Chromium Code Reviews
|
|
Chromium Code Reviews
Issue
2839703003:
Use TaskScheduler instead of blocking pool in offline_page_model_factory.cc. (Closed)
|
Created:
3 years, 8 months ago by fdoray Modified:
3 years, 8 months ago Reviewers:
dewittj CC:
chromium-reviews, romax+watch_chromium.org, fgorski+watch_chromium.org, dewittj+watch_chromium.org, petewil+watch_chromium.org, chili+watch_chromium.org, dimich+watch_chromium.org Target Ref:
refs/heads/master Project:
chromium Visibility:
Public. |
DescriptionUse TaskScheduler instead of blocking pool in offline_page_model_factory.cc.
The blocking pool is being deprecated in favor of TaskScheduler.
BUG=667892
R=dewittj@chromium.org
Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2839703003
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#467419}
Committed: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/a38b0559bbdd200948efbe9b7a2a2d13c91081c3
Patch Set 1 #
Total comments: 2
Patch Set 2 : no-explicit-priority #Messages
Total messages: 18 (11 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...
https://codereview.chromium.org/2839703003/diff/1/chrome/browser/android/offl... File chrome/browser/android/offline_pages/offline_page_model_factory.cc (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/2839703003/diff/1/chrome/browser/android/offl... chrome/browser/android/offline_pages/offline_page_model_factory.cc:46: base::TaskPriority::BACKGROUND)); The tasks on this task runner will sometimes be used to populate UI from a database, so we were using the blocking pool. But the comments in TaskPriority are confusing and suggest that maybe this should be USER_VISIBLE.
The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org
Dry run: This issue passed the CQ dry run.
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/2839703003/diff/1/chrome/browser/android/offl... File chrome/browser/android/offline_pages/offline_page_model_factory.cc (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/2839703003/diff/1/chrome/browser/android/offl... chrome/browser/android/offline_pages/offline_page_model_factory.cc:46: base::TaskPriority::BACKGROUND)); On 2017/04/24 18:44:11, dewittj wrote: > The tasks on this task runner will sometimes be used to populate UI from a > database, so we were using the blocking pool. But the comments in TaskPriority > are confusing and suggest that maybe this should be USER_VISIBLE. Switched to no explicit priority. Priority will be inherited from the calling context. This is appropriate for code that may be used in different contexts.
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": 1493235720149260,
"parent_rev": "cd28a17e10afc0914d2784718df63e9ce3626076", "commit_rev":
"a38b0559bbdd200948efbe9b7a2a2d13c91081c3"}
Message was sent while issue was closed.
Description was changed from ========== Use TaskScheduler instead of blocking pool in offline_page_model_factory.cc. The blocking pool is being deprecated in favor of TaskScheduler. BUG=667892 R=dewittj@chromium.org ========== to ========== Use TaskScheduler instead of blocking pool in offline_page_model_factory.cc. The blocking pool is being deprecated in favor of TaskScheduler. BUG=667892 R=dewittj@chromium.org Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2839703003 Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#467419} Committed: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/a38b0559bbdd200948efbe9b7a2a... ==========
Message was sent while issue was closed.
Committed patchset #2 (id:20001) as https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/a38b0559bbdd200948efbe9b7a2a... |
