Re-enable WaitForInitialUserActivitySatisfied.

Re-enable WaitForInitialUserActivitySatisfied.

Ran 50 times without fail.

BUG=315308
Committed: https://crrev.com/0404e0139721e92982ed02736e1f950db7d9e3cb
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#356974}

[achuithb, 2015-10-16 22:29:27]

The CQ bit was checked by achuith@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[achuithb, 2015-10-16 22:29:51]

achuith@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ cschuet@chromium.org

[achuithb, 2015-10-16 22:29:52]

Chris, please take a look.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-10-16 22:30:13]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1410163002/1
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1410163002/1

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-10-16 23:04:19]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-10-16 23:04:20]

Dry run: This issue passed the CQ dry run.

[cschuet (SLOW), 2015-10-17 09:59:54]

On 2015/10/16 23:04:20, commit-bot: I haz the power wrote:
> Dry run: This issue passed the CQ dry run.

Achuith,
thanks for looking into this. It seems these tests were disabled due to
flakiness. Bartfab@ suspected a regression in the test framework which
(seemingly) turned out to be a red herring. What has fixed this flakiness?

[achuithb, 2015-10-27 17:19:38]

On 2015/10/17 09:59:54, cschuet wrote:
> On 2015/10/16 23:04:20, commit-bot: I haz the power wrote:
> > Dry run: This issue passed the CQ dry run.
> 
> Achuith,
> thanks for looking into this. It seems these tests were disabled due to
> flakiness. Bartfab@ suspected a regression in the test framework which
> (seemingly) turned out to be a red herring. What has fixed this flakiness?

Not sure if you saw this comment in the tracking bug, Christoph:
https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=315308#c25

[cschuet (SLOW), 2015-10-28 05:52:15]

On 2015/10/27 17:19:38, achuithb wrote:
> On 2015/10/17 09:59:54, cschuet wrote:
> > On 2015/10/16 23:04:20, commit-bot: I haz the power wrote:
> > > Dry run: This issue passed the CQ dry run.
> > 
> > Achuith,
> > thanks for looking into this. It seems these tests were disabled due to
> > flakiness. Bartfab@ suspected a regression in the test framework which
> > (seemingly) turned out to be a red herring. What has fixed this flakiness?
> 
> Not sure if you saw this comment in the tracking bug, Christoph:
> https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=315308#c25

I didn't. Thanks again for looking into this. I'd agree, let's reenable these
tests as we can always disable them again due to flakiness.

LGTM

[achuithb, 2015-10-29 22:06:28]

The CQ bit was checked by achuith@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-10-29 22:07:29]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1410163002/1
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1410163002/1

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-10-29 22:58:40]

Committed patchset #1 (id:1)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-10-29 23:00:02]

Patchset 1 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/0404e0139721e92982ed02736e1f950db7d9e3cb
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#356974}