Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Check the BHM option before starting it in multi-process mode. #26106

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Apr 4, 2020

Conversation

@qrasmont
Copy link
Contributor

qrasmont commented Apr 3, 2020

In multi-process mode, if the BHM option is set start with one otherwise don't.

I didn't add a test for this. However if I should I'd be happy to be pointed to where similar tests are done (meaning tests of options yielding the expected state) because I didn't find my way in all those tests.


  • ./mach build -d does not report any errors

  • ./mach test-tidy does not report any errors

  • These changes fix #26088

  • There are tests for these changes OR

  • These changes do not require tests because they are minor enough to not require one.

@highfive
Copy link

highfive commented Apr 3, 2020

Thanks for the pull request, and welcome! The Servo team is excited to review your changes, and you should hear from @asajeffrey (or someone else) soon.

background_hang_monitor_register,
None,
);
if opts::get().background_hang_monitor {

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@gterzian

gterzian Apr 4, 2020

Member

It might be clearer to do something like:

let background_hang_monitor_register = if opts::get().background_hang_monitor {
     unprivileged_content.register_with_background_hang_monitor()
} else {
     None
};

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@qrasmont

qrasmont Apr 4, 2020

Author Contributor

Indeed!

Copy link
Member

gterzian left a comment

Thanks for the contribution, looks like the solution is right, with a small stylistic suggestion...

@qrasmont qrasmont force-pushed the qrasmont:fix-26088-bhm-opt-in-multiproc branch from cf73462 to 8b9390d Apr 4, 2020
Copy link
Member

gterzian left a comment

Looks good, and thanks for the contribution!

@gterzian
Copy link
Member

gterzian commented Apr 4, 2020

@bors-servo
Copy link
Contributor

bors-servo commented Apr 4, 2020

📌 Commit 8b9390d has been approved by gterzian

@bors-servo
Copy link
Contributor

bors-servo commented Apr 4, 2020

Testing commit 8b9390d with merge 9972aee...

@bors-servo
Copy link
Contributor

bors-servo commented Apr 4, 2020

☀️ Test successful - status-taskcluster
Approved by: gterzian
Pushing 9972aee to master...

@bors-servo bors-servo merged commit 9972aee into servo:master Apr 4, 2020
2 checks passed
2 checks passed
Community-TC (pull_request) TaskGroup: success
Details
homu Test successful
Details
@bors-servo bors-servo mentioned this pull request Apr 4, 2020
0 of 5 tasks complete
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Linked issues

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.