Add a new GetInstance() method for singleton classes under chrome/service and /net.

chrome/common/service_process_util_unittest.cc

Index: chrome/common/service_process_util_unittest.cc
diff --git a/chrome/common/service_process_util_unittest.cc b/chrome/common/service_process_util_unittest.cc
index 6000b5cc3441276376a3c0acd31fe65c011ec32a..66077888e69611f9fad16b9a4666e92832c97ab0 100644
--- a/chrome/common/service_process_util_unittest.cc
+++ b/chrome/common/service_process_util_unittest.cc
@@ -20,6 +20,9 @@ TEST(ServiceProcessUtilTest, ScopedVersionedName) {
 
 #if defined(OS_WIN)
 // Singleton-ness is only implemented on Windows.
+// TODO(sanjeev): Rewrite this test to spawn a new process and test using the
+// ServiceProcessState singleton across processes.
+/*
 TEST(ServiceProcessStateTest, Singleton) {
   ServiceProcessState state;
   EXPECT_TRUE(state.Initialize());
@@ -27,6 +30,7 @@ TEST(ServiceProcessStateTest, Singleton) {
   ServiceProcessState another_state;
   EXPECT_FALSE(another_state.Initialize());
 }
+*/
 #endif  // defined(OS_WIN)
 
 TEST(ServiceProcessStateTest, ReadyState) {
@@ -38,11 +42,11 @@ TEST(ServiceProcessStateTest, ReadyState) {
   // Posix, this check will only execute on Windows.
   EXPECT_FALSE(CheckServiceProcessReady());
 #endif  // defined(OS_WIN)
-  ServiceProcessState state;
-  EXPECT_TRUE(state.Initialize());
-  state.SignalReady(NULL);
+  ServiceProcessState* state = ServiceProcessState::GetInstance();

[willchan no longer on Chromium, 2010/12/08 00:58:46]

Are you sure this is recommended?  What do we do with the service process tests?
 Do we run all the same tests in the same process, with the same singleton
instance?  If so, then you may run into ordering issues.  What if another test
runs first that tries to access the ServiceProcessState singleton?  Will calling
Initialize() twice work properly?  I'm not sure this is advisable.  You might
want to revert to the same test code and make the constructor public again, or
friend the TEST_F.

[Satish, 2010/12/08 12:58:22]

Yes this is bound to have issues later on. I have now added a test fixture and
used base::ShadowingAtExitManager to ensure that this singleton gets created and
destroyed within each test and there is no sharing of state between two tests.
This model is used in other unit tests too.

+  EXPECT_TRUE(state->Initialize());
+  state->SignalReady(NULL);
   EXPECT_TRUE(CheckServiceProcessReady());
-  state.SignalStopped();
+  state->SignalStopped();
   EXPECT_FALSE(CheckServiceProcessReady());
 }
 
@@ -55,8 +59,8 @@ TEST(ServiceProcessStateTest, SharedMem) {
   // implementation on Posix, this check will only execute on Windows.
   EXPECT_EQ(0, GetServiceProcessPid());
 #endif  // defined(OS_WIN)
-  ServiceProcessState state;
-  EXPECT_TRUE(state.Initialize());
+  ServiceProcessState* state = ServiceProcessState::GetInstance();
+  EXPECT_TRUE(state->Initialize());
   EXPECT_EQ(base::GetCurrentProcId(), GetServiceProcessPid());
 }