Pipe v8CacheOptions for ServiceWorker from the browser process to blink [2/2 chromium]

Pipe v8CacheOptions for ServiceWorker from the browser process to blink [2/2 chromium]

BUG=449895
Committed: https://crrev.com/f157bc22efba4796a7db1834a240a41ca303d440
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#316682}

[horo, 2015-02-12 09:23:40]

horo@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ kinuko@chromium.org

[horo, 2015-02-12 09:23:41]

kinuko@
Could you please review this?

[horo, 2015-02-12 09:30:45]

horo@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ vogelheim@chromium.org

[horo, 2015-02-12 09:30:46]

vogelheim@
Could you please review this?

[vogelheim, 2015-02-12 10:07:31]

lgtm

https://codereview.chromium.org/918093002/diff/1/content/common/content_switc...
File content/common/content_switches_internal.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/918093002/diff/1/content/common/content_switc...
content/common/content_switches_internal.cc:63: v8_cache_options =
base::FieldTrialList::FindFullName("V8CacheOptions");
[Thinking out loud:]

I wonder if it makes sense to use a different experiment for both code paths. I
originally assumed that the service worker code cache would be less risky than
the general case and hence we could launch it earlier. A separate experiment
would facilitate this. On the other hand: According to current experiments,
there are no stability concerns.

Honestly, I'm not sure myself, so in case of doubt we should just leave it as
is... :)

[kinuko, 2015-02-12 12:41:32]

lgtm

[horo, 2015-02-13 01:45:42]

horo@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ nasko@chromium.org

[horo, 2015-02-13 01:45:43]

nasko@
Could you please review this CL?

Thank you!

[horo, 2015-02-13 08:59:55]

New patchsets have been uploaded after l-g-t-m from
vogelheim@chromium.org,kinuko@chromium.org

[horo, 2015-02-13 23:51:55]

horo@chromium.org changed reviewers:
- nasko@chromium.org

[horo, 2015-02-13 23:54:28]

horo@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ jochen@chromium.org, wfh@chromium.org

[horo, 2015-02-13 23:54:28]

jochen@
Could you please review this cl?


wfh@
Could you please review
content/common/service_worker/embedded_worker_messages.h?

[Will Harris, 2015-02-15 23:12:43]

content/common/service_worker/embedded_worker_messages.h lgtm

[horo, 2015-02-16 10:28:56]

horo@chromium.org changed reviewers:
- jochen@chromium.org

[horo, 2015-02-16 10:29:59]

horo@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ jochen@chromium.org

[horo, 2015-02-16 10:30:23]

horo@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ nasko@chromium.org

[horo, 2015-02-16 10:30:24]

nasko@
Could you please review content/browser/renderer_host/render_view_host_impl.cc
and content/common/content_switches_internal.*?

[horo, 2015-02-16 10:32:56]

horo@chromium.org changed reviewers:
- jochen@chromium.org, nasko@chromium.org

[horo, 2015-02-16 10:33:20]

horo@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ jochen@chromium.org, nasko@chromium.org

[horo, 2015-02-16 10:34:35]

horo@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ creis@chromium.org

[horo, 2015-02-16 10:34:36]

creis@
Could you please review content/browser/renderer_host/render_view_host_impl.cc
and content/common/content_switches_internal.*?

[Charlie Reis, 2015-02-17 22:11:05]

content/ LGTM

[horo, 2015-02-17 22:34:37]

The CQ bit was checked by horo@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-02-17 22:36:43]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/918093002/20001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-02-17 22:40:28]

Committed patchset #2 (id:20001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-02-17 22:40:56]

Patchset 2 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/f157bc22efba4796a7db1834a240a41ca303d440
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#316682}