Add a cap of six in-flight requests per host to the ResourceScheduler

net/base/priority_queue_unittest.cc

Index: net/base/priority_queue_unittest.cc
diff --git a/net/base/priority_queue_unittest.cc b/net/base/priority_queue_unittest.cc
index 0baff6e005ce6c265fca489cf516dada331b86ea..daa294e12c260af6bc8f3bc659125a914603cd8e 100644
--- a/net/base/priority_queue_unittest.cc
+++ b/net/base/priority_queue_unittest.cc
@@ -89,6 +89,19 @@ TEST_F(PriorityQueueTest, FirstMaxOrder) {
   CheckEmpty();
 }
 
+TEST_F(PriorityQueueTest, FirstMaxOrderWithDeletion) {

[szym, 2013/11/15 19:48:52]

The name suggests this is the same as FirstMaxOrderErase.

Better name would be GetNextTowardsLastMinAndErase.

I also would be ok with this test only exercising GetNextTowardsLastMin.

[oystein (OOO til 10th of July), 2013/11/15 19:52:20]

Done.

+  PriorityQueue<int>::Pointer current = queue_.FirstMax();
+  for (size_t i = 0; i < kNumElements; ++i) {
+    EXPECT_FALSE(current.is_null());
+    EXPECT_EQ(kFirstMaxOrder[i], current.value());
+    PriorityQueue<int>::Pointer next = queue_.GetNextTowardsLastMin(current);
+    queue_.Erase(current);
+    current = next;
+  }
+  EXPECT_TRUE(current.is_null());
+  CheckEmpty();
+}
+
 TEST_F(PriorityQueueTest, FirstMaxOrderErase) {
   for (size_t i = 0; i < kNumElements; ++i) {
     EXPECT_EQ(kFirstMaxOrder[i], queue_.FirstMax().value());