Issue-141903: Rename "descheduled" trace event for gpu swap to something understandable

Issue-141903:   Rename "descheduled" trace event for gpu swap to something understandable
Changed Descheduled to ProcessSwap, added authors entry.

BUG=141903
TEST=


Committed: http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=160793

[nduca, 2012-09-21 10:00:35]

@jbauman, wdyt?

[jbauman, 2012-09-21 20:17:06]

On 2012/09/21 10:00:35, nduca wrote:
> @jbauman, wdyt?

This can also happen due to resize (or maybe other things). Would
ProcessSwapOrResize be better?

[rterrazas, 2012-09-21 23:21:12]

On 2012/09/21 20:17:06, jbauman wrote:
> On 2012/09/21 10:00:35, nduca wrote:
> > @jbauman, wdyt?
> 
> This can also happen due to resize (or maybe other things). Would
> ProcessSwapOrResize be better?

Checked the usages and it seems more descriptive, I'll make the change and
upload the new patch set.

[Vangelis Kokkevis, 2012-09-22 00:45:57]

On 2012/09/21 23:21:12, rterrazas wrote:
> On 2012/09/21 20:17:06, jbauman wrote:
> > On 2012/09/21 10:00:35, nduca wrote:
> > > @jbauman, wdyt?
> > 
> > This can also happen due to resize (or maybe other things). Would
> > ProcessSwapOrResize be better?
> 
> Checked the usages and it seems more descriptive, I'll make the change and
> upload the new patch set.

Personally I find "descheduled" to be more descriptive than "ProcessSwap" which
I'm not sure I understand what it's trying to convey...

[rterrazas, 2012-09-22 01:01:39]

On 2012/09/22 00:45:57, Vangelis Kokkevis wrote:
> On 2012/09/21 23:21:12, rterrazas wrote:
> > On 2012/09/21 20:17:06, jbauman wrote:
> > > On 2012/09/21 10:00:35, nduca wrote:
> > > > @jbauman, wdyt?
> > > 
> > > This can also happen due to resize (or maybe other things). Would
> > > ProcessSwapOrResize be better?
> > 
> > Checked the usages and it seems more descriptive, I'll make the change and
> > upload the new patch set.
> 
> Personally I find "descheduled" to be more descriptive than "ProcessSwap"
which
> I'm not sure I understand what it's trying to convey...

What I understood of @nduca's original requirements, is that the new string
would attempt to convey better when this trace event happened.

Since the "Descheduled" traces mark start/end of the unscheduled state, what
would you guys think if we change it to that "UnscheduledState"?.

[nduca, 2012-09-24 22:28:00]

I think ProcessingSwap may be the right way to go here.

[rterrazas, 2012-09-25 08:05:24]

On 2012/09/24 22:28:00, nduca wrote:
> I think ProcessingSwap may be the right way to go here.

Sounds good, uploaded patch set :)

[nduca, 2012-09-25 18:39:44]

LGTM. + apatrick for OWNERS. This is good to CQ once approvals are met, I double
checked and @rubentpoo has signed the cla

[nduca, 2012-09-25 18:40:15]

https://codereview.chromium.org/10967034/diff/6001/gpu/command_buffer/service...
File gpu/command_buffer/service/gpu_scheduler.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/10967034/diff/6001/gpu/command_buffer/service...
gpu/command_buffer/service/gpu_scheduler.cc:128: "GpuScheduler", this);
nit: indentation should match previous line

[rterrazas, 2012-09-26 05:26:17]

On 2012/09/25 18:40:15, nduca wrote:
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/10967034/diff/6001/gpu/command_buffer/service...
> File gpu/command_buffer/service/gpu_scheduler.cc (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/10967034/diff/6001/gpu/command_buffer/service...
> gpu/command_buffer/service/gpu_scheduler.cc:128: "GpuScheduler", this);
> nit: indentation should match previous line

Fixed :)

[nduca, 2012-10-02 03:50:17]

@apatrick, @jbauman, ping.

[apatrick_chromium, 2012-10-02 18:04:52]

lgtm

[rterrazas, 2012-10-08 18:58:23]

On 2012/10/02 18:04:52, apatrick_chromium wrote:
> lgtm

If this looks good to everyone, and there's nothing else that you need from me
for this, can you please commit for me?.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-10-08 19:05:46]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/rubentopo@gmail.com/10967034/7002

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-10-08 19:05:48]

Failed to apply patch for AUTHORS:
While running patch -p1 --forward --force --no-backup-if-mismatch;
  patching file AUTHORS
  Hunk #1 FAILED at 202.
  1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file AUTHORS.rej

Patch:       AUTHORS
Index: AUTHORS
diff --git a/AUTHORS b/AUTHORS
index
33eb34e8b8867fccb7cc948ddb7ce6e8f3b0574c..3e88925c11f564ba9f9b94a04463916e83cdc0ca
100644
--- a/AUTHORS
+++ b/AUTHORS
@@ -202,3 +202,4 @@ Max Vujovic <mvujovic@adobe.com>
 Jakob Weigert <jakob.j.w@googlemail.com>
 Catalin Badea <badea@adobe.com>
 Joshua Lock <joshua.lock@intel.com>
+Ruben Terrazas <rubentopo@gmail.com>

[rterrazas, 2012-10-09 02:16:27]

On 2012/10/08 19:05:48, I haz the power (commit-bot) wrote:
> Failed to apply patch for AUTHORS:
> While running patch -p1 --forward --force --no-backup-if-mismatch;
>   patching file AUTHORS
>   Hunk #1 FAILED at 202.
>   1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file AUTHORS.rej
> 
> Patch:       AUTHORS
> Index: AUTHORS
> diff --git a/AUTHORS b/AUTHORS
> index
>
33eb34e8b8867fccb7cc948ddb7ce6e8f3b0574c..3e88925c11f564ba9f9b94a04463916e83cdc0ca
> 100644
> --- a/AUTHORS
> +++ b/AUTHORS
> @@ -202,3 +202,4 @@ Max Vujovic <mailto:mvujovic@adobe.com>
>  Jakob Weigert <mailto:jakob.j.w@googlemail.com>
>  Catalin Badea <mailto:badea@adobe.com>
>  Joshua Lock <mailto:joshua.lock@intel.com>
> +Ruben Terrazas <mailto:rubentopo@gmail.com>

Per this trybot failure I have uploaded patch set 4 to fix this.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-10-09 02:37:53]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/rubentopo@gmail.com/10967034/20001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-10-09 04:45:32]

Change committed as 160793