Run event executor on the ui thread to remove the need to explicitly XFlush() the XTest calls.

base/message_loop.h

Index: base/message_loop.h
diff --git a/base/message_loop.h b/base/message_loop.h
index d23899784b3a27d33d166a118d6e579d96e400af..58306a720825050580b33b2a439986e2bb72156c 100644
--- a/base/message_loop.h
+++ b/base/message_loop.h
@@ -24,6 +24,7 @@
 #include "base/message_pump_libevent.h"
 #if !defined(OS_MACOSX)
 #include "base/message_pump_glib.h"
+typedef struct _XDisplay Display;
 #endif
 #endif
 #if defined(TOUCH_UI)
@@ -508,6 +509,10 @@ class MessageLoopForUI : public MessageLoop {
   void DidProcessMessage(const MSG& message);
 #endif  // defined(OS_WIN)
 
+#if defined(OS_POSIX) && !defined(OS_MACOSX)
+  Display* get_display();

[sadrul, 2011/02/19 07:02:39]

I see that this has already landed, but ... is there a reason for the horrific
name for the function (i.e. why 'get_display' instead of 'GetDisplay'?)

[Jamie, 2011/02/19 08:09:06]

I was aiming for consistency with other getter-like functions in this header,
for example pump_win and pump_libevent, but just calling it display() didn't
feel descriptive enough.

[sadrul, 2011/02/19 08:22:50]

Simple accessor functions are named like this, so if there was a |display_|
attribute, the accessor would be display(). But for this, I believe GetDisplay
would have been more appropriate. 

But, I would suggest you wait for Evan Martin to weigh in on whether this is the
right way of exposing the Display first before renaming the function (if you
wanted to).

+#endif
+
 #if !defined(OS_MACOSX)
   // Please see message_pump_win/message_pump_glib for definitions of these
   // methods.