Add two interfaces for ServiceWorkerProviderContext/ProviderHost

content/common/service_worker/service_worker_provider.mojom

Index: content/common/service_worker/service_worker_provider.mojom
diff --git a/content/common/service_worker/service_worker_provider.mojom b/content/common/service_worker/service_worker_provider.mojom
index 6e512eddca89cde7db77394ec9104b309c70da5b..6240d84e83fa3a6cfac27ef181349201fd14bdc2 100644
--- a/content/common/service_worker/service_worker_provider.mojom
+++ b/content/common/service_worker/service_worker_provider.mojom
@@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
 
 module content.mojom;
 
+import "content/common/service_worker/service_worker_provider_interfaces.mojom";
 import "content/common/service_worker/service_worker_types.mojom";
 
 // A container object carried from the renderer to the browser process.
@@ -15,4 +16,6 @@ struct ServiceWorkerProviderHostInfo {
   int32 route_id;
   ServiceWorkerProviderType type;
   bool is_parent_frame_secure;
+  associated ServiceWorkerProviderHost& host_request;
+  associated ServiceWorkerProvider client_ptr_info;

[falken, 2017/05/18 04:13:10]

Does it make more sense to just name these |provider_host| and |provider|? I
probably just don't understand Mojo enough but why the nouns "request" and
"client pointer info"?

[shimazu, 2017/05/19 08:31:07]

I thought _request/_ptr_info are informative because there are several types
related to an interface. For example, these four types are used for
ServiceWorkerProviderHost interface:

- ServiceWorkerProviderHost
- AssociatedRequest<ServiceWorkerProviderHost>
- AssociatedBinding<ServiceWorkerProviderHost>
- AssociatedInterfacePtrInfo<ServiceWorkerProviderHost>
- AssociatedInterfacePtr<ServiceWorkerProviderHost>

Request and InterfacePtrInfo are the information to carry the endpoints over
mojo connection, and Binding and InterfacePtr are receptacles of these
endpoints.

What do you think we have _request/_ptr_info for Request and PtrInfo, and no
suffix for Binding and InterfacePtr?

[falken, 2017/05/22 08:28:12]

OK if this is consistent with a common Mojo naming scheme, then I'm OK with it.

 };