Initial implementation of stashed message ports, content side

content/browser/message_port_service.cc

Index: content/browser/message_port_service.cc
diff --git a/content/browser/message_port_service.cc b/content/browser/message_port_service.cc
index 915ae483d3194cfdaff3501b56e1059639d386cf..31318d453b6681cf74ef85e4b4be5f2e755c5fb5 100644
--- a/content/browser/message_port_service.cc
+++ b/content/browser/message_port_service.cc
@@ -74,6 +74,22 @@ void MessagePortService::UpdateMessagePort(int message_port_id,
   port.route_id = routing_id;
 }
 
+void MessagePortService::GetMessagePortInfo(int message_port_id,
+                                            MessagePortDelegate** delegate,
+                                            int* routing_id) {
+  DCHECK_CURRENTLY_ON(BrowserThread::IO);
+  if (!message_ports_.count(message_port_id)) {
+    NOTREACHED();

[scheib, 2015/05/06 22:19:45]

Handle it or not, but not both. Looks like here we can't trust renderer so it's
handle it.
https://www.chromium.org/developers/coding-style#TOC-CHECK-DCHECK-and-NOTREAC...

[Marijn Kruisselbrink, 2015/05/12 06:57:33]

I would generally agree with you, but this exact same pattern is used in pretty
much every other MessagePortService method that takes a message_port_id, so I
think consistency here is more important.

+    return;
+  }
+
+  const MessagePort& port = message_ports_[message_port_id];
+  if (delegate)
+    *delegate = port.delegate;
+  if (routing_id)
+    *routing_id = port.route_id;
+}
+
 void MessagePortService::OnMessagePortDelegateClosing(
     MessagePortDelegate* delegate) {
   DCHECK_CURRENTLY_ON(BrowserThread::IO);
@@ -180,6 +196,10 @@ void MessagePortService::PostMessageTo(
     }
     entangled_port.queued_messages.push_back(
         std::make_pair(message, sent_message_ports));
+
+    if (entangled_port.delegate)
+      entangled_port.delegate->MessageWasHeld(entangled_port.route_id);
+
     return;
   }