Implement SharedTimer on WorkerRunLoop

[Dmitry Titov]

This patch depends on 23488 which is not yet landed.

It implements SharedTimer interface on WorkerRunLoop and initializes thread-specific copy of ThreadTimers for worker thread.

Patch is coming.

[Dmitry Titov]

Created attachment 27060 [details]
Proposed patch

[Alexey Proskuryakov]

+    class WorkerRunLoop : public SharedTimer {

Is it really right to say that a run loop is an instance of SharedTimer? This results in awkward calls like runLoop.stop() that are difficult to interpret as being timer-related.

[Darin Adler]

(In reply to comment #2)
> +    class WorkerRunLoop : public SharedTimer {
> 
> Is it really right to say that a run loop is an instance of SharedTimer? This
> results in awkward calls like runLoop.stop() that are difficult to interpret as
> being timer-related.

In case it's not obvious, other options are to use private inheritance, or to have a shared timer as a data member.

[Dmitry Titov]

Thanks guys. I think having something like a ThreadSharedTimer as a member of WorkerRunLoop will remove those methods from the run loop itself. Updated patch is coming...

[Dmitry Titov]

Created attachment 27085 [details]
Updated patch

Removed SharedTimer implementation into a private class. WorkerRunLoop has an instance of it.

[Mark Rowe (bdash)]

Comment on attachment 27085 [details]
Updated patch

> -        task->performTask(context);
> +        if (result == MessageQueueTerminated)
> +            break;
> +        else if (result == MessageQueueMessageReceived)
> +            task->performTask(context);
> +        else
> +            m_sharedTimer->fire();

You don't need an "else" after the "break".

[Dmitry Titov]

Created attachment 27135 [details]
Updated patch

Thanks Mark!
Updated the patch.

[Dmitry Titov]

bug 23488 was resolved, this bug is not blocked anymore. Same patch.

[Alexey Proskuryakov]

Comment on attachment 27135 [details]
Updated patch

> +    {}

We usually put braces on separate lines in this context.

> +    bool isActive() { return m_sharedTimerFunction && m_nextFireTime != 0; }

No need for "!= 0" here.

r=me

[Alexey Proskuryakov]

Committed revision 40532.

+        * dom/WorkerRunLoop.h:
+        Add member of type OwnPtr<WorkerSharedTimer>

A great comment says why a change was made, not what the change was. But I know that it's difficult to find something to say about trivial changes.

[Alexey Proskuryakov]

And committed JavaScriptCore parts in revision 40533.