Chromium Code Reviews
|
|
Chromium Code Reviews
Issue
2882633003:
Use TaskScheduler instead of SequencedWorkerPool in default_component_installer_unittest.cc. (Closed)
DescriptionUse TaskScheduler instead of SequencedWorkerPool in default_component_installer_unittest.cc.
SequencedWorkerPool is being deprecated in favor of TaskScheduler.
BUG=667892
R=waffles@chromium.org
Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2882633003
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#472175}
Committed: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/b26583c72c10f7aba88bcd087785be8afcd5ceae
Patch Set 1 #
Total comments: 2
Patch Set 2 : fix-build-error #Patch Set 3 : add-missing-include #Messages
Total messages: 22 (15 generated)
The CQ bit was checked by fdoray@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run
Please take a look. This CL was generated automatically. The base::MayBlock() trait was specified for all call sites and the base::TaskPriority::BACKGROUND trait was specified for all non-test call sites. That may not be appropriate for your use case. Please verify that appropriate traits were used https://cs.chromium.org/chromium/src/base/task_scheduler/task_traits.h If everything looks good, 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 shutdown behavior is not set explicitly (no base::TaskShutdownBehavior)? 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. Note that the default shutdown behavior is BLOCK_SHUTDOWN in SequencedWorkerPool and SKIP_ON_SHUTDOWN in TaskScheduler. What if the task priority is not set explicitly (no base::TaskPriority)? 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).
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: Try jobs failed on following builders: android_compile_dbg on master.tryserver.chromium.android (JOB_FAILED, https://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.android/builders/android_comp...) ios-simulator-xcode-clang on master.tryserver.chromium.mac (JOB_FAILED, http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.mac/builders/ios-simulator-xco...)
https://codereview.chromium.org/2882633003/diff/1/components/component_update... File components/component_updater/default_component_installer_unittest.cc (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/2882633003/diff/1/components/component_update... components/component_updater/default_component_installer_unittest.cc:143: std::unique_ptr<base::SequencedWorkerPoolOwner> worker_pool_; Looks like we were getting the declaration of this class from one of the removed headers.
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: Try jobs failed on following builders: ios-device on master.tryserver.chromium.mac (JOB_FAILED, http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.mac/builders/ios-device/builds...) mac_chromium_rel_ng on master.tryserver.chromium.mac (JOB_FAILED, http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.mac/builders/mac_chromium_rel_...)
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.
PTAnL https://codereview.chromium.org/2882633003/diff/1/components/component_update... File components/component_updater/default_component_installer_unittest.cc (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/2882633003/diff/1/components/component_update... components/component_updater/default_component_installer_unittest.cc:143: std::unique_ptr<base::SequencedWorkerPoolOwner> worker_pool_; On 2017/05/12 20:02:33, waffles wrote: > Looks like we were getting the declaration of this class from one of the removed > headers. Done.
lgtm, thank you!
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": 40001, "attempt_start_ts": 1494955150235030,
"parent_rev": "df49c6da32ca2a0ed87e1d5f87f4032d9c4fdc12", "commit_rev":
"b26583c72c10f7aba88bcd087785be8afcd5ceae"}
Message was sent while issue was closed.
Description was changed from ========== Use TaskScheduler instead of SequencedWorkerPool in default_component_installer_unittest.cc. SequencedWorkerPool is being deprecated in favor of TaskScheduler. BUG=667892 R=waffles@chromium.org ========== to ========== Use TaskScheduler instead of SequencedWorkerPool in default_component_installer_unittest.cc. SequencedWorkerPool is being deprecated in favor of TaskScheduler. BUG=667892 R=waffles@chromium.org Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2882633003 Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#472175} Committed: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/b26583c72c10f7aba88bcd087785... ==========
Message was sent while issue was closed.
Committed patchset #3 (id:40001) as https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/b26583c72c10f7aba88bcd087785... |
