mash: changes can_accept_events to an enum

mash: changes can_accept_events to an enum

And renames it to EventTargetingPolicy. Additionally this makes
checking the non-client area have precedence of children. Without this
if a child filled the bounds of the parent it would be the hit target
when we want the window with the non-client area to be the target.

BUG=548435
TEST=covered by test.
R=sadrul@chromium.org, tsepez@chromium.org

Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2667073002
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#447636}
Committed: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/f9646dc93e6b087a251688952dd8ccc6ae856adc

[sky, 2017-02-01 05:08:58]

The CQ bit was checked by sky@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[sky, 2017-02-01 05:09:06]

tsepez: mojom
sadrul: the rest

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-02-01 05:09:09]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-02-01 05:56:10]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-02-01 05:56:10]

Dry run: This issue passed the CQ dry run.

[Tom Sepez, 2017-02-01 16:25:11]

lgtm

[sadrul, 2017-02-01 20:42:00]

https://codereview.chromium.org/2667073002/diff/1/services/ui/ws/event_dispat...
File services/ui/ws/event_dispatcher_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2667073002/diff/1/services/ui/ws/event_dispat...
services/ui/ws/event_dispatcher_unittest.cc:326:
mojom::EventTargetingPolicy::TARGET_AND_DESCENDANTS);
Probably not needed since the default?

https://codereview.chromium.org/2667073002/diff/1/services/ui/ws/window_finde...
File services/ui/ws/window_finder.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2667073002/diff/1/services/ui/ws/window_finde...
services/ui/ws/window_finder.cc:52: return false;
Should this go first? I see that that would be different from what we currently
do, but I think this would be the better way of doing things? (i.e. if policy is
set to NONE, the window itself shouldn't be targeted).

[sky, 2017-02-01 21:13:52]

https://codereview.chromium.org/2667073002/diff/1/services/ui/ws/event_dispat...
File services/ui/ws/event_dispatcher_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2667073002/diff/1/services/ui/ws/event_dispat...
services/ui/ws/event_dispatcher_unittest.cc:326:
mojom::EventTargetingPolicy::TARGET_AND_DESCENDANTS);
On 2017/02/01 20:42:00, sadrul wrote:
> Probably not needed since the default?

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2667073002/diff/1/services/ui/ws/window_finde...
File services/ui/ws/window_finder.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2667073002/diff/1/services/ui/ws/window_finde...
services/ui/ws/window_finder.cc:52: return false;
On 2017/02/01 20:42:00, sadrul wrote:
> Should this go first? I see that that would be different from what we
currently
> do, but I think this would be the better way of doing things? (i.e. if policy
is
> set to NONE, the window itself shouldn't be targeted).

This needs to be after the non-client area hit test. Otherwise it would mean a
window marked as not accepting events could never be moved/closed.

[sadrul, 2017-02-01 21:28:29]

lgtm

https://codereview.chromium.org/2667073002/diff/1/services/ui/ws/window_finde...
File services/ui/ws/window_finder.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2667073002/diff/1/services/ui/ws/window_finde...
services/ui/ws/window_finder.cc:52: return false;
On 2017/02/01 21:13:50, sky wrote:
> On 2017/02/01 20:42:00, sadrul wrote:
> > Should this go first? I see that that would be different from what we
> currently
> > do, but I think this would be the better way of doing things? (i.e. if
policy
> is
> > set to NONE, the window itself shouldn't be targeted).
> 
> This needs to be after the non-client area hit test. Otherwise it would mean a
> window marked as not accepting events could never be moved/closed.

Ah, of course.

[sky, 2017-02-01 22:09:24]

The CQ bit was checked by sky@chromium.org

[sky, 2017-02-01 22:09:24]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from tsepez@chromium.org,
sadrul@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/2667073002/#ps60001
(title: "merge")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-02-01 22:09:47]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-02-01 23:12:34]

CQ is committing da patch.

Bot data: {"patchset_id": 60001, "attempt_start_ts": 1485986964278230,
"parent_rev": "3e0797f2ae6a7d349acf6aaf8d02215f28c559c1", "commit_rev":
"f9646dc93e6b087a251688952dd8ccc6ae856adc"}

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-02-01 23:13:08]

Description was changed from

==========
mash: changes can_accept_events to an enum

And renames it to EventTargetingPolicy. Additionally this makes
checking the non-client area have precedence of children. Without this
if a child filled the bounds of the parent it would be the hit target
when we want the window with the non-client area to be the target.

BUG=548435
TEST=covered by test.
R=sadrul@chromium.org, tsepez@chromium.org
==========

to

==========
mash: changes can_accept_events to an enum

And renames it to EventTargetingPolicy. Additionally this makes
checking the non-client area have precedence of children. Without this
if a child filled the bounds of the parent it would be the hit target
when we want the window with the non-client area to be the target.

BUG=548435
TEST=covered by test.
R=sadrul@chromium.org, tsepez@chromium.org

Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2667073002
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#447636}
Committed:
https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/f9646dc93e6b087a251688952dd8...
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-02-01 23:13:10]

Committed patchset #4 (id:60001) as
https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/f9646dc93e6b087a251688952dd8...