpCache* cache)
handling_206_(false),
cache_pending_(false),
done_reading_(false),
+ done_headers_create_new_entry_(false),
vary_mismatch_(false),
couldnt_conditionalize_request_(false),
bypass_lock_for_test_(false),
@@ -757,6 +758,9 @@ int HttpCache::Transaction::DoLoop(int result) {
case STATE_ADD_TO_ENTRY_COMPLETE:
rv = DoAddToEntryComplete(rv);
break;
+ case STATE_DONE_HEADERS_ADD_TO_ENTRY_COMPLETE:
+ rv = DoDoneHeadersAddToEntryComplete(rv);
+ break;
case STATE_CACHE_READ_RESPONSE:
DCHECK_EQ(OK, rv);
rv = DoCacheReadResponse();
@@ -1115,10 +1119,22 @@ int HttpCache::Transaction::DoCreateEntryComplete(int result) {
// already created the entry. If we want to eliminate this issue, we
// need an atomic OpenOrCreate() method exposed by the disk cache.
DLOG(WARNING) << "Unable to create cache entry";
+ // Switching into passing through data directly from the network, avoiding
jkarlin 2017/06/16 18:28:01 Suggest: Set the mode to NONE in order to bypass t
shivanisha 2017/06/27 15:31:14 done
+ // the cache entry.
mode_ = NONE;
- if (partial_)
- partial_->RestoreHeaders(&custom_request_->extra_headers);
- TransitionToState(STATE_SEND_REQUEST);
+ if (!done_headers_create_new_entry_) {
+ if (partial_)
+ partial_->RestoreHeaders(&custom_request_->extra_headers);
+ TransitionToState(STATE_SEND_REQUEST);
+ return OK;
+ }
+ // The headers have already been received as a result of validation,
+ // triggering the doom of the old entry. So no network request needs to
+ // be sent. Note that since mode_ is set to pass-through, response will
jkarlin 2017/06/16 18:28:01 Suggest: Note that since mode_ is NONE, the respon
shivanisha 2017/06/27 15:31:14 done
+ // not be written to the cache but moving to state
+ // STATE_CACHE_WRITE_RESPONSE for consistency.
+ done_headers_create_new_entry_ = false;
+ TransitionToState(STATE_CACHE_WRITE_RESPONSE);
}
return OK;
}
@@ -1127,44 +1143,56 @@ int HttpCache::Transaction::DoAddToEntry() {
TRACE_EVENT0("io", "HttpCacheTransaction::DoAddToEntry");
DCHECK(new_entry_);
cache_pending_ = true;
- TransitionToState(STATE_ADD_TO_ENTRY_COMPLETE);
net_log_.BeginEvent(NetLogEventType::HTTP_CACHE_ADD_TO_ENTRY);
DCHECK(entry_lock_waiting_since_.is_null());
- entry_lock_waiting_since_ = TimeTicks::Now();
int rv = cache_->AddTransactionToEntry(new_entry_, this);
- if (rv == ERR_IO_PENDING) {
- if (bypass_lock_for_test_) {
- base::ThreadTaskRunnerHandle::Get()->PostTask(
- FROM_HERE,
- base::Bind(&HttpCache::Transaction::OnAddToEntryTimeout,
- weak_factory_.GetWeakPtr(), entry_lock_waiting_since_));
- } else {
- int timeout_milliseconds = 20 * 1000;
- if (partial_ && new_entry_->writer &&
- new_entry_->writer->range_requested_) {
- // Quickly timeout and bypass the cache if we're a range request and
- // we're blocked by the reader/writer lock. Doing so eliminates a long
- // running issue, http://crbug.com/31014, where two of the same media
- // resources could not be played back simultaneously due to one locking
- // the cache entry until the entire video was downloaded.
- //
- // Bypassing the cache is not ideal, as we are now ignoring the cache
- // entirely for all range requests to a resource beyond the first. This
- // is however a much more succinct solution than the alternatives, which
- // would require somewhat significant changes to the http caching logic.
- //
- // Allow some timeout slack for the entry addition to complete in case
- // the writer lock is imminently released; we want to avoid skipping
- // the cache if at all possible. See http://crbug.com/408765
- timeout_milliseconds = 25;
- }
- base::ThreadTaskRunnerHandle::Get()->PostDelayedTask(
- FROM_HERE,
- base::Bind(&HttpCache::Transaction::OnAddToEntryTimeout,
- weak_factory_.GetWeakPtr(), entry_lock_waiting_since_),
- TimeDelta::FromMilliseconds(timeout_milliseconds));
+ DCHECK_EQ(rv, ERR_IO_PENDING);
+
+ // If headers phase is already done and we are here because of validation not
+ // matching and creating a new entry, then this transaction should be the
+ // first transaction of that entry and thus it should not be subject
+ // to any cache lock delays, thus returning early from here.
jkarlin 2017/06/16 18:28:01 This is a very long sentence, please break it up.
shivanisha 2017/06/27 15:31:14 done
+ if (done_headers_create_new_entry_) {
+ DCHECK_EQ(mode_, WRITE);
+ TransitionToState(STATE_DONE_HEADERS_ADD_TO_ENTRY_COMPLETE);
+ return rv;
+ }
+
+ TransitionToState(STATE_ADD_TO_ENTRY_COMPLETE);
+ entry_lock_waiting_since_ = TimeTicks::Now();
+
+ if (bypass_lock_for_test_) {
+ base::ThreadTaskRunnerHandle::Get()->PostTask(
+ FROM_HERE,
+ base::Bind(&HttpCache::Transaction::OnAddToEntryTimeout,
+ weak_factory_.GetWeakPtr(), entry_lock_waiting_since_));
+ } else {
+ int timeout_milliseconds = 20 * 1000;
+ if (partial_ && new_entry_->writer &&
+ new_entry_->writer->range_requested_) {
+ // Quickly timeout and bypass the cache if we're a range request and
+ // we're blocked by the reader/writer lock. Doing so eliminates a long
+ // running issue, http://crbug.com/31014, where two of the same media
+ // resources could not be played back simultaneously due to one locking
+ // the cache entry until the entire video was downloaded.
+ //
+ // Bypassing the cache is not ideal, as we are now ignoring the cache
+ // entirely for all range requests to a resource beyond the first. This
+ // is however a much more succinct solution than the alternatives, which
+ // would require somewhat significant changes to the http caching logic.
+ //
+ // Allow some timeout slack for the entry addition to complete in case
+ // the writer lock is imminently released; we want to avoid skipping
+ // the cache if at all possible. See http://crbug.com/408765
+ timeout_milliseconds = 25;
}
+ base::ThreadTaskRunnerHandle::Get()->PostDelayedTask(
+ FROM_HERE,
+ base::Bind(&HttpCache::Transaction::OnAddToEntryTimeout,
+ weak_factory_.GetWeakPtr(), entry_lock_waiting_since_),
+ TimeDelta::FromMilliseconds(timeout_milliseconds));
}
+
return rv;
}
@@ -1232,6 +1260,28 @@ int HttpCache::Transaction::DoAddToEntryComplete(int result) {
return OK;
}
+int HttpCache::Transaction::DoDoneHeadersAddToEntryComplete(int result) {
+ // This state is reached when |this| has already completed validation leading
+ // to a no-match with original entry which was doomed and |new_entry_| was
jkarlin 2017/06/16 18:28:01 Suggest: This transaction's response headers did n
shivanisha 2017/06/27 15:31:14 done
+ // created. A response of no-match from a validation request also includes the
+ // full contents of the URL, so go ahead and write the response to the newly
+ // created entry.
+
+ DCHECK_EQ(result, OK);
+ DCHECK_EQ(mode_, WRITE);
+ DCHECK(new_entry_);
+ DCHECK(response_.headers);
+
+ cache_pending_ = false;
+ entry_ = new_entry_;
+ done_headers_create_new_entry_ = false;
+ bool is_match = response_.headers->response_code() == 304;
jkarlin 2017/06/16 18:28:01 Hmm, can it be a 304? If it were a 304 then the tr
shivanisha 2017/06/27 15:31:14 done
+ DCHECK(cache_->CanTransactionWriteResponseHeaders(
+ entry_, this, partial_ != nullptr, is_match));
+ TransitionToState(STATE_CACHE_WRITE_RESPONSE);
+ return OK;
+}
+
int HttpCache::Transaction::DoCacheReadResponse() {
TRACE_EVENT0("io", "HttpCacheTransaction::DoCacheReadResponse");
DCHECK(entry_);
@@ -1717,7 +1767,6 @@ int HttpCache::Transaction::DoOverwriteCachedResponse() {
int HttpCache::Transaction::DoCacheWriteResponse() {
TRACE_EVENT0("io", "HttpCacheTransaction::DoCacheWriteResponse");
- TransitionToState(STATE_CACHE_WRITE_RESPONSE_COMPLETE);
// Invalidate any current entry with a successful response if this transaction
// cannot write to this entry. This transaction then continues to read from
@@ -1726,12 +1775,19 @@ int HttpCache::Transaction::DoCacheWriteResponse() {
if (entry_ && response_.headers &&
!cache_->CanTransactionWriteResponseHeaders(
entry_, this, partial_ != nullptr, is_match)) {
- cache_->DoneWritingToEntry(entry_, false, this);
+ done_headers_create_new_entry_ = true;
+
+ // This transaction should not add itself to any other existing entry but
+ // create a new entry. Going to state STATE_INIT_ENTRY and setting mode_ to
+ // WRITE will take care of dooming if any other entry exists.
jkarlin 2017/06/16 18:28:01 Suggest: The transaction needs to overwrite this
shivanisha 2017/06/27 15:31:14 done
+ mode_ = WRITE;
+ TransitionToState(STATE_INIT_ENTRY);
+ cache_->DoomEntryValidationNoMatch(entry_, this);
entry_ = nullptr;
- mode_ = NONE;
return OK;
}
+ TransitionToState(STATE_CACHE_WRITE_RESPONSE_COMPLETE);
return WriteResponseInfoToEntry(truncated_);
}

Powered by Google App Engine
This is Rietveld 408576698