Add permission "mediaRouterPrivate" for the Media Router Mojo service.

Add permission "mediaRouterPrivate" for the Media Router Mojo service.

BUG=464205
Committed: https://crrev.com/3b122b10feb84eb065f5f4f319b1f8b6091f6d32
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#323839}

[Kevin M, 2015-04-02 17:35:40]

kmarshall@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ rdevlin.cronin@chromium.org

[Devlin, 2015-04-02 19:58:28]

Couple of things, but the biggest is a request for more context - can you link
anything documenting what the mediaRouterPrivate permission will do?  An API
proposal, etc?

[Kevin Marshall, 2015-04-02 20:34:27]

marshallk@google.com changed reviewers:
+ marshallk@google.com

[Kevin Marshall, 2015-04-02 20:34:27]

Certainly. Here is a doc link that you can use:
http://www.chromium.org/developers/design-documents/media-router . This link is
also supplied in the README under chrome/browser/media/router .

The whitelisted permission bit arbitrates access to the Media Router Mojo
service, which is used to perform IPC between the Media Router component
extension and the Media Router browser service. If the permission is set, then
the Media Router Mojo service factory is bound to the extension's RenderFrame.
See extensions/browser/mojo/service_registration.cc to get an idea of how this
would look. If the permission is not set, then the extension will be unable to
connect to the MR service.

The Mojo API exists in a private branch right now, but I'll put it up for code
review in Chromium immediately after CL, once the permission checks are in
place.

[Devlin, 2015-04-02 21:06:50]

Can you also please update the CL title (so the commit title doesn't get cropped
weirdly)?

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051333002/diff/1/chrome/common/extensions/ap...
File chrome/common/extensions/api/_permission_features.json (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051333002/diff/1/chrome/common/extensions/ap...
chrome/common/extensions/api/_permission_features.json:643: "extension_types":
["platform_app", "extension"],
Do we need multiple extension types when there's only one whitelist?

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051333002/diff/1/chrome/common/extensions/pe...
File chrome/common/extensions/permissions/chrome_api_permissions.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051333002/diff/1/chrome/common/extensions/pe...
chrome/common/extensions/permissions/chrome_api_permissions.cc:31: // add the
corresponding permission message rule to
Sounds like you should do this. :)

[Kevin M, 2015-04-02 21:32:08]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051333002/diff/1/chrome/common/extensions/ap...
File chrome/common/extensions/api/_permission_features.json (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051333002/diff/1/chrome/common/extensions/ap...
chrome/common/extensions/api/_permission_features.json:643: "extension_types":
["platform_app", "extension"],
On 2015/04/02 21:06:50, Devlin wrote:
> Do we need multiple extension types when there's only one whitelist?

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051333002/diff/1/chrome/common/extensions/pe...
File chrome/common/extensions/permissions/chrome_api_permissions.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051333002/diff/1/chrome/common/extensions/pe...
chrome/common/extensions/permissions/chrome_api_permissions.cc:31: // add the
corresponding permission message rule to
On 2015/04/02 21:06:50, Devlin wrote:
> Sounds like you should do this. :)

Done.

[Devlin, 2015-04-02 21:37:17]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051333002/diff/1/chrome/common/extensions/pe...
File chrome/common/extensions/permissions/chrome_api_permissions.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051333002/diff/1/chrome/common/extensions/pe...
chrome/common/extensions/permissions/chrome_api_permissions.cc:31: // add the
corresponding permission message rule to
On 2015/04/02 21:32:07, Kevin M wrote:
> On 2015/04/02 21:06:50, Devlin wrote:
> > Sounds like you should do this. :)
> 
> Done.

I think this is referring to
https://code.google.com/p/chromium/codesearch#chromium/src/chrome/common/exte...
, which still isn't included in the patch?

[Kevin M, 2015-04-02 22:44:55]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051333002/diff/1/chrome/common/extensions/pe...
File chrome/common/extensions/permissions/chrome_api_permissions.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051333002/diff/1/chrome/common/extensions/pe...
chrome/common/extensions/permissions/chrome_api_permissions.cc:31: // add the
corresponding permission message rule to
On 2015/04/02 21:37:17, Devlin wrote:
> On 2015/04/02 21:32:07, Kevin M wrote:
> > On 2015/04/02 21:06:50, Devlin wrote:
> > > Sounds like you should do this. :)
> > 
> > Done.
> 
> I think this is referring to
>
https://code.google.com/p/chromium/codesearch#chromium/src/chrome/common/exte...
> , which still isn't included in the patch?

Sorry, now it's done.

[Devlin, 2015-04-02 23:20:17]

lgtm

[Kevin M, 2015-04-02 23:28:21]

The CQ bit was checked by kmarshall@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-03 00:54:52]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1051333002/40001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-03 05:37:16]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-03 05:37:17]

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

[Kevin M, 2015-04-03 17:37:12]

The CQ bit was checked by kmarshall@chromium.org

[Kevin M, 2015-04-03 17:37:12]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from
rdevlin.cronin@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/1051333002/#ps60001
(title: "Resync with master")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-03 17:37:31]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1051333002/60001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-03 18:46:18]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-03 18:46:19]

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

[Kevin M, 2015-04-03 21:47:47]

Hey Devlin,

Actually, upon further reflection, other private APIs do not have permission
messages at all. So I removed the permission message string and added it to the
unit test exemption list.

[Kevin M, 2015-04-03 21:50:40]

I'll hold off on submitting until you give another LGTM. :)

[Devlin, 2015-04-03 21:52:53]

Sounds reasonable, lgtm.  (We can always add a message later, if we decide it's
necessary.)

[Kevin M, 2015-04-03 22:22:55]

The CQ bit was checked by kmarshall@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-03 22:23:14]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1051333002/100001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-03 22:45:47]

Committed patchset #6 (id:100001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-03 22:47:14]

Patchset 6 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/3b122b10feb84eb065f5f4f319b1f8b6091f6d32
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#323839}