Improved ignore-backoff handling
Allow a non-epidited ignore-backoff op to pass through an expidited backed off op. To do this, I first refactored the complicated if statement: if (best == null || ((bestSyncableIsUnknownAndNotARetry == syncableIsUnknownAndNotARetry) ? (best.expedited == op.expedited ? opRunTime < bestRunTime : op.expedited) : syncableIsUnknownAndNotARetry)) { best = op; bestSyncableIsUnknownAndNotARetry = syncableIsUnknownAndNotARetry; bestRunTime = opRunTime; } Into a more readable: boolean setBest = false; if (best == null) { setBest = true; } else if (bestSyncableIsUnknownAndNotARetry == syncableIsUnknownAndNotARetry) { if (best.expedited == op.expedited) { if (opRunTime < bestRunTime) { // if both have same level, earlier time wins setBest = true; } } else { if (op.expedited) { setBest = true; } } } else { if (syncableIsUnknownAndNotARetry) { setBest = true; } } if (setBest) { best = op; bestSyncableIsUnknownAndNotARetry = syncableIsUnknownAndNotARetry; bestRunTime = opRunTime; } The refactoring was all done automatically with IntelliJ to avoid human error in the conversion. After verifying this code still behaved as expected including the error condition in the bug, I added handling for the cases when a non-expidited op may override an expedited op if certain conditions occur, specificaly, if the expidited op is backed off and the non-expidited op is not. Finally, refactored to make it testable and added tests and logging. Bug: 3128963 Change-Id: I131cbcec6073ea5fe425f6b5aa88ca56c02b6598
Loading
Please register or sign in to comment