Create a field trial for Seccomp-BPF on Android.

content/public/common/sandbox_init.h

 // Copyright (c) 2012 The Chromium Authors. All rights reserved.
 // Use of this source code is governed by a BSD-style license that can be
 // found in the LICENSE file.
 
 #ifndef CONTENT_PUBLIC_COMMON_SANDBOX_INIT_H_
 #define CONTENT_PUBLIC_COMMON_SANDBOX_INIT_H_
 
 #include "base/files/scoped_file.h"
 #include "base/memory/scoped_ptr.h"
 #include "base/memory/shared_memory.h"
 #include "base/process/process.h"
 #include "base/process/process_handle.h"
 #include "build/build_config.h"
 #include "content/common/content_export.h"
 
+#if defined(OS_ANDROID)
+#include "base/feature_list.h"
+#endif
+
 namespace base {
 class CommandLine;
 class FilePath;
 }
 
 namespace sandbox {
 namespace bpf_dsl {
 class Policy;
 }
 struct SandboxInterfaceInfo;
@@ skipping 80 matching lines @@
 CONTENT_EXPORT bool InitializeSandbox(
     scoped_ptr<sandbox::bpf_dsl::Policy> policy,
     base::ScopedFD proc_fd);
 
 // Return a "baseline" policy. This is used by a SandboxInitializerDelegate to
 // implement a policy that is derived from the baseline.
 CONTENT_EXPORT scoped_ptr<sandbox::bpf_dsl::Policy>
 GetBPFSandboxBaselinePolicy();
 #endif  // defined(OS_LINUX) || defined(OS_NACL_NONSFI)
 
+#if defined(OS_ANDROID)
+// FeatureList definition for the Seccomp field trial.
+CONTENT_EXPORT extern const base::Feature kSeccompSandboxAndroidFeature;

[jam, 2015/11/13 17:20:17]

hmm, as we convert switches to base::Feature, seems like they should go into the
switches file still? i.e. otherwise where will we end up putting all the various
switches? (also seems we want them in one place like switches)

[Alexei Svitkine (slow), 2015/11/13 17:33:02]

I am okay with a centralized place for features at each layer (e.g. content/,
chrome/), although some may live in components and therefore may need to be
decentralized. (The base API allows either.)

One idea is to add a new file - e.g. content_features.cc/h similar to
content_switches and same for chrome/. Or do you prefer re-using
content_switches? WDYT?

[Robert Sesek, 2015/11/14 01:18:03]

I agree that it'd be good to centralize these. I added content_features to do so
(it doesn't seem like switches is the right place for these).

+#endif  // defined(OS_ANDROID)
+
 }  // namespace content
 
 #endif  // CONTENT_PUBLIC_COMMON_SANDBOX_INIT_H_