SystemInfo API: Fix SystemInfoEventRouter initialization code.

SystemInfo API: Fix SystemInfoEventRouter initialization code.

This changes SystemInfoEventRouter instantiation to occur after the
StorageMonitor has been initialized for system.storage events.

BUG=324153
TEST=Manual, see bug.

Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=245685

[Lei Zhang, 2014-01-16 06:31:51]

This is 'correct' because that's what media_galleries_private does.

[Haojian Wu, 2014-01-16 06:53:27]

Thanks for fixing this. I think this patch can fix the bug.

LGTM.

https://codereview.chromium.org/132873008/diff/1/chrome/browser/extensions/ap...
File chrome/browser/extensions/api/system_info/system_info_api.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/132873008/diff/1/chrome/browser/extensions/ap...
chrome/browser/extensions/api/system_info/system_info_api.cc:173: 
Some performance concerns: everytime we add an systemInfo event, we will invoke
StorageMonitor::EnsureInitialized to make sure StorageMonitor is constructed.
The type of systemInfo event is including display, so when we add display event,
the checking is unnecessay.

[Lei Zhang, 2014-01-16 23:24:11]

https://codereview.chromium.org/132873008/diff/1/chrome/browser/extensions/ap...
File chrome/browser/extensions/api/system_info/system_info_api.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/132873008/diff/1/chrome/browser/extensions/ap...
chrome/browser/extensions/api/system_info/system_info_api.cc:173: 
On 2014/01/16 06:53:27, Haojian Wu wrote:
> Some performance concerns: everytime we add an systemInfo event, we will
invoke
> StorageMonitor::EnsureInitialized to make sure StorageMonitor is constructed.
> The type of systemInfo event is including display, so when we add display
event,
> the checking is unnecessay.

See patch set 2.

[Haojian Wu, 2014-01-17 00:54:43]

LGTM with nits.

https://codereview.chromium.org/132873008/diff/70001/chrome/browser/extension...
File chrome/browser/extensions/api/system_info/system_info_api.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/132873008/diff/70001/chrome/browser/extension...
chrome/browser/extensions/api/system_info/system_info_api.cc:78:
scoped_ptr<base::ListValue> args);
nits: code indent

[Lei Zhang, 2014-01-17 00:57:29]

https://codereview.chromium.org/132873008/diff/70001/chrome/browser/extension...
File chrome/browser/extensions/api/system_info/system_info_api.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/132873008/diff/70001/chrome/browser/extension...
chrome/browser/extensions/api/system_info/system_info_api.cc:78:
scoped_ptr<base::ListValue> args);
On 2014/01/17 00:54:43, Haojian Wu wrote:
> nits: code indent

*blink* *blink* look ok to me. It's lined up with const... on the line above.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-01-17 00:58:51]

No LGTM from a valid reviewer yet. Only full committers are accepted.
Even if an LGTM may have been provided, it was from a non-committer or
a lowly provisional committer, _not_ a full super star committer.
See http://www.chromium.org/getting-involved/become-a-committer
Note that this has nothing to do with OWNERS files.

[Haojian Wu, 2014-01-17 01:03:53]

On 2014/01/17 00:58:51, I haz the power (commit-bot) wrote:
> No LGTM from a valid reviewer yet. Only full committers are accepted.
> Even if an LGTM may have been provided, it was from a non-committer or
> a lowly provisional committer, _not_ a full super star committer.
> See http://www.chromium.org/getting-involved/become-a-committer
> Note that this has nothing to do with OWNERS files.

I think you need a committer LGTM, since I'm not committer now. Hongbo@ is the
right reviewer.

[Greg Billock, 2014-01-17 21:48:47]

On 2014/01/17 01:03:53, Haojian Wu wrote:
> On 2014/01/17 00:58:51, I haz the power (commit-bot) wrote:
> > No LGTM from a valid reviewer yet. Only full committers are accepted.
> > Even if an LGTM may have been provided, it was from a non-committer or
> > a lowly provisional committer, _not_ a full super star committer.
> > See http://www.chromium.org/getting-involved/become-a-committer
> > Note that this has nothing to do with OWNERS files.
> 
> I think you need a committer LGTM, since I'm not committer now. Hongbo@ is the
> right reviewer.

lgtm

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-01-17 21:53:40]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/thestig@chromium.org/132873008/230001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-01-18 00:53:51]

Change committed as 245685