Add a UMA stat to track if the Browser blacklist is Set on the Renderer

Add a UMA stat to track if the Browser blacklist is Set on the Renderer

This shouldn't be happening, but we got some crash reports suggesting it
does. Unable to repo locally so this stat will verify it does occur and
then can be used to verify our fixes actually fix it.

TBR=asvitkine@chromium.org
BUG=329023
Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=251454

[csharp, 2014-02-14 16:29:17]

Patch 1 is the original version I landed which broke the 64 bit sync bot.

I was able to repo locally and patch 2 fixes the issue. For some reason
GetModuleHandle("chrome_elf.dll") fails for sync_integration_tests (even when
run normally). 

chrome_elf.dll is present in the output dir (and sync_integration_tests is
depending on renderer, which ensures we built it) so I have no idea why it isn't
found.

This fix seems like the best solution to get this back in since it is probably a
useful sanity check to have in any case. I might try poking around the sync
integration code a bit to see if I can figure out why chrome_elf is missing, but
I'm not too confident in my ability to figure it out.

[robertshield, 2014-02-14 16:31:44]

On 2014/02/14 16:29:17, csharp wrote:
> Patch 1 is the original version I landed which broke the 64 bit sync bot.
> 
> I was able to repo locally and patch 2 fixes the issue. For some reason
> GetModuleHandle("chrome_elf.dll") fails for sync_integration_tests (even when
> run normally). 
> 
> chrome_elf.dll is present in the output dir (and sync_integration_tests is
> depending on renderer, which ensures we built it) so I have no idea why it
isn't
> found.
> 
> This fix seems like the best solution to get this back in since it is probably
a
> useful sanity check to have in any case. I might try poking around the sync
> integration code a bit to see if I can figure out why chrome_elf is missing,
but
> I'm not too confident in my ability to figure it out.

This is likely because sync_integration_tests doesn't actually depend on any of
chrome_elf's exports, so chrome_elf is not in its import table. This means it
won't get loaded, this the GetModuleHandle call will fail. Reviewing now.

[robertshield, 2014-02-14 16:37:10]

lgtm

https://codereview.chromium.org/166953002/diff/30001/chrome/interactive_ui_te...
File chrome/interactive_ui_tests.isolate (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/166953002/diff/30001/chrome/interactive_ui_te...
chrome/interactive_ui_tests.isolate:80: '<(PRODUCT_DIR)/chrome_elf.dll',
I seem to recall you mentioning that this only works accidentally for
browser_tests since that depends on chrome.isolate or some such. Is it worth
adding chrome_elf.dll explicitly to browser_tests.isolate as well?

https://codereview.chromium.org/166953002/diff/30001/chrome/unit_tests.isolate
File chrome/unit_tests.isolate (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/166953002/diff/30001/chrome/unit_tests.isolat...
chrome/unit_tests.isolate:112: '<(PRODUCT_DIR)/ffmpegsumo.dll',
is whitespace being added to the end of this line? if so, remove it

[csharp, 2014-02-14 16:43:58]

https://codereview.chromium.org/166953002/diff/30001/chrome/interactive_ui_te...
File chrome/interactive_ui_tests.isolate (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/166953002/diff/30001/chrome/interactive_ui_te...
chrome/interactive_ui_tests.isolate:80: '<(PRODUCT_DIR)/chrome_elf.dll',
On 2014/02/14 16:37:11, robertshield wrote:
> I seem to recall you mentioning that this only works accidentally for
> browser_tests since that depends on chrome.isolate or some such. Is it worth
> adding chrome_elf.dll explicitly to browser_tests.isolate as well?

Yup, good point. Added.

https://codereview.chromium.org/166953002/diff/30001/chrome/unit_tests.isolate
File chrome/unit_tests.isolate (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/166953002/diff/30001/chrome/unit_tests.isolat...
chrome/unit_tests.isolate:112: '<(PRODUCT_DIR)/ffmpegsumo.dll',
On 2014/02/14 16:37:11, robertshield wrote:
> is whitespace being added to the end of this line? if so, remove it

Done.

[csharp, 2014-02-14 16:44:03]

The CQ bit was checked by csharp@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-02-14 16:44:27]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/csharp@chromium.org/166953002/160001

[Alexei Svitkine (slow), 2014-02-14 17:29:23]

lgtm

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-02-14 19:17:55]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-02-14 19:17:56]

Retried try job too often on win_rel for step(s) unit_tests
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/buildstatus?builder=win_rel&nu...

[csharp, 2014-02-14 19:19:12]

The CQ bit was checked by csharp@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-02-14 19:20:15]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/csharp@chromium.org/166953002/160001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-02-15 00:32:33]

Change committed as 251454