Upgrade Insecure Requests: bugfixes, tests, and support for OOPIF.

content/browser/frame_host/frame_tree_node.h

Index: content/browser/frame_host/frame_tree_node.h
diff --git a/content/browser/frame_host/frame_tree_node.h b/content/browser/frame_host/frame_tree_node.h
index 6ee699e87346b7059c202012dbc7136aaed37b77..cbaba789b408694900f2a81c811f041e2619458b 100644
--- a/content/browser/frame_host/frame_tree_node.h
+++ b/content/browser/frame_host/frame_tree_node.h
@@ -167,6 +167,8 @@ class CONTENT_EXPORT FrameTreeNode {
   // Sets the current insecure request policy, and notifies proxies about the
   // update.
   void SetInsecureRequestPolicy(blink::WebInsecureRequestPolicy policy);
+  void SetInsecureNavigationsSet(
+      const std::vector<unsigned>& insecure_navigations_set);

[nasko, 2016/12/08 22:45:44]

Please be explicit. Unsigned int?

[arthursonzogni, 2016/12/09 11:06:50]

I agree, but at the same time I tried to stay coherent with what is done in the
current source code:
* using InsecureNavigationsSet = HashSet<unsigned, WTF::AlreadyHashed>;
* unsigned StringImpl::hash() const
* void addInsecureNavigationUpgrade(unsigned hashedHost)

I think "unsigned" is more used in blink:
grep "<unsigned int>"    -r third_party/WebKit/ | wc -l => 0
grep "<unsigned>"        -r third_party/WebKit/ | wc -l => 454
grep "unsigned int i ="  -r third_party/WebKit/ | wc -l => 2
grep "unsigned i ="      -r third_party/WebKit/ | wc -l => 789

There is no consensus in content/
grep "<unsigned int>"    -r content/ | wc -l => 24
grep "<unsigned>"        -r content/ | wc -l => 18
grep "unsigned int i ="  -r content/ | wc -l => 6
grep "unsigned i ="      -r content/ | wc -l => 32


I think the best thing to do is to apply your suggestion to my patch for
everything that is not in blink. Are you okay with this?

 
   // Returns the currently active sandbox flags for this frame.  This includes
   // flags inherited from parent frames and the currently active flags from the