Prevent RFH from attempting to transfer after it's been swapped out

content/public/test/browser_test_utils.h

Index: content/public/test/browser_test_utils.h
diff --git a/content/public/test/browser_test_utils.h b/content/public/test/browser_test_utils.h
index 96e5791db23ffa2612bb2a19662a285647173c32..4d02c44c9e6dae39b4f98780befcbc0443ea7688 100644
--- a/content/public/test/browser_test_utils.h
+++ b/content/public/test/browser_test_utils.h
@@ -614,6 +614,10 @@ class TestNavigationManager : public WebContentsObserver {
   // stack. Returns false if the request was aborted before starting.
   WARN_UNUSED_RESULT bool WaitForWillStartRequest();
 
+  // Waits until the navigation response has been sent received. Returns false
+  // if the request was aborted before getting a response.
+  WARN_UNUSED_RESULT bool WaitForWillProcessResponse();

[nasko, 2016/09/30 23:21:33]

nit: I think it will be a bit more readable as WaitForResponse. While the
lengthy name is fully explanatory of what exact event will cause it, I think the
WillProcess part doesn't add as much to be needed.

If you go that route, we can rename the above method too in a separate CL.

[clamy, 2016/10/04 11:54:41]

Acknowledged. Since more of the code needs to be refactored, I'll do a followup
CL to improve the TestNavigationManager.

+
   // Waits until the navigation has been finished. Will automatically resume
   // navigations paused before this point.
   void WaitForNavigationFinished();
@@ -632,14 +636,20 @@ class TestNavigationManager : public WebContentsObserver {
   // WillStartRequest.
   void OnWillStartRequest();
 
+  // Called when the NavigationThrottle pauses the navigation in
+  // WillProcessResponse.
+  void OnWillProcessResponse();
+
   // Resumes the navigation.
   void ResumeNavigation();
 
   const GURL url_;
-  bool navigation_paused_;
+  bool navigation_paused_in_will_start_;
+  bool navigation_paused_in_will_process_response_;
   NavigationHandle* handle_;
   bool handled_navigation_;
   scoped_refptr<MessageLoopRunner> will_start_loop_runner_;
+  scoped_refptr<MessageLoopRunner> will_process_response_loop_runner_;

[nasko, 2016/09/30 23:21:33]

Why do we need separate MessageLoopRunner?

[clamy, 2016/10/04 11:54:41]

I added another one since it meant the least amount of modifications to the
existing code, and wanted to land this ASAP. The code can probably be
refactored, but to use only one MessageLoopRunner we'd need to keep track of the
current & desired states. I'd rather do this in another patch.

   scoped_refptr<MessageLoopRunner> did_finish_loop_runner_;
 
   base::WeakPtrFactory<TestNavigationManager> weak_factory_;