Move the SubframeKeyboardEventRouting test to interactive_ui_tests.

Move the SubframeKeyboardEventRouting test to interactive_ui_tests.

Since this test heavily relies on correctly focused frames, it should
be more reliable as an interactive test.  Hopefully, this will help
with flakiness that has been recently observed in
https://crbug.com/596508.

BUG=596508
Committed: https://crrev.com/e16154fa1a98b487a9e04feaad87fd31a3ae3fa4
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#386833}

[alexmos, 2016-04-07 17:40:26]

alexmos@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ nasko@chromium.org

[alexmos, 2016-04-07 17:40:27]

Nasko, can you please take a look?  This is a follow-on to
https://codereview.chromium.org/1869853002 and relies on things introduced there
(so please look at that one first).  It's a fairly straightforward move; the
only notable difference is  using window.focus() instead of a synthetic click
via FocusFrame to focus the subframe (because it's just easier - window.focus
wasn't implemented yet at the time I wrote this test, plus FocusFrame() isn't
available in chrome/).

[dcheng, 2016-04-07 18:01:55]

dcheng@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ dcheng@chromium.org

[dcheng, 2016-04-07 18:01:55]

I would only expect focus to be an issue wrt windows. Does window focus somehow
affect focused frames?

[alexmos, 2016-04-07 18:26:12]

On 2016/04/07 18:01:55, dcheng wrote:
> I would only expect focus to be an issue wrt windows. Does window focus
somehow
> affect focused frames?

Right, frame focus shouldn't be affected, but it seems some of these code paths
also check page-level focus (FocusController::isFocused/isActive) and behave
differently if the main test window loses/gains focus.  That's almost definitely
the case with 559273, and I suspect something similar might be happening here. 
For this CL's test, I'll definitely monitor it and verify that this was the
source of flakiness, and if it wasn't, I can move it back.  But I'm hopeful,
since the only way I could repro the failure locally was by screwing with focus.
:)

[nasko, 2016-04-08 22:41:50]

LGTM with a nit.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1869853002/diff/1/chrome/browser/site_per_pro...
File chrome/browser/site_per_process_interactive_browsertest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1869853002/diff/1/chrome/browser/site_per_pro...
chrome/browser/site_per_process_interactive_browsertest.cc:129: "window.focus();
focusInputField()",
nit: Semi-colon after the call to focusInputField().

[alexmos, 2016-04-11 18:38:22]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1869853002/diff/1/chrome/browser/site_per_pro...
File chrome/browser/site_per_process_interactive_browsertest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1869853002/diff/1/chrome/browser/site_per_pro...
chrome/browser/site_per_process_interactive_browsertest.cc:129: "window.focus();
focusInputField()",
On 2016/04/08 22:41:50, nasko (very slow Apr 8-18) wrote:
> nit: Semi-colon after the call to focusInputField().

Done.

[alexmos, 2016-04-11 19:50:14]

alexmos@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ thestig@chromium.org

[alexmos, 2016-04-11 19:50:15]

thestig@: can you please review chrome/ for OWNERS?

[Lei Zhang, 2016-04-11 19:56:13]

lgtm

https://codereview.chromium.org/1869853002/diff/20001/chrome/browser/site_per...
File chrome/browser/site_per_process_interactive_browsertest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1869853002/diff/20001/chrome/browser/site_per...
chrome/browser/site_per_process_interactive_browsertest.cc:130:
EXPECT_EQ(result, "input-focus");
EXPECT_EQ(expected, actual);

[alexmos, 2016-04-11 20:42:58]

Thanks!

https://codereview.chromium.org/1869853002/diff/20001/chrome/browser/site_per...
File chrome/browser/site_per_process_interactive_browsertest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1869853002/diff/20001/chrome/browser/site_per...
chrome/browser/site_per_process_interactive_browsertest.cc:130:
EXPECT_EQ(result, "input-focus");
On 2016/04/11 19:56:12, Lei Zhang wrote:
> EXPECT_EQ(expected, actual);

Done.

[alexmos, 2016-04-12 21:08:45]

The CQ bit was checked by alexmos@chromium.org

[alexmos, 2016-04-12 21:08:45]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from nasko@chromium.org,
thestig@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/1869853002/#ps40001
(title: "Fix EXPECT_EQ")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-04-12 21:09:34]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1869853002/40001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1869853002/40001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-04-12 22:20:44]

Committed patchset #3 (id:40001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-04-12 22:22:22]

Description was changed from

==========
Move the SubframeKeyboardEventRouting test to interactive_ui_tests.

Since this test heavily relies on correctly focused frames, it should
be more reliable as an interactive test.  Hopefully, this will help
with flakiness that has been recently observed in
https://crbug.com/596508.

BUG=596508
==========

to

==========
Move the SubframeKeyboardEventRouting test to interactive_ui_tests.

Since this test heavily relies on correctly focused frames, it should
be more reliable as an interactive test.  Hopefully, this will help
with flakiness that has been recently observed in
https://crbug.com/596508.

BUG=596508

Committed: https://crrev.com/e16154fa1a98b487a9e04feaad87fd31a3ae3fa4
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#386833}
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-04-12 22:22:23]

Patchset 3 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/e16154fa1a98b487a9e04feaad87fd31a3ae3fa4
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#386833}