Rename Node::shadowHost() to Node::ownerShadowHost()

Rename Node::shadowHost() to Node::ownerShadowHost()

I think Node::shadowHost() is not a good name because it is unclear *which*
shadowHost would be returned by its name.

Node::ownerShadowHost() might be a better name than Node::shadowHost().
It is similar to Node::ownerDocument(), where it is clear that the owner would be
returned.
CQ_INCLUDE_TRYBOTS=master.tryserver.chromium.linux:linux_layout_tests_slimming_paint_v2

Committed: https://crrev.com/9a2cefc4c20b11f7995c59a910c858a4c5732e7d
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#417555}

[hayato, 2016-09-09 04:20:46]

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

[hayato, 2016-09-09 04:20:48]

Description was changed from

==========
Rename Node::shadowHost() to Node::ownerShadowHost()

I think Node::shadowHost() is not intuitive name.

Node::ownerShadowHost() is be a better name than Node::shadowHost(),
honering the convention of Node::ownerXXX, for example, Node::ownerDocument().
==========

to

==========
Rename Node::shadowHost() to Node::ownerShadowHost()

I think Node::shadowHost() is not intuitive name.

Node::ownerShadowHost() is be a better name than Node::shadowHost(),
honering the convention of Node::ownerXXX, for example, Node::ownerDocument().
CQ_INCLUDE_TRYBOTS=master.tryserver.chromium.linux:linux_layout_tests_slimming_paint_v2
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-09-09 04:20:55]

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

[hayato, 2016-09-09 04:24:18]

Description was changed from

==========
Rename Node::shadowHost() to Node::ownerShadowHost()

I think Node::shadowHost() is not intuitive name.

Node::ownerShadowHost() is be a better name than Node::shadowHost(),
honering the convention of Node::ownerXXX, for example, Node::ownerDocument().
CQ_INCLUDE_TRYBOTS=master.tryserver.chromium.linux:linux_layout_tests_slimming_paint_v2
==========

to

==========
Rename Node::shadowHost() to Node::ownerShadowHost()

I think Node::shadowHost() is not a good name because it is unclear *which* 
shadowHost would be returned by its name.

Node::ownerShadowHost() might be a better name than Node::shadowHost().
It is similar to Node::ownerDocument(), where it is clear that the owner would
be
returned.
==========

[hayato, 2016-09-09 04:25:38]

hayato@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ kochi@chromium.org, tkent@chromium.org

[hayato, 2016-09-09 04:25:38]

PTAL

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-09-09 05:10:46]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-09-09 05:10:47]

Dry run: Exceeded global retry quota

[kochi, 2016-09-09 05:41:57]

lgtm

Mac build failing, maybe you forgot to update
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/paint/paint/ThemePainterMac.cpp?

[hayato, 2016-09-09 06:11:08]

fix ThemePainerMac.mm

[hayato, 2016-09-09 06:11:09]

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

[hayato, 2016-09-09 06:11:10]

Description was changed from

==========
Rename Node::shadowHost() to Node::ownerShadowHost()

I think Node::shadowHost() is not a good name because it is unclear *which* 
shadowHost would be returned by its name.

Node::ownerShadowHost() might be a better name than Node::shadowHost().
It is similar to Node::ownerDocument(), where it is clear that the owner would
be
returned.
==========

to

==========
Rename Node::shadowHost() to Node::ownerShadowHost()

I think Node::shadowHost() is not a good name because it is unclear *which* 
shadowHost would be returned by its name.

Node::ownerShadowHost() might be a better name than Node::shadowHost().
It is similar to Node::ownerDocument(), where it is clear that the owner would
be
returned.
CQ_INCLUDE_TRYBOTS=master.tryserver.chromium.linux:linux_layout_tests_slimming_paint_v2
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-09-09 06:11:23]

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

[hayato, 2016-09-09 06:11:58]

The CQ bit was unchecked by hayato@chromium.org

[hayato, 2016-09-09 06:12:00]

The CQ bit was checked by hayato@chromium.org

[hayato, 2016-09-09 06:12:01]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from kochi@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/2327743002/#ps20001
(title: "fix ThemePainerMac.mm")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-09-09 06:12:19]

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, 2016-09-09 06:15:46]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-09-09 06:15:47]

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

[tkent, 2016-09-09 06:30:48]

lgtm

[hayato, 2016-09-09 09:19:37]

fix

[hayato, 2016-09-09 09:19:39]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-09-09 09:19:48]

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

[hayato, 2016-09-09 09:20:01]

The CQ bit was unchecked by hayato@chromium.org

[hayato, 2016-09-09 09:20:04]

The CQ bit was checked by hayato@chromium.org

[hayato, 2016-09-09 09:20:04]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from tkent@chromium.org,
kochi@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/2327743002/#ps40001
(title: "fix")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-09-09 09:20:14]

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, 2016-09-09 11:09:07]

Committed patchset #3 (id:40001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-09-09 11:11:02]

Description was changed from

==========
Rename Node::shadowHost() to Node::ownerShadowHost()

I think Node::shadowHost() is not a good name because it is unclear *which* 
shadowHost would be returned by its name.

Node::ownerShadowHost() might be a better name than Node::shadowHost().
It is similar to Node::ownerDocument(), where it is clear that the owner would
be
returned.
CQ_INCLUDE_TRYBOTS=master.tryserver.chromium.linux:linux_layout_tests_slimming_paint_v2
==========

to

==========
Rename Node::shadowHost() to Node::ownerShadowHost()

I think Node::shadowHost() is not a good name because it is unclear *which*
shadowHost would be returned by its name.

Node::ownerShadowHost() might be a better name than Node::shadowHost().
It is similar to Node::ownerDocument(), where it is clear that the owner would
be
returned.
CQ_INCLUDE_TRYBOTS=master.tryserver.chromium.linux:linux_layout_tests_slimming_paint_v2

Committed: https://crrev.com/9a2cefc4c20b11f7995c59a910c858a4c5732e7d
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#417555}
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-09-09 11:11:04]

Patchset 3 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/9a2cefc4c20b11f7995c59a910c858a4c5732e7d
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#417555}