Refactor IsSupportedKeySystemWithMediaMimeType().

Refactor IsSupportedKeySystemWithMediaMimeType().

This CL replaces all uses of IsSupportedKeySystemWithMediaMimeType() with the new KeySystems method, IsSupportedCodecCombination(). This new method implements the unprefixed algorithm more faithfully.

BUG=457386, 417461
Committed: https://crrev.com/34b8b85c4f7abd1f8a679fba4a53c279a0ac29ee
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#322283}

[sandersd (OOO until July 31), 2015-03-24 19:43:24]

Patchset #1 (id:1) has been deleted

[sandersd (OOO until July 31), 2015-03-24 19:43:35]

sandersd@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ ddorwin@chromium.org

[sandersd (OOO until July 31), 2015-03-24 20:44:06]

Patchset #3 (id:60001) has been deleted

[ddorwin, 2015-03-24 22:36:36]

LG. Mostly test cleanup.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022823008/diff/20001/media/base/key_systems.cc
File media/base/key_systems.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022823008/diff/20001/media/base/key_systems....
media/base/key_systems.cc:54: // TODO(sandersd): This definition only makes
sense for prefixed EME.
Are you planning to deal with this before removing prefixed? If not, add that
bug.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022823008/diff/20001/media/base/key_systems....
media/base/key_systems.cc:351: audio_codec_mask_ = EME_CODEC_AUDIO_ALL;
Move to initializer list?

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022823008/diff/20001/media/base/key_systems_...
File media/base/key_systems_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022823008/diff/20001/media/base/key_systems_...
media/base/key_systems_unittest.cc:1: // Copyright 2013 The Chromium Authors.
All rights reserved.
Do we have a test for an empty codec (417461)?

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022823008/diff/20001/media/base/key_systems_...
media/base/key_systems_unittest.cc:359: EXPECT_EQ("Unknown",
GetKeySystemNameForUMA(std::string()));
What was wrong with the removed line?

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022823008/diff/20001/media/base/key_systems_...
media/base/key_systems_unittest.cc:380: 
Ditto

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022823008/diff/20001/media/base/key_systems_...
media/base/key_systems_unittest.cc:521:
EXPECT_TRUE(IsSupportedKeySystem(kUsesAes));
Already tested at 399 and 466 respectively. Also, not video.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022823008/diff/20001/media/base/key_systems_...
media/base/key_systems_unittest.cc:584: // The parent system is not a concrete
system but is supported.
// Unprefixed has no parent key system support.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022823008/diff/20001/media/base/key_systems_...
media/base/key_systems_unittest.cc:607:
EXPECT_TRUE(IsSupportedKeySystem(kExternal));
Already tested at 573. Also, not video.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022823008/diff/20001/media/base/key_systems_...
media/base/key_systems_unittest.cc:629:
EXPECT_FALSE(IsSupportedKeySystem(kExternalParent));
Tested at 585 and not video.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022823008/diff/20001/media/base/key_systems_...
media/base/key_systems_unittest.cc:663: // Unprefixed has no parent key system
support.
remove this line

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022823008/diff/20001/media/base/key_systems_...
media/base/key_systems_unittest.cc:702:
EXPECT_FALSE(IsSupportedKeySystem(kExternalParent));
Tested at 585 and not video.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022823008/diff/20001/media/base/key_systems_...
media/base/key_systems_unittest.cc:737: // Unprefixed has no parent key system
support.
Remove this line.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022823008/diff/20001/media/base/key_systems_...
media/base/key_systems_unittest.cc:778: }
What was wrong with the removed line?

[sandersd (OOO until July 31), 2015-03-24 22:49:04]

Patchset #2 (id:40001) has been deleted

[sandersd (OOO until July 31), 2015-03-24 23:26:36]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022823008/diff/20001/media/base/key_systems.cc
File media/base/key_systems.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022823008/diff/20001/media/base/key_systems....
media/base/key_systems.cc:54: // TODO(sandersd): This definition only makes
sense for prefixed EME.
On 2015/03/24 22:36:35, ddorwin wrote:
> Are you planning to deal with this before removing prefixed? If not, add that
> bug.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022823008/diff/20001/media/base/key_systems....
media/base/key_systems.cc:351: audio_codec_mask_ = EME_CODEC_AUDIO_ALL;
On 2015/03/24 22:36:35, ddorwin wrote:
> Move to initializer list?

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022823008/diff/20001/media/base/key_systems_...
File media/base/key_systems_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022823008/diff/20001/media/base/key_systems_...
media/base/key_systems_unittest.cc:1: // Copyright 2013 The Chromium Authors.
All rights reserved.
On 2015/03/24 22:36:36, ddorwin wrote:
> Do we have a test for an empty codec (417461)?

No, I was planning to do that as part of an overall refactor of these tests
(which is not yet planned, admittedly).

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022823008/diff/20001/media/base/key_systems_...
media/base/key_systems_unittest.cc:359: EXPECT_EQ("Unknown",
GetKeySystemNameForUMA(std::string()));
On 2015/03/24 22:36:36, ddorwin wrote:
> What was wrong with the removed line?

IsSupportedCodecCombination() DCHECKs that |key_system| is known (like all the
other new methods that don't have KeySystem in their name).

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022823008/diff/20001/media/base/key_systems_...
media/base/key_systems_unittest.cc:521:
EXPECT_TRUE(IsSupportedKeySystem(kUsesAes));
On 2015/03/24 22:36:36, ddorwin wrote:
> Already tested at 399 and 466 respectively. Also, not video.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022823008/diff/20001/media/base/key_systems_...
media/base/key_systems_unittest.cc:584: // The parent system is not a concrete
system but is supported.
On 2015/03/24 22:36:36, ddorwin wrote:
> // Unprefixed has no parent key system support.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022823008/diff/20001/media/base/key_systems_...
media/base/key_systems_unittest.cc:607:
EXPECT_TRUE(IsSupportedKeySystem(kExternal));
On 2015/03/24 22:36:36, ddorwin wrote:
> Already tested at 573. Also, not video.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022823008/diff/20001/media/base/key_systems_...
media/base/key_systems_unittest.cc:629:
EXPECT_FALSE(IsSupportedKeySystem(kExternalParent));
On 2015/03/24 22:36:36, ddorwin wrote:
> Tested at 585 and not video.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022823008/diff/20001/media/base/key_systems_...
media/base/key_systems_unittest.cc:663: // Unprefixed has no parent key system
support.
On 2015/03/24 22:36:36, ddorwin wrote:
> remove this line

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022823008/diff/20001/media/base/key_systems_...
media/base/key_systems_unittest.cc:702:
EXPECT_FALSE(IsSupportedKeySystem(kExternalParent));
On 2015/03/24 22:36:36, ddorwin wrote:
> Tested at 585 and not video.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022823008/diff/20001/media/base/key_systems_...
media/base/key_systems_unittest.cc:737: // Unprefixed has no parent key system
support.
On 2015/03/24 22:36:35, ddorwin wrote:
> Remove this line.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022823008/diff/20001/media/base/key_systems_...
media/base/key_systems_unittest.cc:778: }
On 2015/03/24 22:36:36, ddorwin wrote:
> What was wrong with the removed line?

kExternal is not supported by unprefixed (and thus would DCHECK).

[ddorwin, 2015-03-24 23:48:05]

LGTM % 2 comments (one in previous PS)

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022823008/diff/20001/media/base/key_systems_...
File media/base/key_systems_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022823008/diff/20001/media/base/key_systems_...
media/base/key_systems_unittest.cc:1: // Copyright 2013 The Chromium Authors.
All rights reserved.
On 2015/03/24 23:26:36, sandersd wrote:
> On 2015/03/24 22:36:36, ddorwin wrote:
> > Do we have a test for an empty codec (417461)?
> 
> No, I was planning to do that as part of an overall refactor of these tests
> (which is not yet planned, admittedly).

TODO along with a reference to the bug for context?

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022823008/diff/100001/media/base/key_systems...
File media/base/key_systems_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022823008/diff/100001/media/base/key_systems...
media/base/key_systems_unittest.cc:738: // Unprefixed has no parent key system
support.
Not removed

[sandersd (OOO until July 31), 2015-03-24 23:57:21]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022823008/diff/20001/media/base/key_systems_...
File media/base/key_systems_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022823008/diff/20001/media/base/key_systems_...
media/base/key_systems_unittest.cc:1: // Copyright 2013 The Chromium Authors.
All rights reserved.
On 2015/03/24 23:48:04, ddorwin wrote:
> On 2015/03/24 23:26:36, sandersd wrote:
> > On 2015/03/24 22:36:36, ddorwin wrote:
> > > Do we have a test for an empty codec (417461)?
> > 
> > No, I was planning to do that as part of an overall refactor of these tests
> > (which is not yet planned, admittedly).
> 
> TODO along with a reference to the bug for context?

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022823008/diff/100001/media/base/key_systems...
File media/base/key_systems_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1022823008/diff/100001/media/base/key_systems...
media/base/key_systems_unittest.cc:738: // Unprefixed has no parent key system
support.
On 2015/03/24 23:48:04, ddorwin wrote:
> Not removed

Done.

[sandersd (OOO until July 31), 2015-03-25 22:23:22]

The CQ bit was checked by sandersd@chromium.org

[sandersd (OOO until July 31), 2015-03-25 22:23:23]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from ddorwin@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/1022823008/#ps100002
(title: " ")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-03-25 22:24:17]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1022823008/100002

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-03-25 23:45:25]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-03-25 23:45:26]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  linux_chromium_rel_ng on tryserver.chromium.linux (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/linux_chromium_...)

[sandersd (OOO until July 31), 2015-03-25 23:46:16]

The CQ bit was checked by sandersd@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-03-25 23:48:11]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1022823008/100002

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-03-26 01:04:46]

Committed patchset #7 (id:100002)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-03-26 01:05:15]

Patchset 7 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/34b8b85c4f7abd1f8a679fba4a53c279a0ac29ee
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#322283}