Chromium Code Reviews
|
|
Chromium Code Reviews
Issue
2834413003:
Use TaskScheduler instead of blocking pool in user_policy_manager_factory_chromeos.cc. (Closed)
DescriptionUse TaskScheduler instead of blocking pool in user_policy_manager_factory_chromeos.cc.
The blocking pool is being deprecated in favor of TaskScheduler.
BUG=667892
R=bartfab@chromium.org
Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2834413003
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#467728}
Committed: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/a9e5023d954f033d7720a91cea36ec15aea73a7c
Patch Set 1 #
Total comments: 2
Patch Set 2 : SKIP_ON_SHUTDOWN #Messages
Total messages: 21 (13 generated)
The CQ bit was checked by fdoray@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run
PTAL! This CL was generated automatically. Please make sure that the appropriate TaskTraits are used to post tasks. https://cs.chromium.org/chromium/src/base/task_scheduler/task_traits.h If everything looks good, please lgtm and CQ this CL. Otherwise, tell us what's wrong. Thanks! - FAQ - What if bots are red? Ignore this CL. A human will look at errors shortly. What if the task priority is not set explicitly (no .WithTaskPriority())? When there is no explicit priority, the priority is inherited from the calling context (e.g. a task posted from a BACKGROUND task without an explicit priority will have a BACKGROUND priority). What if the shutdown behavior is not set explicitly (no .WithShutdownBehavior())? If shutdown behavior is important for a task, it should be set explicitly. It's not necessary to specify it if you're fine with either BLOCK_SHUTDOWN or SKIP_ON_SHUTDOWN.
Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at: https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...
The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org
Dry run: This issue passed the CQ dry run.
Description was changed from ========== Use TaskScheduler instead of blocking pool in user_policy_manager_factory_chromeos.cc. The blocking pool is being deprecated in favor of TaskScheduler. BUG=667892 R=bartfab@chromium.org ========== to ========== Use TaskScheduler instead of blocking pool in user_policy_manager_factory_chromeos.cc. The blocking pool is being deprecated in favor of TaskScheduler. BUG=667892 R=bartfab@chromium.org ==========
fdoray@chromium.org changed reviewers: + tnagel@chromium.org
+tnagel@chromium.org since bartfab is "(slow)" On 2017/04/24 18:42:37, fdoray wrote: > PTAL! > > This CL was generated automatically. > > Please make sure that the appropriate TaskTraits are used to post tasks. > https://cs.chromium.org/chromium/src/base/task_scheduler/task_traits.h > If everything looks good, please lgtm and CQ this CL. Otherwise, tell > us what's wrong. > > Thanks! > > - FAQ - > > What if bots are red? Ignore this CL. A human will look at errors shortly. > > What if the task priority is not set explicitly (no .WithTaskPriority())? > When there is no explicit priority, the priority is inherited from the > calling context (e.g. a task posted from a BACKGROUND task without an > explicit priority will have a BACKGROUND priority). > > What if the shutdown behavior is not set explicitly > (no .WithShutdownBehavior())? > If shutdown behavior is important for a task, it should be set explicitly. > It's not necessary to specify it if you're fine with either BLOCK_SHUTDOWN > or SKIP_ON_SHUTDOWN.
https://codereview.chromium.org/2834413003/diff/1/chrome/browser/chromeos/pol... File chrome/browser/chromeos/policy/user_policy_manager_factory_chromeos.cc (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/2834413003/diff/1/chrome/browser/chromeos/pol... chrome/browser/chromeos/policy/user_policy_manager_factory_chromeos.cc:245: base::TaskPriority::BACKGROUND)); I think we should SKIP_ON_SHUTDOWN. From what I can see, no data is lost if we drop something on the floor as we can always re-fetch during the next session.
The CQ bit was checked by fdoray@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run
Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at: https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...
The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org
Dry run: This issue passed the CQ dry run.
Please take another look. https://codereview.chromium.org/2834413003/diff/1/chrome/browser/chromeos/pol... File chrome/browser/chromeos/policy/user_policy_manager_factory_chromeos.cc (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/2834413003/diff/1/chrome/browser/chromeos/pol... chrome/browser/chromeos/policy/user_policy_manager_factory_chromeos.cc:245: base::TaskPriority::BACKGROUND)); On 2017/04/27 09:44:52, Thiemo Nagel wrote: > I think we should SKIP_ON_SHUTDOWN. From what I can see, no data is lost if we > drop something on the floor as we can always re-fetch during the next session. Done.
Lgtm.
The CQ bit was checked by fdoray@chromium.org
CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at: https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...
CQ is committing da patch.
Bot data: {"patchset_id": 20001, "attempt_start_ts": 1493312836944230,
"parent_rev": "5f26315f43d9d4214df8af3deb263a02fc47db5d", "commit_rev":
"a9e5023d954f033d7720a91cea36ec15aea73a7c"}
Message was sent while issue was closed.
Description was changed from ========== Use TaskScheduler instead of blocking pool in user_policy_manager_factory_chromeos.cc. The blocking pool is being deprecated in favor of TaskScheduler. BUG=667892 R=bartfab@chromium.org ========== to ========== Use TaskScheduler instead of blocking pool in user_policy_manager_factory_chromeos.cc. The blocking pool is being deprecated in favor of TaskScheduler. BUG=667892 R=bartfab@chromium.org Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2834413003 Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#467728} Committed: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/a9e5023d954f033d7720a91cea36... ==========
Message was sent while issue was closed.
Committed patchset #2 (id:20001) as https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/a9e5023d954f033d7720a91cea36... |
