Fix StatsTable::RegisterThread so that it doesn't crash if shared memory...

Fix StatsTable::RegisterThread so that it doesn't crash if shared memory
couldn't be allocated. Instead, it just returns 0.

Also, fix StatsTable::AddCounter so that it's not a fatal error if shared
memory couldn't be allocated. Instead, it just returns 0.

In StatsTableTest::StatsCounter, we now assert that the counter could be
created, rather than just expecting it.  Much of the remainder of the test
relies on the fact that foo.Pointer() is non-NULL, and would crash if it 
were NULL.

TEST= StatsTableTest.* RenderViewTest.*
  Didn't test on Linux (still figuring out how to build on that plaform). 
Instead, tested on Mac OS X by modifying StatsTablePrivate::New to return NULL,
and then ran:
  unit_tests --gtest_filter='Render*'
  base_unittests --gtest_filter='StatsTableTest.*'
Both tests tests crashed.

Then, I applied the changes in this CL, reran the tests, and verified 
the crashing no longer occured.

BUG=13193
BUG=13196

[Neil Rhodes, 2009-06-14 15:32:36]

FYI: This is my first patch for Chromium.

[Evan Martin, 2009-06-15 18:35:32]

Mike might be a good reviewer for this.

http://codereview.chromium.org/126100/diff/1/2
File AUTHORS (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/126100/diff/1/2#newcode19
Line 19: Neil Rhodes <rhodes.neil@gmail.com>
Please put yourself at the bottom of the list (just for sanity's sake -- it's
roughly chronological).

[Mike Belshe, 2009-06-15 18:41:34]

lgtm

http://codereview.chromium.org/126100/diff/1/3
File base/stats_table.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/126100/diff/1/3#newcode295
Line 295: if (!impl_) {
I would move this up to line 290.

[Evan Martin, 2009-06-15 19:16:31]

Neil: when you upload a new version of the patch, can you also sign the CLA:
http://dev.chromium.org/developers/contributing-code

[Neil Rhodes, 2009-06-16 04:34:31]

Here's another version addressing the moving of a couple of lines of code: ready
for re-review.

Also, I now understand the format of the AUTHORS file better.  I thought I was
putting my name below Google Inc. as one of a list of people who are part of
that organization.

I now realize that each line is either a corporation or an individual.

I'm an employee of Google, so AFAIK, don't need to modify AUTHORS or sign a
license agreement.  Let me know if I'm wrong.

[Evan Martin, 2009-06-16 17:39:07]

On 2009/06/16 04:34:31, Neil Rhodes wrote:
> Here's another version addressing the moving of a couple of lines of code:
ready
> for re-review.
> 
> Also, I now understand the format of the AUTHORS file better.  I thought I was
> putting my name below Google Inc. as one of a list of people who are part of
> that organization.
> 
> I now realize that each line is either a corporation or an individual.
> 
> I'm an employee of Google, so AFAIK, don't need to modify AUTHORS or sign a
> license agreement.  Let me know if I'm wrong.

You are correct.  I will commit it shortly after testing on Linux.

[Evan Martin, 2009-06-16 20:50:05]

r18527

http://codereview.chromium.org/126100/diff/1006/1007
File base/stats_table.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/126100/diff/1006/1007#newcode291
Line 291: return 0;
BTW, Chrome style is to not use curlies on one-liners.  (I know it's different
that google3 -- don't ask me why.)

[Neil Rhodes, 2009-06-17 13:47:28]

Removed the extra curly-braces.

Take another look

[Evan Martin, 2009-06-17 15:41:23]

In my previous mail the "r18527" means I committed it as that svn rev.  Sorry
for the confusion!