Update heartbeats and energymon profiler dependencies

[connorimes]

Heartbeats now on crates.io.
Updates to energymon interface for energy profiling.
Profiling script for Android.

[highfive]

Warning

• These commits modify script code, but no tests are modified. Please consider adding a test!

[asajeffrey]

@larsbergstrom can you take a look at tests/heartbeats/characterize_android.py?

[asajeffrey]

Reviewed 6 of 9 files at r1.
Review status: 6 of 9 files reviewed at latest revision, 2 unresolved discussions.

---

components/script/parser.out, line 0 [r1] (raw file):
Do you know what caused this diff?

---

tests/heartbeats/characterize.py, line 26 [r1] (raw file):
A test commented out?

---

Comments from the review on Reviewable.io

[asajeffrey]

Mostly looks fine. It'd be nice to get someone who knows their way round the android build to look at it. Do you know why parser.out changed?

[connorimes]

I don't have any idea what that parser thing is. I commented out that profiler category because it doesn't use the profiling interface properly and therefore doesn't behave like the others. It screws up data in log files and the chart generation by the process_logs python script as a result.

Basically all the heartbeats changes are just better build support, esp. for cross compiling (also now using Alex's cmake crate to help). Also, I published both the bindings and abstraction crates on crates.io. Additionally, they're relicensed to dual MIT/Apache-2.0.

The real changes are in the energymon-related crates and associated native C code. They are also re-licensed now. Energy monitoring capabilities are only enabled with the energy-profiling feature, which is disabled by default.

[connorimes]

Review status: 6 of 9 files reviewed at latest revision, 2 unresolved discussions.

---

tests/heartbeats/characterize.py, line 26 [r1] (raw file):
This is intentional - this profiler category doesn't use the profiling interface properly and causes problems.

---

Comments from the review on Reviewable.io

[larsbergstrom]

Reviewed 1 of 9 files at r1.
Review status: 7 of 9 files reviewed at latest revision, 2 unresolved discussions.

---

components/script/parser.out, line [r1] (raw file):
This file was removed in #9817. Does this PR need a rebase?

---

Comments from the review on Reviewable.io

[asajeffrey]

I'm going to regret asking this, but... over in https://github.com/libheartbeats/heartbeats-simple/blob/master/LICENSE the copyright holder is given as "The University of Chicago". Is this correct?

[connorimes]

Ah, I didn't even realize I had added a deleted file back in. Maybe something happened pushing/popping my git stash when I pulled to get the latest changes before making my branch. Sorry about that - good catch. I've deleted the file and rebased my commit.

[asajeffrey]

Reviewed 1 of 9 files at r1, 1 of 1 files at r2.
Review status: all files reviewed at latest revision, 1 unresolved discussion.

---

Comments from the review on Reviewable.io

[connorimes]

We chose the 3-clause BSD license when we released Heartbeats source as part of other work. The heartbeats-simple project is originally based on that source. The BSD license allows source redistribution as long as the LICENSE file is retained. We've previously included these projects in servo, so this is not new.
When I began development on the energymon projects, I just applied the same license, but I can easily relicense energymon since I'm the only contributor ever.
All the rust code (sys bindings and abstraction crates) are dual-licensed under MIT/Apache-2.0 which I started work on last summer while I was with Mozilla. They were originally MIT only, which is what was recommended to me at the time.

[asajeffrey]

Is UoC the copyright holder? I'm a bit concerned that if they are, we need someone to officially bless the licensing.

[connorimes]

I'm a graduate student at UofC and primary developer of the libraries. Per the licensing, nobody at UofC's end has to bless the redistribution, nor is it a copyleft license. If you need blessing from inside Mozilla, I think @larsbergstrom can provide that.

[asajeffrey]

Sorry to harp on about this, but is UoC the copyright holder? If they are, we need to think about the licensing. If not, could you update the LICENSE files?

[connorimes]

I've updated the license files for the energymon project to be dual MIT/Apache-2.0.

[asajeffrey]

Thanks!

[asajeffrey]

Reviewed 1 of 1 files at r3.
Review status: all files reviewed at latest revision, 1 unresolved discussion.

---

Comments from the review on Reviewable.io

[asajeffrey]

@larsbergstrom did tests/heartbeats/characterize_android.py look good to you?

@bors-servo try

[bors-servo]

⌛ Trying commit 2ab12a3 with merge 2af98a4...

[bors-servo]

☀️ Test successful - android, gonk, linux-dev, linux-rel, mac-dev-unit, mac-rel-css, mac-rel-wpt, status-appveyor

[connorimes]

I rebased this yesterday afternoon. Did it become unmergeable again? Or is something else missing?

[larsbergstrom]

@bors-servo r=asajeffrey

Unlike nearly every other action on GitHub, rebases / pushing extra commits to a branch does not send any update mails.

[bors-servo]

📌 Commit f31e884 has been approved by asajeffrey

[connorimes]

I knew that but I thought highfive automatically picked it up. Thanks.

[bors-servo]

⌛ Testing commit f31e884 with merge 18f0a9a...

[bors-servo]

💔 Test failed - status-appveyor

[larsbergstrom]

@bors-servo retry

• AppVeyor misconfiguration

[bors-servo]

⌛ Testing commit f31e884 with merge 396812b...

[bors-servo]

💔 Test failed - linux-rel

[asajeffrey]

@bors-servo: retry

• #9012

[bors-servo]

⚡ Previous build results for android, gonk, linux-dev, mac-dev-unit, mac-rel-css, mac-rel-wpt, status-appveyor are reusable. Rebuilding only linux-rel...

[bors-servo]

☀️ Test successful - android, gonk, linux-dev, linux-rel, mac-dev-unit, mac-rel-css, mac-rel-wpt, status-appveyor

[asajeffrey]

Yay! Thanks, @connorimes!