Add support for kiosk mode on the client. Make sure the settings are written in the lockbox.

chrome/browser/policy/device_token_fetcher_unittest.cc

Index: chrome/browser/policy/device_token_fetcher_unittest.cc
diff --git a/chrome/browser/policy/device_token_fetcher_unittest.cc b/chrome/browser/policy/device_token_fetcher_unittest.cc
index a8ae3182dfde5789aa9685da794b3931099de0fe..6d55ae1817330c9571bc3dce653c6222a6fbb237 100644
--- a/chrome/browser/policy/device_token_fetcher_unittest.cc
+++ b/chrome/browser/policy/device_token_fetcher_unittest.cc
@@ -35,6 +35,8 @@ class DeviceTokenFetcherTest : public testing::Test {
     EXPECT_TRUE(temp_user_data_dir_.CreateUniqueTempDir());
     successful_registration_response_.mutable_register_response()->
         set_device_management_token("fake_token");
+    successful_registration_response_.mutable_register_response()->
+        set_enrollment_type(em::DeviceRegisterResponse::ENTERPRISE);
   }
 
   virtual void SetUp() {
@@ -107,11 +109,14 @@ TEST_F(DeviceTokenFetcherTest, FetchToken) {
                              &notifier_);
   EXPECT_CALL(observer_, OnDeviceTokenChanged());
   EXPECT_EQ("", data_store_->device_token());
+  EXPECT_EQ(DEVICE_MODE_UNKNOWN, data_store_->device_mode());
   FetchToken(&fetcher);
   loop_.RunAllPending();
   Mock::VerifyAndClearExpectations(&observer_);
   std::string token = data_store_->device_token();
   EXPECT_NE("", token);
+  // User policy registration should not set enrollment mode.
+  EXPECT_EQ(DEVICE_MODE_UNKNOWN, data_store_->device_mode());
 
   // Calling FetchToken() again should result in a new token being fetched.
   successful_registration_response_.mutable_register_response()->
@@ -128,6 +133,62 @@ TEST_F(DeviceTokenFetcherTest, FetchToken) {
   EXPECT_NE(token, token2);
 }
 
+// User token fetches does not have to carry enrollment type.

[Mattias Nissler (ping if slow), 2012/02/21 10:37:46]

That comment is misleading, since the test is really about device registrations.
Say something like "For device registrations, the fetcher needs to determine
device mode."

[pastarmovj, 2012/02/21 14:57:08]

Yep. I removed the comment here and put it down at the point I EXPECT that the
mode has been set.

+TEST_F(DeviceTokenFetcherTest, FetchDeviceToken) {
+  testing::InSequence s;
+  scoped_ptr<CloudPolicyDataStore> data_store(
+      CloudPolicyDataStore::CreateForDevicePolicies());
+  data_store->AddObserver(&observer_);

[Mattias Nissler (ping if slow), 2012/02/21 10:37:46]

do you actually need the observer for this test? I guess not.

[pastarmovj, 2012/02/21 14:57:08]

Done.

+  EXPECT_CALL(service_,
+              CreateJob(DeviceManagementRequestJob::TYPE_REGISTRATION))
+      .WillOnce(service_.SucceedJob(successful_registration_response_));
+  EXPECT_CALL(service_, StartJob(_)).WillOnce(VerifyRegisterRequest(false));
+  DeviceTokenFetcher fetcher(&service_, cache_.get(), data_store.get(),
+                             &notifier_);
+  EXPECT_CALL(observer_, OnDeviceTokenChanged());
+  EXPECT_EQ("", data_store->device_token());
+  EXPECT_EQ(DEVICE_MODE_UNKNOWN, data_store->device_mode());
+  data_store->SetupForTesting("", "fake_device_id", "fake_user_name",
+                              "fake_auth_token", true);
+  fetcher.FetchToken();
+  loop_.RunAllPending();
+  Mock::VerifyAndClearExpectations(&observer_);
+  EXPECT_NE("", data_store->device_token());
+  EXPECT_EQ(DEVICE_MODE_ENTERPRISE, data_store->device_mode());
+
+  data_store->RemoveObserver(&observer_);
+}
+
+// TODO(pastarmovj): This test must be changed in accordance with
+// http://crosbug.com/26624.
+TEST_F(DeviceTokenFetcherTest, FetchDeviceTokenMissingMode) {
+  testing::InSequence s;
+  scoped_ptr<CloudPolicyDataStore> data_store(
+      CloudPolicyDataStore::CreateForDevicePolicies());
+  data_store->AddObserver(&observer_);

[Mattias Nissler (ping if slow), 2012/02/21 10:37:46]

ditto

[pastarmovj, 2012/02/21 14:57:08]

Done.

+  EXPECT_CALL(service_,
+              CreateJob(DeviceManagementRequestJob::TYPE_REGISTRATION))
+      .WillOnce(service_.SucceedJob(successful_registration_response_));
+  EXPECT_CALL(service_, StartJob(_)).WillOnce(VerifyRegisterRequest(false));
+  DeviceTokenFetcher fetcher(&service_, cache_.get(), data_store.get(),
+                             &notifier_);
+  EXPECT_CALL(observer_, OnDeviceTokenChanged());
+  EXPECT_EQ("", data_store->device_token());
+  EXPECT_EQ(DEVICE_MODE_UNKNOWN, data_store->device_mode());
+  data_store->SetupForTesting("", "fake_device_id", "fake_user_name",
+                              "fake_auth_token", true);

[Mattias Nissler (ping if slow), 2012/02/21 10:37:46]

It looks like this setup code is now duplicated 3 times for the most part. Any
chance to consolidate?

[pastarmovj, 2012/02/21 14:57:08]

Did some consolidation. Could push it further but I think this will make future
changes in single tests rather harder.

+  successful_registration_response_.mutable_register_response()->
+      clear_enrollment_type();
+  fetcher.FetchToken();
+  loop_.RunAllPending();
+  Mock::VerifyAndClearExpectations(&observer_);
+  EXPECT_NE("", data_store->device_token());
+  // TODO(pastarmovj): Modify when http://crosbug.com/26624 is resolved.
+  EXPECT_EQ(DEVICE_MODE_ENTERPRISE, data_store->device_mode());
+
+  data_store->RemoveObserver(&observer_);
+}
+
 TEST_F(DeviceTokenFetcherTest, RetryOnError) {
   testing::InSequence s;
   EXPECT_CALL(service_,