SPDY - don't persist SpdySettings until we convert it to a map.

net/spdy/spdy_session.cc

Index: net/spdy/spdy_session.cc
===================================================================
--- net/spdy/spdy_session.cc	(revision 126690)
+++ net/spdy/spdy_session.cc	(working copy)
@@ -1300,8 +1300,9 @@
                             uint32 value) {
   HandleSetting(id, value);
   spdy::SettingsFlagsAndId flags_and_id(flags, id);
-  http_server_properties_->SetSpdySetting(
-      host_port_pair(), std::make_pair(flags_and_id, value));
+  // TODO(rtenneti): persist SpdySetting.

[willchan no longer on Chromium, 2012/03/15 03:13:54]

Wait, why do we have to change this? We can still set the SpdySetting, right? It
just can't be persisted?

[ramant (doing other things), 2012/03/15 03:46:30]

SetSpdySetting is doing the copy of memory. It is possible over a period of time
(for plus.google.com) we get lot of settings update and we keep appending and
thus the list can grow. Will check in a fix that doesn't grow the memory
tomorrow. Hope this approach is ok.

+  // http_server_properties_->SetSpdySetting(
+  //    host_port_pair(), std::make_pair(flags_and_id, value));
 
   received_settings_ = true;
 
@@ -1673,7 +1674,8 @@
           i->second = cwnd;
           i->first = new_id;
           spdy::SpdySetting setting(new_id, val);
-          http_server_properties_->SetSpdySetting(host_port_pair(), setting);
+          // TODO(rtenneti): Persist SpdySetting.

[willchan no longer on Chromium, 2012/03/15 03:13:54]

Do we need to change this too?

[ramant (doing other things), 2012/03/15 03:46:30]

This is where the bug was. In the previous version, we used to break and we used
to set only one setting update. For sorting purposes, I used the same loop and
it had the side effect of calling SetSpdySetting for every element (and most of
the elements were CWD setting).

None of this code will get executed because GetSpdySettings will be empty.
Wanted to be 100% safe. Will implement persisting (and saving of the settings
tonight/tomorrow).

What do you think of this approach (being very conservative).

+          // http_server_properties_->SetSpdySetting(host_port_pair(), setting);
           unique_settings[id] = setting;
           continue;
         }