Stop pretending that a Flash setting of DETECT_IMPORTANT_CONTENT is ASK.

chrome/browser/plugins/flash_permission_context.cc

Index: chrome/browser/plugins/flash_permission_context.cc
diff --git a/chrome/browser/plugins/flash_permission_context.cc b/chrome/browser/plugins/flash_permission_context.cc
index 0794b45a15de6c299d4a9140c8802721e8a5545f..7a139a764c4e4d604b5266986bbcd04672be17ed 100644
--- a/chrome/browser/plugins/flash_permission_context.cc
+++ b/chrome/browser/plugins/flash_permission_context.cc
@@ -46,8 +46,6 @@ ContentSetting FlashPermissionContext::GetPermissionStatusInternal(
       requesting_origin, nullptr);
   flash_setting = PluginsFieldTrial::EffectiveContentSetting(
       host_content_settings_map, content_settings_type(), flash_setting);
-  if (flash_setting == CONTENT_SETTING_DETECT_IMPORTANT_CONTENT)
-    return CONTENT_SETTING_ASK;

[raymes, 2017/03/05 23:55:40]

I'm not sure if we want to do this? Won't this have potential behavioral
implications? We just want to change the UI.

[tommycli, 2017/03/06 19:10:26]

I agree. I missed that this was in FlashPermissionContext. I agree with Raymes
that this seems like it will have negative side effects.

[lgarron, 2017/03/09 02:47:19]

Could you explain to me what those effects are?
If the general behaviour is not ASK yet, I don't quite understand why returning
DETECT here is not alright. (Can we fix the call sites to interpret DETECT
correctly?)

[raymes, 2017/03/09 03:01:07]

Ask means "show a prompt" in the permissions code, and that's what we want to
happen in this case. This actually happens to work because of the way the code
is written, but I don't think we should rely on that (which is why this test
doesn't fail). There is other code that assumes that ASK means show a prompt,
which is intuitive.

I think the right solution is to get rid of DETECT as an option which I hope
we'll be able to do soon.

   return flash_setting;
 }