First step towards invalidations componentization

First step towards invalidations componentization

Moves some files from chrome/browser/invalidation to
components/invalidation.  The files moved in this CL are those that do
not have dependencies on chrome/, so they can be moved without
significant refactoring.

This refactoring touches a lot of files, but none of the changes are
meaningful.  Most of it inovlves changing #include paths, updating DEPS,
changing header guards, and other trivial changes.

One part of this change that is significant is that it creates two new
static libraries and moves some of the symbols formerly defined in
chrome/browser/invalidation into those libraries.  There is some risk of
linker errors if this was done wrong.

TBR=bartfab,blundell
BUG=336571
Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=269462

[rlarocque, 2014-04-29 20:19:18]

This is the first change associated with the document I published recently. 
Please take a look, let me know if the plan and proposed changes look OK, and
then I'll start adding or TBRing other reviewers as necessary.

[pavely, 2014-04-30 16:59:39]

lgtm

[rlarocque, 2014-04-30 17:37:38]

Hi everyone,

This CL contains a bunch of renames.  There should be no significant changes
here, except for the fact that some files are now moved into their own static
library.  The code is the same.

It touches a lot of files, so it needs a lot of reviewers.  Here are your
responsibilities:

blundell: components/
arv: chrome/browser/ui/webui/
bartfab: chrome/browser/policy/
dcheng: chrome/browser/extensions/api/push_messaging/
satorux: chrome/browser/drive/

If you object to these changes, please let me know right away.  Otherwise, I
plan to start TBR'ing if I don't hear from you and the trybots are green.

Thanks in advance for the reviews!

[dcheng, 2014-04-30 17:44:42]

c/b/e/a/push_messaging/* rslgtm

[arv (Not doing code reviews), 2014-04-30 18:21:04]

chrome/browser/ui/webui/ LGTM

[rlarocque, 2014-05-01 20:13:57]

+zea for review of components/, since the components OWNERs aren't available
right now.

If Nicolas approves of the components/ changes, then I'm willing to TBR the
rest.

[Nicolas Zea, 2014-05-01 20:25:53]

https://codereview.chromium.org/255273002/diff/1/components/invalidation/DEPS
File components/invalidation/DEPS (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/255273002/diff/1/components/invalidation/DEPS...
components/invalidation/DEPS:4: "+content/public/test",
hmm, I was under the impression nothing in components should depend on content.
Is that not the case?

[rlarocque, 2014-05-01 20:45:20]

https://codereview.chromium.org/255273002/diff/1/components/invalidation/DEPS
File components/invalidation/DEPS (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/255273002/diff/1/components/invalidation/DEPS...
components/invalidation/DEPS:4: "+content/public/test",
On 2014/05/01 20:25:54, Nicolas Zea wrote:
> hmm, I was under the impression nothing in components should depend on
content.
> Is that not the case?

I would have thought so too, but evidently not.

$ git grep '+content/public' components | grep DEPS | sed 's/:.*//' | sort |
uniq
components/autofill/content/browser/DEPS
components/autofill/content/common/DEPS
components/autofill/content/DEPS
components/autofill/content/renderer/DEPS
components/breakpad/app/DEPS
components/breakpad/browser/DEPS
components/DEPS
components/domain_reliability/DEPS
components/dom_distiller/content/DEPS
components/dom_distiller/standalone/DEPS
components/dom_distiller/webui/DEPS
components/keyed_service/content/DEPS
components/nacl/broker/DEPS
components/nacl/browser/DEPS
components/nacl/loader/DEPS
components/nacl/renderer/DEPS
components/navigation_interception/DEPS
components/password_manager/content/browser/DEPS
components/password_manager/content/DEPS
components/password_manager/core/browser/DEPS
components/plugins/renderer/DEPS
components/precache/content/DEPS
components/sessions/DEPS
components/storage_monitor/DEPS
components/test/DEPS
components/translate/content/browser/DEPS
components/translate/content/DEPS
components/usb_service/DEPS
components/user_prefs/DEPS
components/visitedlink/browser/DEPS
components/visitedlink/common/DEPS
components/visitedlink/renderer/DEPS
components/visitedlink/test/DEPS
components/web_contents_delegate_android/android/DEPS
components/web_contents_delegate_android/DEPS
components/webdata/DEPS
components/web_modal/DEPS

[Nicolas Zea, 2014-05-01 20:57:25]

Ah, looks like it's okay to depend on the public part of the content api, just
not the implementation. LGTM then.

[blundell, 2014-05-01 20:57:59]

https://codereview.chromium.org/255273002/diff/1/components/invalidation/DEPS
File components/invalidation/DEPS (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/255273002/diff/1/components/invalidation/DEPS...
components/invalidation/DEPS:4: "+content/public/test",
Code that is shared by iOS cannot depend on //content. That's either (a) the
core code of layered components (e.g., autofill) or (b) the entire code of
components that don't use //content at all (e.g. sync_driver).

On 2014/05/01 20:45:21, rlarocque wrote:
> On 2014/05/01 20:25:54, Nicolas Zea wrote:
> > hmm, I was under the impression nothing in components should depend on
> content.
> > Is that not the case?
> 
> I would have thought so too, but evidently not.
> 
> $ git grep '+content/public' components | grep DEPS | sed 's/:.*//' | sort |
> uniq
> components/autofill/content/browser/DEPS
> components/autofill/content/common/DEPS
> components/autofill/content/DEPS
> components/autofill/content/renderer/DEPS
> components/breakpad/app/DEPS
> components/breakpad/browser/DEPS
> components/DEPS
> components/domain_reliability/DEPS
> components/dom_distiller/content/DEPS
> components/dom_distiller/standalone/DEPS
> components/dom_distiller/webui/DEPS
> components/keyed_service/content/DEPS
> components/nacl/broker/DEPS
> components/nacl/browser/DEPS
> components/nacl/loader/DEPS
> components/nacl/renderer/DEPS
> components/navigation_interception/DEPS
> components/password_manager/content/browser/DEPS
> components/password_manager/content/DEPS
> components/password_manager/core/browser/DEPS
> components/plugins/renderer/DEPS
> components/precache/content/DEPS
> components/sessions/DEPS
> components/storage_monitor/DEPS
> components/test/DEPS
> components/translate/content/browser/DEPS
> components/translate/content/DEPS
> components/usb_service/DEPS
> components/user_prefs/DEPS
> components/visitedlink/browser/DEPS
> components/visitedlink/common/DEPS
> components/visitedlink/renderer/DEPS
> components/visitedlink/test/DEPS
> components/web_contents_delegate_android/android/DEPS
> components/web_contents_delegate_android/DEPS
> components/webdata/DEPS
> components/web_modal/DEPS

[blundell, 2014-05-01 20:58:36]

To be more explicit, this DEPS inclusion is wrong, as the invalidation component
is built on iOS.

[rlarocque, 2014-05-01 22:11:53]

On 2014/05/01 20:58:36, blundell wrote:
> To be more explicit, this DEPS inclusion is wrong, as the invalidation
component
> is built on iOS.

It only needs that dependency to get access to a BrowserThreadTestBundle. 
There's probably a way to work around it, but this CL is not the place to deal
with those issues.  

I've moved InvalidationServiceTestTemplate back into
chrome/browser/invalidations and removed the dependency.  PTAL.

[satorux1, 2014-05-01 22:24:16]

chrome/browser/drive/ LGTM with a nit:

https://codereview.chromium.org/255273002/diff/20001/chrome/browser/drive/DEPS
File chrome/browser/drive/DEPS (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/255273002/diff/20001/chrome/browser/drive/DEP...
chrome/browser/drive/DEPS:20:
"!chrome/browser/invalidation/invalidation_service.h",
maybe we can remove this line?

[rlarocque, 2014-05-01 22:56:29]

https://codereview.chromium.org/255273002/diff/20001/chrome/browser/drive/DEPS
File chrome/browser/drive/DEPS (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/255273002/diff/20001/chrome/browser/drive/DEP...
chrome/browser/drive/DEPS:20:
"!chrome/browser/invalidation/invalidation_service.h",
On 2014/05/01 22:24:16, satorux1 wrote:
> maybe we can remove this line?

Done.

[rlarocque, 2014-05-02 17:26:00]

Added TBRs for bartfab and blundell.  I think this commit is good to go.

[rlarocque, 2014-05-02 17:26:06]

The CQ bit was checked by rlarocque@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-02 17:27:56]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/rlarocque@chromium.org/255273002/40001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-02 17:28:23]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-02 17:28:24]

Failed to apply patch for chrome/chrome_browser.gypi:
While running patch -p1 --forward --force --no-backup-if-mismatch;
  patching file chrome/chrome_browser.gypi
  Hunk #1 FAILED at 36.
  Hunk #2 succeeded at 916 (offset 2 lines).
  Hunk #3 succeeded at 928 (offset 2 lines).
  Hunk #4 succeeded at 3266 (offset 4 lines).
  1 out of 4 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file
chrome/chrome_browser.gypi.rej

Patch:       chrome/chrome_browser.gypi
Index: chrome/chrome_browser.gypi
diff --git a/chrome/chrome_browser.gypi b/chrome/chrome_browser.gypi
index
18089df1c4ad62956bd2b7a15da8da000d8e569d..992ae1fb7217bbe3392a7414625ae3cc7488818b
100644
--- a/chrome/chrome_browser.gypi
+++ b/chrome/chrome_browser.gypi
@@ -36,6 +36,7 @@
         '../components/components.gyp:favicon_base',
         '../components/components.gyp:favicon_core',
         '../components/components.gyp:infobars_core',
+        '../components/components.gyp:invalidation',
         '../components/components.gyp:navigation_metrics',
         '../components/components.gyp:os_crypt',
         '../components/components.gyp:password_manager_core_browser',
@@ -914,9 +915,6 @@
         'browser/invalidation/gcm_invalidation_bridge.h',
         'browser/invalidation/invalidation_controller_android.cc',
         'browser/invalidation/invalidation_controller_android.h',
-        'browser/invalidation/invalidation_logger.cc',
-        'browser/invalidation/invalidation_logger.h',
-        'browser/invalidation/invalidation_service.h',
         'browser/invalidation/invalidation_service_android.cc',
         'browser/invalidation/invalidation_service_android.h',
         'browser/invalidation/invalidation_service_factory.cc',
@@ -929,8 +927,6 @@
         'browser/invalidation/ticl_invalidation_service.h',
         'browser/invalidation/ticl_profile_settings_provider.cc',
         'browser/invalidation/ticl_profile_settings_provider.h',
-        'browser/invalidation/ticl_settings_provider.cc',
-        'browser/invalidation/ticl_settings_provider.h',
         'browser/io_thread.cc',
         'browser/io_thread.h',
         'browser/jankometer.h',
@@ -3267,8 +3263,8 @@
             'browser/invalidation/ticl_invalidation_service.h',
             'browser/invalidation/ticl_profile_settings_provider.cc',
             'browser/invalidation/ticl_profile_settings_provider.h',
-            'browser/invalidation/ticl_settings_provider.cc',
-            'browser/invalidation/ticl_settings_provider.h',
+            'invalidation/ticl_settings_provider.cc',
+            'invalidation/ticl_settings_provider.h',
 
             'browser/sync/glue/synced_tab_delegate.cc',
           ],

[rlarocque, 2014-05-02 17:52:43]

The CQ bit was checked by rlarocque@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-02 17:54:25]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/rlarocque@chromium.org/255273002/60001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-02 18:13:06]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-02 18:13:07]

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

[blundell, 2014-05-05 08:48:41]

//components LGTM with some fixes to make in a followup. Thanks!

https://codereview.chromium.org/255273002/diff/60001/components/components_te...
File components/components_tests.gyp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/255273002/diff/60001/components/components_te...
components/components_tests.gyp:330: ['include', '^keyed_service/core/'],
Could you add invalidation here?

https://codereview.chromium.org/255273002/diff/60001/components/invalidation/...
File components/invalidation/DEPS (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/255273002/diff/60001/components/invalidation/...
components/invalidation/DEPS:2: "+components/keyed_service",
These dependencies should be present in the gypfile as well.

https://codereview.chromium.org/255273002/diff/60001/components/invalidation/...
components/invalidation/DEPS:2: "+components/keyed_service",
There should be a -content rule here (see e.g. //components/sync_driver/DEPS).

[blundell, 2014-05-05 08:57:22]

Oops, didn't notice that this CL hadn't landed yet. Even better - you can make
the fixes I suggested in this CL itself :).

[bartfab (slow), 2014-05-05 12:07:08]

On 2014/05/01 22:11:53, rlarocque wrote:
> On 2014/05/01 20:58:36, blundell wrote:
> > To be more explicit, this DEPS inclusion is wrong, as the invalidation
> component
> > is built on iOS.
> 
> It only needs that dependency to get access to a BrowserThreadTestBundle. 
> There's probably a way to work around it, but this CL is not the place to deal
> with those issues. 

Yes, it is possible to get around this requirement. Code that is moving to a
component should pass around SequencedTaskRunners representing the threads it
needs to work on (most likely foreground_task_runner == UI thread,
background_task_runner == IO thread). Once this is done, the dependency on
browser threads can be removed.

> 
> I've moved InvalidationServiceTestTemplate back into
> chrome/browser/invalidations and removed the dependency.  PTAL.

[bartfab (slow), 2014-05-05 12:11:38]

chrome/browser/policy lgtm with nit

https://codereview.chromium.org/255273002/diff/60001/chrome/browser/policy/cl...
File chrome/browser/policy/cloud/DEPS (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/255273002/diff/60001/chrome/browser/policy/cl...
chrome/browser/policy/cloud/DEPS:52: "+components/invalidation"
Nit: Move this to the include_rules above. A dependency on another component is
OK and is not something that we will need to remove in the future.

[rlarocque, 2014-05-05 17:39:10]

Thanks for the reviews.  I'll try again to get this landed today.

https://codereview.chromium.org/255273002/diff/60001/chrome/browser/policy/cl...
File chrome/browser/policy/cloud/DEPS (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/255273002/diff/60001/chrome/browser/policy/cl...
chrome/browser/policy/cloud/DEPS:52: "+components/invalidation"
On 2014/05/05 12:11:39, bartfab wrote:
> Nit: Move this to the include_rules above. A dependency on another component
is
> OK and is not something that we will need to remove in the future.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/255273002/diff/60001/components/components_te...
File components/components_tests.gyp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/255273002/diff/60001/components/components_te...
components/components_tests.gyp:330: ['include', '^keyed_service/core/'],
On 2014/05/05 08:48:41, blundell wrote:
> Could you add invalidation here?

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/255273002/diff/60001/components/invalidation/...
File components/invalidation/DEPS (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/255273002/diff/60001/components/invalidation/...
components/invalidation/DEPS:2: "+components/keyed_service",
On 2014/05/05 08:48:41, blundell wrote:
> These dependencies should be present in the gypfile as well.

Added gyp dependencies for keyed_service and cacheinvalidation.

https://codereview.chromium.org/255273002/diff/60001/components/invalidation/...
components/invalidation/DEPS:2: "+components/keyed_service",
On 2014/05/05 08:48:41, blundell wrote:
> There should be a -content rule here (see e.g. //components/sync_driver/DEPS).

Done.  I would have thought that "-content" was the default for this directory.

[rlarocque, 2014-05-05 17:40:38]

The CQ bit was checked by rlarocque@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-05 17:41:18]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/rlarocque@chromium.org/255273002/100001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-05 19:43:31]

FYI, CQ is re-trying this CL (attempt #1).
Please consider checking whether the failures are real,
and report flakes to chrome-troopers@google.com.
The failing builders are:
  android_aosp on tryserver.chromium
  android_clang_dbg on tryserver.chromium
  android_dbg on tryserver.chromium
  ios_dbg_simulator on tryserver.chromium
  ios_rel_device on tryserver.chromium
  ios_rel_device_ninja on tryserver.chromium
  linux_chromium_chromeos_clang_dbg on tryserver.chromium
  linux_chromium_chromeos_rel on tryserver.chromium
  linux_chromium_clang_dbg on tryserver.chromium
  linux_chromium_rel on tryserver.chromium
  mac_chromium_compile_dbg on tryserver.chromium
  mac_chromium_rel on tryserver.chromium
  win_chromium_compile_dbg on tryserver.chromium
  win_chromium_rel on tryserver.chromium
  win_chromium_x64_rel on tryserver.chromium

[rlarocque, 2014-05-05 19:55:48]

The CQ bit was checked by rlarocque@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-05 19:57:23]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/rlarocque@chromium.org/255273002/120001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-05 23:03:42]

FYI, CQ is re-trying this CL (attempt #1).
Please consider checking whether the failures are real,
and report flakes to chrome-troopers@google.com.
The failing builders are:
  android_aosp on tryserver.chromium
  win_chromium_rel on tryserver.chromium

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-05 23:36:23]

FYI, CQ is re-trying this CL (attempt #2).
Please consider checking whether the failures are real,
and report flakes to chrome-troopers@google.com.
The failing builders are:
  android_aosp on tryserver.chromium
  win_chromium_rel on tryserver.chromium

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-05 23:53:11]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-05 23:53:12]

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

[rlarocque, 2014-05-06 17:31:43]

The CQ bit was checked by rlarocque@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-06 17:32:30]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/rlarocque@chromium.org/255273002/140001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-06 23:22:04]

FYI, CQ is re-trying this CL (attempt #1).
Please consider checking whether the failures are real,
and report flakes to chrome-troopers@google.com.
The failing builders are:
  android_aosp on tryserver.chromium
  win_chromium_compile_dbg on tryserver.chromium

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-07 05:24:44]

FYI, CQ is re-trying this CL (attempt #2).
Please consider checking whether the failures are real,
and report flakes to chrome-troopers@google.com.
The failing builders are:
  android_aosp on tryserver.chromium
  win_chromium_compile_dbg on tryserver.chromium

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-07 06:00:14]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-07 06:00:15]

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

[rlarocque, 2014-05-07 17:23:50]

The CQ bit was checked by rlarocque@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-07 17:26:30]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/rlarocque@chromium.org/255273002/160001

[rlarocque, 2014-05-08 01:20:20]

The CQ bit was checked by rlarocque@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-08 01:22:29]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/rlarocque@chromium.org/255273002/180001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-08 18:52:39]

FYI, CQ is re-trying this CL (attempt #1).
Please consider checking whether the failures are real,
and report flakes to chrome-troopers@google.com.
The failing builders are:
  win_chromium_rel on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/win_chromium_rel/buil...)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-08 23:26:14]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-08 23:26:15]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  win_chromium_rel on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/win_chromium_rel/buil...)

[rlarocque, 2014-05-08 23:28:29]

The CQ bit was checked by rlarocque@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-08 23:35:04]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/rlarocque@chromium.org/255273002/180001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-09 04:54:03]

FYI, CQ is re-trying this CL (attempt #1).
Please consider checking whether the failures are real,
and report flakes to chrome-troopers@google.com.
The failing builders are:
  win_chromium_rel on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/win_chromium_rel/buil...)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-09 05:14:56]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-09 05:14:57]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  win_chromium_rel on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/win_chromium_rel/buil...)

[rlarocque, 2014-05-09 20:12:21]

The CQ bit was checked by rlarocque@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-09 20:13:18]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/rlarocque@chromium.org/255273002/200001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-09 23:17:58]

Change committed as 269462