Following https://abseil.io/tips/122 to make tests easier to understand
and adds a bit of flexibility to create sockets with custom parameters.
This also simplifies handover tests.
Additionally, AdvanceTime will now also run timers, as that was easily
forgotten previously.
Bug: None
Change-Id: Ieb5eece7aca51c98a7634ed1c61646383ad1712d
Reviewed-on: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/253782
Reviewed-by: Sergey Sukhanov <sergeysu@webrtc.org>
Commit-Queue: Victor Boivie <boivie@webrtc.org>
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/main@{#36141}
Context: The timer precision of PostDelayedTask() is about to be lowered
to include up to 17 ms leeway. In order not to break use cases that
require high precision timers, PostDelayedHighPrecisionTask() will
continue to have the same precision that PostDelayedTask() has today.
webrtc::TaskQueueBase has an enum (kLow, kHigh) to decide which
precision to use when calling PostDelayedTaskWithPrecision().
See go/postdelayedtask-precision-in-webrtc for motivation and a table of
delayed task use cases in WebRTC that are "high" or "low" precision.
Most timers in DCSCTP are believed to only be needing low precision (see
table), but the delayed_ack_timer_ of DataTracker[1] is an example of a
use case that is likely to break if the timer precision is lowered (if
ACK is sent too late, retransmissions may occur). So this is considered
a high precision use case.
This CL makes it possible to specify the precision of dcsctp::Timer.
In a follow-up CL we will update delayed_ack_timer_ to kHigh precision.
[1] https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:third_party/webrtc/net/dcsctp/rx/data_tracker.cc;l=340
Bug: webrtc:13604
Change-Id: I8eec5ce37044096978b5dd1985fbb00bc0d8fb7e
Reviewed-on: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/249081
Reviewed-by: Victor Boivie <boivie@webrtc.org>
Reviewed-by: Tomas Gunnarsson <tommi@webrtc.org>
Commit-Queue: Henrik Boström <hbos@webrtc.org>
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/main@{#35809}
This was caught in an integration test which had stricter assertions
than the FakeTimeout which is used in unit tests, so the first thing was
to add the same assertions to the FakeTimeout.
The issue is that when a Timer triggers, and if it's set to
automatically restart (possibly with an exponential backoff), the
`is_running_` field was set to true while the timer callback was called
to allow the client to know that the timer is in fact running, but the
timer was actually not started until the callback returned. Which made
sense, as the callback can with its return value override the duration,
which should affect the backoff algorithm.
The problem was when a timer was manually started within the callback.
As the Timer itself thought that it was already running, it first would
Stop() the underlying Timeout, then Start(). But calling Stop() on a
timeout that is not running is illegal, which set of assertions.
So the solution is to don't lie; Don't say that a timer is running when
it's not. Make sure that the timer is running when the timer callback is
triggered, which makes it consistent at all times. That may result in
unnecessary timeout invocations (stopping and starting), but that's not
too expensive.
Bug: webrtc:12614
Change-Id: I7b4447ccd88bd43d181e158f0d29b0770c8a3fd6
Reviewed-on: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/217522
Reviewed-by: Florent Castelli <orphis@webrtc.org>
Commit-Queue: Victor Boivie <boivie@webrtc.org>
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#33926}
In real life, when a Timeout expires, the caller is supposed to call
DcSctpSocket::HandleTimeout directly, as the Timeout that just expired
is stopped (it just expired), but the Timer still believes it's running.
The system is not in a consistent state.
In tests, all timeouts were evaluated at the same time, which, if two
timeouts expired at the same time, would put them both as "not running",
and with their timers believing they were running. So if you would do
any operation on a timer whose timeout had just expired, the timeout
would assert saying that "you can't stop a stopped timeout" or similar.
This isn't relevant in non-test scenarios.
Solved by expiring timeouts one by one.
Bug: webrtc:12614
Change-Id: I79d006f4d3e96854d77cec3eb0080aa23b8569cb
Reviewed-on: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/217560
Reviewed-by: Florent Castelli <orphis@webrtc.org>
Commit-Queue: Victor Boivie <boivie@webrtc.org>
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#33925}
To be able to use them type-safely, they should support native
operators (e.g. adding a time and a duration, or subtracting two time
values), as the alternative is to manage them as numbers.
Yes, this makes them behave a bit like absl::Time/absl::Duration.
Bug: webrtc:12614
Change-Id: I4dea12e33698a46e71fb549f44c06f2f381c9201
Reviewed-on: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/215143
Reviewed-by: Tommi <tommi@webrtc.org>
Commit-Queue: Victor Boivie <boivie@webrtc.org>
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#33725}
Timer is a high-level timer (in contrast to the low-level `Timeout`
class). Timers are started and can be stopped or restarted. When a timer
expires, the provided callback will be triggered.
Timers can be configured to do e.g. exponential backoff when they expire
and how many times they should be automatically restarted.
Bug: webrtc:12614
Change-Id: Id5eddd58dd0af62184b10dd1f98e3e886e3f1d50
Reviewed-on: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/213350
Reviewed-by: Tommi <tommi@webrtc.org>
Commit-Queue: Victor Boivie <boivie@webrtc.org>
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#33666}
