Move process-per-site logic from BrowsingInstance to RenderProcessHost.

chrome/browser/ssl/ssl_browser_tests.cc

Index: chrome/browser/ssl/ssl_browser_tests.cc
diff --git a/chrome/browser/ssl/ssl_browser_tests.cc b/chrome/browser/ssl/ssl_browser_tests.cc
index d0c359295707b2b473d5f6a88d20f1dacf6cd7ad..c6d6939a51a80fa214a81b9fbada31abb7266fb2 100644
--- a/chrome/browser/ssl/ssl_browser_tests.cc
+++ b/chrome/browser/ssl/ssl_browser_tests.cc
@@ -840,7 +840,7 @@ IN_PROC_BROWSER_TEST_F(SSLUITest, TestRunsInsecureContentTwoTabs) {
       test_server()->host_port_pair(),
       &replacement_path));
 
-  // Create a new tab in the same process.
+  // Create a new tab in the same process (since we are using process-per-site).

[awong, 2012/06/27 00:26:54]

This parenthetical doesn't explain enough to me.  If we were not using process
per site, how would the setup code look different?

[Charlie Reis, 2012/06/27 20:53:43]

Using the NEW_FOREGROUND_TAB disposition will not usually keep the new tab in a
new process by default.  It will work in process-per-site mode, though.  I've
updated the comment.

   GURL url = https_server_.GetURL(replacement_path);
   browser::NavigateParams params(
       browser(), url, content::PAGE_TRANSITION_TYPED);
@@ -853,6 +853,10 @@ IN_PROC_BROWSER_TEST_F(SSLUITest, TestRunsInsecureContentTwoTabs) {
   TabContents* tab2 = params.target_contents;
   observer.Wait();
 
+  // Both tabs should have the same process.
+  EXPECT_EQ(tab1->web_contents()->GetRenderProcessHost(),
+            tab2->web_contents()->GetRenderProcessHost());
+
   // The new tab has insecure content.
   CheckAuthenticationBrokenState(tab2->web_contents(), 0, true, false);