retry r266042:

retry r266042:
----------------------
Automatically call OnNativeThemeChanged when a widget is added to a hierarchy
with a widget.

Split off from https://codereview.chromium.org/245863002/

BUG=347832
(tangentially)
----------------------

original review: https://codereview.chromium.org/248073005/
changes: updated views unit tests

R=sky@chromium.org

Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=266622

[Evan Stade, 2014-04-25 19:57:21]

only changes are in the _unittest.cc files. Don't know why views_unittests is
not run by the CQ.

[Evan Stade, 2014-04-25 19:59:57]

https://codereview.chromium.org/251703002/diff/20001/ui/views/controls/label_...
File ui/views/controls/label_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/251703002/diff/20001/ui/views/controls/label_...
ui/views/controls/label_unittest.cc:596: EXPECT_EQ(expected_flags,
expected_flags & flags);
Note the problem with these tests were that, since no bg color was set,  it was
returning this flag as well: gfx::Canvas::NO_SUBPIXEL_RENDERING

Since this is not relevant to this test, I just fixed the test.

[sky, 2014-04-25 20:28:19]

LGTM

[Evan Stade, 2014-04-25 20:40:24]

The CQ bit was checked by estade@chromium.org

[Evan Stade, 2014-04-25 20:42:27]

The CQ bit was checked by estade@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-04-25 22:04:34]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/estade@chromium.org/251703002/40001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-04-25 23:02:56]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-04-25 23:02:56]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  tryserver.chromium on linux_chromium_gn_rel

[Evan Stade, 2014-04-28 19:15:54]

Committed patchset #3 manually as r266622 (presubmit successful).

[msw, 2014-04-28 19:31:20]

https://codereview.chromium.org/251703002/diff/40001/ui/views/controls/label_...
File ui/views/controls/label_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/251703002/diff/40001/ui/views/controls/label_...
ui/views/controls/label_unittest.cc:534: EXPECT_EQ(expected_flags,
expected_flags & flags);
Why did this change to checking |expected_flags & flags| instead of |flags|?
That will allow |flags| to contain additional values that were not expected.

https://codereview.chromium.org/251703002/diff/40001/ui/views/controls/label_...
ui/views/controls/label_unittest.cc:798: EXPECT_TRUE(gfx::Canvas::MULTI_LINE &
flags);
Ditto, these types of changes would allow additional unexpected flag values.

[Evan Stade, 2014-04-28 19:32:08]

On 2014/04/28 19:31:20, msw wrote:
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/251703002/diff/40001/ui/views/controls/label_...
> File ui/views/controls/label_unittest.cc (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/251703002/diff/40001/ui/views/controls/label_...
> ui/views/controls/label_unittest.cc:534: EXPECT_EQ(expected_flags,
> expected_flags & flags);
> Why did this change to checking |expected_flags & flags| instead of |flags|?
> That will allow |flags| to contain additional values that were not expected.
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/251703002/diff/40001/ui/views/controls/label_...
> ui/views/controls/label_unittest.cc:798: EXPECT_TRUE(gfx::Canvas::MULTI_LINE &
> flags);
> Ditto, these types of changes would allow additional unexpected flag values.

That's the intent. See https://codereview.chromium.org/251703002/#msg2

[msw, 2014-04-28 20:50:23]

On 2014/04/28 19:32:08, Evan Stade wrote:
> On 2014/04/28 19:31:20, msw wrote:
> >
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/251703002/diff/40001/ui/views/controls/label_...
> > File ui/views/controls/label_unittest.cc (right):
> > 
> >
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/251703002/diff/40001/ui/views/controls/label_...
> > ui/views/controls/label_unittest.cc:534: EXPECT_EQ(expected_flags,
> > expected_flags & flags);
> > Why did this change to checking |expected_flags & flags| instead of |flags|?
> > That will allow |flags| to contain additional values that were not expected.
> > 
> >
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/251703002/diff/40001/ui/views/controls/label_...
> > ui/views/controls/label_unittest.cc:798: EXPECT_TRUE(gfx::Canvas::MULTI_LINE
&
> > flags);
> > Ditto, these types of changes would allow additional unexpected flag values.
> 
> That's the intent. See https://codereview.chromium.org/251703002/#msg2

Hmm, okay. Sorry I missed that, thanks for clarifying.

[Nico, 2014-04-28 21:04:38]

A revert of this CL has been created in
https://codereview.chromium.org/259073004/ by thakis@chromium.org.

The reason for reverting is: Caused tons of uninitialized reads:

http://build.chromium.org/p/chromium.memory.fyi/builders/Chromium%20OS%20%28v...

{
<insert_a_suppression_name_here>
Memcheck:Uninitialized
fun:_ZN11color_utils12SkColorToHSLEjPNS_3HSLE
fun:_ZN11color_utils12_GLOBAL__N_115LumaInvertColorEj
fun:_ZN11color_utils16GetReadableColorEjj
fun:_ZN5views5Label17RecalculateColorsEv
fun:_ZN5views5Label15SetEnabledColorEj
fun:_ZN14message_center12BoundedLabel9SetColorsEjj
fun:_ZN14message_center16NotificationViewC1EPNS_23MessageCenterControllerERKNS_12NotificationE
fun:_ZN14message_center16NotificationView6CreateEPNS_23MessageCenterControllerERKNS_12NotificationEb
fun:_ZN14message_center17MessageCenterView17AddNotificationAtERKNS_12NotificationEi
fun:_ZN14message_center17MessageCenterView16SetNotificationsERKSt3setIPNS_12NotificationENS_30ComparePriorityTimestampSerialESaIS3_EE
fun:_ZN14message_center21MessageCenterViewTest5SetUpEv
}

etc.