Ensure |m_image| is (re-)created in ImageResource::didAddClient()

Ensure |m_image| is (re-)created in ImageResource::didAddClient()

After ImageResource is pruned, |m_image| can be turned into null, but is not
re-created when ResourceClient is added to ImageResource later.
We re-create |m_image| when ImageResourceObserver is added in
ImageResource::addObserver().
This CL do the same thing in ImageResource::didAddClient() to ensure |m_image|
is non-null when ImageResource is reused after pruning.

This is regression since ImageResourceClient was split into ResourceClient and
ImageResourceObserver but the |m_image| re-creation logic was put only in the
ImageResourceObserver path and not in the ResourceClient path:
  https://codereview.chromium.org/1706083002
  https://codereview.chromium.org/1728313003

BUG=618597, 587663
Committed: https://crrev.com/d415aad374ad81906840afbf4c05f0594f1f581b
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#405024}

[hiroshige, 2016-07-12 08:00:18]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-12 08:00:53]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[hiroshige, 2016-07-12 08:16:07]

Description was changed from

==========
Ensure |m_image| is (re-)created in ImageResource::didAddClient()

BUG=618597
==========

to

==========
Ensure |m_image| is (re-)created in ImageResource::didAddClient()

After ImageResource is pruned, |m_image| can be turned into null, but is not
re-created when ResourceClient is added to ImageResource later.
We re-create |m_image| when ImageResourceObserver is added in
ImageResource::addObserver().
This CL do the same thing in ImageResource::didAddClient() to ensure |m_image|
is non-null when ImageResource is reused after pruning.

BUG=618597
==========

[hiroshige, 2016-07-12 08:25:38]

Description was changed from

==========
Ensure |m_image| is (re-)created in ImageResource::didAddClient()

After ImageResource is pruned, |m_image| can be turned into null, but is not
re-created when ResourceClient is added to ImageResource later.
We re-create |m_image| when ImageResourceObserver is added in
ImageResource::addObserver().
This CL do the same thing in ImageResource::didAddClient() to ensure |m_image|
is non-null when ImageResource is reused after pruning.

BUG=618597
==========

to

==========
Ensure |m_image| is (re-)created in ImageResource::didAddClient()

After ImageResource is pruned, |m_image| can be turned into null, but is not
re-created when ResourceClient is added to ImageResource later.
We re-create |m_image| when ImageResourceObserver is added in
ImageResource::addObserver().
This CL do the same thing in ImageResource::didAddClient() to ensure |m_image|
is non-null when ImageResource is reused after pruning.

This is regression since ImageResourceClient was split into ResourceClient and
ImageResourceObserver but the |m_image| re-creation logic was put only in the
ImageResourceObserver path and not in the ResourceClient path:
  https://codereview.chromium.org/1706083002
  https://codereview.chromium.org/1728313003

BUG=618597, 587663
==========

[hiroshige, 2016-07-12 08:25:38]

hiroshige@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ hajimehoshi@chromium.org, mkwst@chromium.org, yhirano@chromium.org

[hiroshige, 2016-07-12 08:26:02]

PTAL.

[hajimehoshi, 2016-07-12 08:38:26]

https://codereview.chromium.org/2141843003/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/Source/c...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/core/fetch/ImageResource.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2141843003/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/Source/c...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/fetch/ImageResource.cpp:122:
m_image->setData(m_data, true);
There is same code in addObserver. How about creating a new function for this
(like ensureImage)?

[hiroshige, 2016-07-12 08:49:27]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-12 08:49:41]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[hiroshige, 2016-07-12 08:58:21]

https://codereview.chromium.org/2141843003/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/Source/c...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/core/fetch/ImageResource.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2141843003/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/Source/c...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/fetch/ImageResource.cpp:122:
m_image->setData(m_data, true);
On 2016/07/12 08:38:26, hajimehoshi wrote:
> There is same code in addObserver. How about creating a new function for this
> (like ensureImage)?

Done.

[hajimehoshi, 2016-07-12 08:59:43]

lgtm

[Mike West, 2016-07-12 09:33:12]

LGTM too.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-12 10:09:27]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-12 10:09:28]

Dry run: Try jobs failed on following builders:
  linux_chromium_chromeos_ozone_rel_ng on master.tryserver.chromium.linux
(JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/linux_chromium_...)

[yhirano, 2016-07-12 11:08:24]

lgtm

[hiroshige, 2016-07-12 14:30:35]

The CQ bit was checked by hiroshige@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-12 14:32:17]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-12 15:49:13]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-12 15:49:15]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  linux_chromium_chromeos_ozone_rel_ng on master.tryserver.chromium.linux
(JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/linux_chromium_...)
  linux_chromium_chromeos_rel_ng on master.tryserver.chromium.linux (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/linux_chromium_...)

[hiroshige, 2016-07-12 16:05:59]

The CQ bit was checked by hiroshige@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-12 16:07:27]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-12 17:39:46]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-12 17:39:47]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  linux_chromium_rel_ng on master.tryserver.chromium.linux (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/linux_chromium_...)

[hiroshige, 2016-07-13 03:07:47]

The CQ bit was checked by hiroshige@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-13 03:09:22]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-13 04:41:31]

Description was changed from

==========
Ensure |m_image| is (re-)created in ImageResource::didAddClient()

After ImageResource is pruned, |m_image| can be turned into null, but is not
re-created when ResourceClient is added to ImageResource later.
We re-create |m_image| when ImageResourceObserver is added in
ImageResource::addObserver().
This CL do the same thing in ImageResource::didAddClient() to ensure |m_image|
is non-null when ImageResource is reused after pruning.

This is regression since ImageResourceClient was split into ResourceClient and
ImageResourceObserver but the |m_image| re-creation logic was put only in the
ImageResourceObserver path and not in the ResourceClient path:
  https://codereview.chromium.org/1706083002
  https://codereview.chromium.org/1728313003

BUG=618597, 587663
==========

to

==========
Ensure |m_image| is (re-)created in ImageResource::didAddClient()

After ImageResource is pruned, |m_image| can be turned into null, but is not
re-created when ResourceClient is added to ImageResource later.
We re-create |m_image| when ImageResourceObserver is added in
ImageResource::addObserver().
This CL do the same thing in ImageResource::didAddClient() to ensure |m_image|
is non-null when ImageResource is reused after pruning.

This is regression since ImageResourceClient was split into ResourceClient and
ImageResourceObserver but the |m_image| re-creation logic was put only in the
ImageResourceObserver path and not in the ResourceClient path:
  https://codereview.chromium.org/1706083002
  https://codereview.chromium.org/1728313003

BUG=618597, 587663
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-13 04:41:33]

Committed patchset #2 (id:20001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-13 04:44:06]

Description was changed from

==========
Ensure |m_image| is (re-)created in ImageResource::didAddClient()

After ImageResource is pruned, |m_image| can be turned into null, but is not
re-created when ResourceClient is added to ImageResource later.
We re-create |m_image| when ImageResourceObserver is added in
ImageResource::addObserver().
This CL do the same thing in ImageResource::didAddClient() to ensure |m_image|
is non-null when ImageResource is reused after pruning.

This is regression since ImageResourceClient was split into ResourceClient and
ImageResourceObserver but the |m_image| re-creation logic was put only in the
ImageResourceObserver path and not in the ResourceClient path:
  https://codereview.chromium.org/1706083002
  https://codereview.chromium.org/1728313003

BUG=618597, 587663
==========

to

==========
Ensure |m_image| is (re-)created in ImageResource::didAddClient()

After ImageResource is pruned, |m_image| can be turned into null, but is not
re-created when ResourceClient is added to ImageResource later.
We re-create |m_image| when ImageResourceObserver is added in
ImageResource::addObserver().
This CL do the same thing in ImageResource::didAddClient() to ensure |m_image|
is non-null when ImageResource is reused after pruning.

This is regression since ImageResourceClient was split into ResourceClient and
ImageResourceObserver but the |m_image| re-creation logic was put only in the
ImageResourceObserver path and not in the ResourceClient path:
  https://codereview.chromium.org/1706083002
  https://codereview.chromium.org/1728313003

BUG=618597, 587663

Committed: https://crrev.com/d415aad374ad81906840afbf4c05f0594f1f581b
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#405024}
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-07-13 04:44:08]

Patchset 2 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/d415aad374ad81906840afbf4c05f0594f1f581b
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#405024}