scheduler: Implement task observers

content/renderer/scheduler/webthread_impl_for_scheduler_unittest.cc

+// Copyright 2015 The Chromium Authors. All rights reserved.
+// Use of this source code is governed by a BSD-style license that can be
+// found in the LICENSE file.
+
+#include "content/renderer/scheduler/webthread_impl_for_scheduler.h"
+
+#include "base/run_loop.h"
+#include "content/renderer/scheduler/renderer_scheduler_impl.h"
+#include "testing/gmock/include/gmock/gmock.h"
+#include "testing/gtest/include/gtest/gtest.h"
+#include "third_party/WebKit/public/platform/WebTraceLocation.h"
+
+namespace content {
+namespace {
+
+const int kWorkBatchSize = 2;
+
+class MockTask : public blink::WebThread::Task {
+ public:
+  MOCK_METHOD0(run, void());
+};
+
+class MockTaskObserver : public blink::WebThread::TaskObserver {
+ public:
+  MOCK_METHOD0(willProcessTask, void());
+  MOCK_METHOD0(didProcessTask, void());
+};
+}  // namespace
+
+class WebThreadImplForSchedulerTest : public testing::Test {
+ public:
+  WebThreadImplForSchedulerTest()
+      : scheduler_(message_loop_.task_runner()),
+        default_task_runner_(scheduler_.DefaultTaskRunner()),
+        thread_(&scheduler_) {}
+
+  ~WebThreadImplForSchedulerTest() override {}
+
+ protected:
+  void EatDefaultTask(MockTaskObserver* observer) {
+    // The scheduler posts one extra DoWork() task automatically.
+    EXPECT_CALL(*observer, willProcessTask());
+    EXPECT_CALL(*observer, didProcessTask());
+  }
+
+  base::MessageLoop message_loop_;
+  RendererSchedulerImpl scheduler_;
+  scoped_refptr<base::SingleThreadTaskRunner> default_task_runner_;
+  WebThreadImplForScheduler thread_;
+
+  DISALLOW_COPY_AND_ASSIGN(WebThreadImplForSchedulerTest);
+};
+
+TEST_F(WebThreadImplForSchedulerTest, TestTaskObserver) {
+  MockTaskObserver observer;
+  thread_.addTaskObserver(&observer);
+  scoped_ptr<MockTask> task(new MockTask());
+
+  {
+    testing::InSequence sequence;
+    EXPECT_CALL(observer, willProcessTask());
+    EXPECT_CALL(*task, run());
+    EXPECT_CALL(observer, didProcessTask());
+
+    EatDefaultTask(&observer);
+  }
+
+  thread_.postTask(blink::WebTraceLocation(), task.release());
+  message_loop_.RunUntilIdle();
+  thread_.removeTaskObserver(&observer);
+}
+
+TEST_F(WebThreadImplForSchedulerTest, TestWorkBatchWithOneTask) {
+  MockTaskObserver observer;
+  thread_.addTaskObserver(&observer);
+  scoped_ptr<MockTask> task(new MockTask());
+
+  scheduler_.SetWorkBatchSizeForTesting(kWorkBatchSize);
+  {
+    testing::InSequence sequence;
+    EXPECT_CALL(observer, willProcessTask());
+    EXPECT_CALL(*task, run());
+    EXPECT_CALL(observer, didProcessTask());
+
+    EatDefaultTask(&observer);
+  }
+
+  thread_.postTask(blink::WebTraceLocation(), task.release());
+  message_loop_.RunUntilIdle();
+  thread_.removeTaskObserver(&observer);
+}
+
+TEST_F(WebThreadImplForSchedulerTest, TestWorkBatchWithTwoTasks) {
+  MockTaskObserver observer;
+  thread_.addTaskObserver(&observer);
+  scoped_ptr<MockTask> task1(new MockTask());
+  scoped_ptr<MockTask> task2(new MockTask());
+
+  scheduler_.SetWorkBatchSizeForTesting(kWorkBatchSize);
+  {
+    testing::InSequence sequence;
+    EXPECT_CALL(observer, willProcessTask());
+    EXPECT_CALL(*task1, run());
+    EXPECT_CALL(observer, didProcessTask());
+
+    EXPECT_CALL(observer, willProcessTask());
+    EXPECT_CALL(*task2, run());
+    EXPECT_CALL(observer, didProcessTask());
+
+    EatDefaultTask(&observer);
+  }
+
+  thread_.postTask(blink::WebTraceLocation(), task1.release());
+  thread_.postTask(blink::WebTraceLocation(), task2.release());
+  message_loop_.RunUntilIdle();
+  thread_.removeTaskObserver(&observer);
+}
+
+TEST_F(WebThreadImplForSchedulerTest, TestWorkBatchWithThreeTasks) {
+  MockTaskObserver observer;
+  thread_.addTaskObserver(&observer);
+  scoped_ptr<MockTask> task1(new MockTask());
+  scoped_ptr<MockTask> task2(new MockTask());
+  scoped_ptr<MockTask> task3(new MockTask());
+
+  scheduler_.SetWorkBatchSizeForTesting(kWorkBatchSize);
+  {
+    testing::InSequence sequence;
+    EXPECT_CALL(observer, willProcessTask());
+    EXPECT_CALL(*task1, run());
+    EXPECT_CALL(observer, didProcessTask());
+
+    EXPECT_CALL(observer, willProcessTask());
+    EXPECT_CALL(*task2, run());
+    EXPECT_CALL(observer, didProcessTask());
+
+    EXPECT_CALL(observer, willProcessTask());
+    EXPECT_CALL(*task3, run());
+    EXPECT_CALL(observer, didProcessTask());
+
+    EatDefaultTask(&observer);
+  }
+
+  thread_.postTask(blink::WebTraceLocation(), task1.release());
+  thread_.postTask(blink::WebTraceLocation(), task2.release());
+  thread_.postTask(blink::WebTraceLocation(), task3.release());
+  message_loop_.RunUntilIdle();
+  thread_.removeTaskObserver(&observer);
+}
+
+class ExitRunLoopTask : public blink::WebThread::Task {
+ public:
+  ExitRunLoopTask(base::RunLoop* run_loop) : run_loop_(run_loop) {}
+
+  virtual void run() { run_loop_->Quit(); }
+
+ private:
+  base::RunLoop* run_loop_;
+};
+
+void EnterRunLoop(base::MessageLoop* message_loop, blink::WebThread* thread) {
+  // Note: WebThreads do not support nested run loops, which is why we use a
+  // run loop directly.
+  base::RunLoop run_loop;
+  thread->postTask(blink::WebTraceLocation(), new ExitRunLoopTask(&run_loop));
+  message_loop->SetNestableTasksAllowed(true);
+  run_loop.Run();
+}
+
+TEST_F(WebThreadImplForSchedulerTest, TestNestedRunLoop) {
+  MockTaskObserver observer;
+  thread_.addTaskObserver(&observer);
+
+  {
+    testing::InSequence sequence;
+
+    // One callback for EnterRunLoop.
+    EXPECT_CALL(observer, willProcessTask());
+
+    // A double pair for ExitRunLoopTask because we are in a nested message
+    // loop.

[rmcilroy, 2015/02/20 23:03:06]

I worry that we might see test fail due to the double pair of calls for nested
message loops.

Rethinking this again, wouldn't it be simpler just to always skip the first
willProcessTask and the last didProcessTask in TaskQueueManager::DoWork given
that we know that the message_loop will have already sent these callbacks for
the DoWork task itself?  That way we could accurately only send one observation
per task, and wouldn't have to worry about nesting, etc.

[Sami, 2015/02/23 15:11:02]

FWIW, a form of the double calls already happens because the the nested
MessageLoop is started from within an already executing task.
 
Thanks, that's a great idea to make this simpler. It's not quite as
straightforward as I'd like because we need to keep the previously executed task
around a little longer, but I think I prefer it to this post-processing
spaghetti. PTAL!

+    EXPECT_CALL(observer, willProcessTask());
+    EXPECT_CALL(observer, willProcessTask());
+    EXPECT_CALL(observer, didProcessTask());
+    EXPECT_CALL(observer, didProcessTask());
+
+    // A final callback for EnterRunLoop.
+    EXPECT_CALL(observer, didProcessTask());
+
+    EatDefaultTask(&observer);
+  }
+
+  message_loop_.PostTask(
+      FROM_HERE, base::Bind(&EnterRunLoop, base::Unretained(&message_loop_),
+                            base::Unretained(&thread_)));
+  message_loop_.RunUntilIdle();
+  thread_.removeTaskObserver(&observer);
+}
+
+}  // namespace content