Fix a crash when views::HWNDMessageHandler::HandleTouchMessage

Fix a crash when views::HWNDMessageHandler::HandleTouchMessage.

There is a crash when calling views::HWNDMessageHandler::HandleTouchMessage,
because there are missing touch presses. Remove the CHECK for missing touch press,
and ignore when this happens.

BUG=316085, 488473
Committed: https://crrev.com/41065dad044cd3bbd3c9bcc24e59eeae27a6c6a9
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#330751}

[lanwei, 2015-05-15 20:15:00]

lanwei@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ ananta@chromium.org, sadrul@chromium.org

[sadrul, 2015-05-15 20:24:01]

As discussed offline, GenerateTouchEvent() is only called with PRESSED, MOVED,
or RELEASED. So this change is essentially a no-op.

[lanwei, 2015-05-19 23:17:17]

Patchset #2 (id:20001) has been deleted

[ananta, 2015-05-19 23:27:13]

lgtm

[sadrul, 2015-05-19 23:38:12]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1147583002/diff/40001/ui/views/win/hwnd_messa...
File ui/views/win/hwnd_message_handler.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1147583002/diff/40001/ui/views/win/hwnd_messa...
ui/views/win/hwnd_message_handler.cc:2356: CHECK(!touch_event_from_palm) <<
"There are touch events from user's palm";
I don't think we should crash here? Why not just ignore this event?

[ananta, 2015-05-19 23:40:18]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1147583002/diff/40001/ui/views/win/hwnd_messa...
File ui/views/win/hwnd_message_handler.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1147583002/diff/40001/ui/views/win/hwnd_messa...
ui/views/win/hwnd_message_handler.cc:2356: CHECK(!touch_event_from_palm) <<
"There are touch events from user's palm";
On 2015/05/19 23:38:12, sadrul wrote:
> I don't think we should crash here? Why not just ignore this event?

Wanted to check if the missing touch downs are because of us receiving a touch
palm event. We register for palms as well. If this CHECK fires then we can treat
palms as downs.

[sadrul, 2015-05-19 23:51:13]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1147583002/diff/40001/ui/views/win/hwnd_messa...
File ui/views/win/hwnd_message_handler.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1147583002/diff/40001/ui/views/win/hwnd_messa...
ui/views/win/hwnd_message_handler.cc:2356: CHECK(!touch_event_from_palm) <<
"There are touch events from user's palm";
On 2015/05/19 23:40:18, ananta wrote:
> On 2015/05/19 23:38:12, sadrul wrote:
> > I don't think we should crash here? Why not just ignore this event?
> 
> Wanted to check if the missing touch downs are because of us receiving a touch
> palm event. We register for palms as well. If this CHECK fires then we can
treat
> palms as downs.
> 

Should we keep the old CHECKs too then? If the palms are the downs we are
missing, then the we would trip this CHECK, and not the the one in 2399. But if
there are some other reason the downs are missing, we will miss that without the
CHECK below, right?

[ananta, 2015-05-20 00:06:28]

On 2015/05/19 23:51:13, sadrul wrote:
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/1147583002/diff/40001/ui/views/win/hwnd_messa...
> File ui/views/win/hwnd_message_handler.cc (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/1147583002/diff/40001/ui/views/win/hwnd_messa...
> ui/views/win/hwnd_message_handler.cc:2356: CHECK(!touch_event_from_palm) <<
> "There are touch events from user's palm";
> On 2015/05/19 23:40:18, ananta wrote:
> > On 2015/05/19 23:38:12, sadrul wrote:
> > > I don't think we should crash here? Why not just ignore this event?
> > 
> > Wanted to check if the missing touch downs are because of us receiving a
touch
> > palm event. We register for palms as well. If this CHECK fires then we can
> treat
> > palms as downs.
> > 
> 
> Should we keep the old CHECKs too then? If the palms are the downs we are
> missing, then the we would trip this CHECK, and not the the one in 2399. But
if
> there are some other reason the downs are missing, we will miss that without
the
> CHECK below, right?

Yeah. I guess we can keep the old CHECKs

[lanwei, 2015-05-20 02:58:14]

Patchset #3 (id:60001) has been deleted

[sadrul, 2015-05-20 04:52:41]

lgtm

[lanwei, 2015-05-20 16:41:40]

The CQ bit was checked by lanwei@chromium.org

[lanwei, 2015-05-20 16:41:41]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from ananta@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/1147583002/#ps80001
(title: "Add check back")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-05-20 16:42:02]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1147583002/80001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-05-20 16:46:29]

Committed patchset #3 (id:80001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-05-20 16:48:07]

Patchset 3 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/41065dad044cd3bbd3c9bcc24e59eeae27a6c6a9
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#330751}

[lanwei, 2015-05-20 17:19:02]

A revert of this CL (patchset #3 id:80001) has been created in
https://codereview.chromium.org/1148143002/ by lanwei@chromium.org.

The reason for reverting is: We reverted the CL which needs to be fixed by this
one, so we need to revert it one as well. We will recommit it once we fully fix
and test it..