Replacing raw pointer to LayerAnimator with scoped_refptr in ScopedLayerAnimationSettings.

Replacing raw pointer to LayerAnimator with scoped_refptr in ScopedLayerAnimationSettings.
The raw pointer can cause issues: if the ScopedLayerAnimationSettings object survives the
respective LayerAnimator object, a seg fault occurs when ScopedLayerAnimationSettings is deleted.
This is particularly problematic when the animation in question has a 0 duration (which can be
the case for unit tests). When animation's duration is 0, the Animator gets deleted right away,
by the same setter that starts the animation.

BUG=

Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=255482

[mfomitchev, 2014-03-03 22:11:00]

Hi Ian, 
Can you please take a look? Quick change as we discussed via email.

[Ian Vollick, 2014-03-03 23:02:08]

On 2014/03/03 22:11:00, mfomitchev wrote:
> Hi Ian, 
> Can you please take a look? Quick change as we discussed via email.

Looks like a bad upload. Also, where's the test?

[mfomitchev, 2014-03-03 23:19:52]

I've re-uploaded the changes.
Tests in
content/browser/web_contents/aura/overscroll_navigation_overlay_unittest.cc will
fail if someone replaces the ref counted pointer with the raw pointer, but I
guess it would be good to create a test specifically for this. I assume it would
go into layer_animator_unittest.cc?

[Ian Vollick, 2014-03-04 02:53:02]

On 2014/03/03 23:19:52, mfomitchev wrote:
> I've re-uploaded the changes.
> Tests in
> content/browser/web_contents/aura/overscroll_navigation_overlay_unittest.cc
will
> fail if someone replaces the ref counted pointer with the raw pointer, but I
> guess it would be good to create a test specifically for this. I assume it
would
> go into layer_animator_unittest.cc?

Ah, cool; I didn't realize there was coverage already. But yeah, it'd be great
if you could add a specific test to layer_animator_unittest.cc.

[mfomitchev, 2014-03-05 23:30:33]

I've added a unit test. Can you please take another look? Thanks!

[Ian Vollick, 2014-03-06 03:35:49]

On 2014/03/05 23:30:33, mfomitchev wrote:
> I've added a unit test. Can you please take another look? Thanks!

ui/compositor lgtm! Love it. Thanks for the test.

[mfomitchev, 2014-03-06 15:26:55]

Adding sky@, sadrul@ for the Overlay piece - can you please review? Thanks!

[sky, 2014-03-06 16:51:45]

LGTM

[mfomitchev, 2014-03-06 16:52:55]

The CQ bit was checked by mfomitchev@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-03-06 16:53:15]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/mfomitchev@chromium.org/185793005/40001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-03-06 17:56:49]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-03-06 17:56:49]

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...

[mfomitchev, 2014-03-06 17:59:35]

The CQ bit was checked by mfomitchev@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-03-06 18:00:01]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/mfomitchev@chromium.org/185793005/40001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-03-06 20:51:03]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/mfomitchev@chromium.org/185793005/40001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-03-06 21:39:16]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/mfomitchev@chromium.org/185793005/40001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-03-06 22:14:58]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/mfomitchev@chromium.org/185793005/40001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-03-07 00:46:14]

Change committed as 255482