Repurpose views+content example into a generic multiprocess views runtime

Repurpose views+content example into a generic multiprocess views runtime

This is to facilitate the addition of an app launcher example/demo app,
separate from the browser, and to assist testing of the out-of-process
compositor on mac.

The change splits out from the current views_examples_with_content_exe
target a new views_content_client target placed in
ui/views_content_client. views_examples_with_content_exe is updated to
use it.

This will allow the app launcher to have its own example app, while
reusing the logic to set up the multiprocess runtime environment for
using views and content.

Follow-up patches for the views_content_client runtime will: isolate
aura dependencies, introduce the gpu_process UI compositor, and
implement the runtime environment for mac.

BUG=365977
Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=272476

Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=272902

[tapted, 2014-05-20 08:45:35]

Hi Ben, PTAL.

I started doing a separate thing for an app launcher example to test out of
process compositing on mac [Patchset 1], but we want to port views_examples* to
Mac as well. It seemed silly to do it in two places, so this makes the
content_client in views/examples reusable elsewhere.

For more context, the app list example "main"/entrypoint is in Patchset 3, but I
took it out for for a follow-up.

Thanks!

https://codereview.chromium.org/284113011/diff/310001/ui/views/examples/conte...
File ui/views/examples/content_client/examples_main.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/284113011/diff/310001/ui/views/examples/conte...
ui/views/examples/content_client/examples_main.h:35: //  
sandbox::SandboxInterfaceInfo sandbox_info = {0};
note: I think I can get rid of some of this boilerplate: crrev/297643004 . It's
here because content::InitializeSandboxInfo(..) must be statically linked for it
to work, but that CL has a possible solution.

[Ben Goodger (Google), 2014-05-20 19:29:00]

What is the "app launcher example" app?

[tapted, 2014-05-20 22:21:05]

On 2014/05/20 19:29:00, Ben Goodger (Google) wrote:
> What is the "app launcher example" app?

This is in Patchset 3 -
https://codereview.chromium.org/284113011/diff/140016/ui/app_list/views/app_l...
- but it made the review diff a bit big.

Patchset 1 has a self-contained version. However, it duplicates a whole heap of
code in the views examples for setting up the mulitprocess/views runtime, so I
went for this approach before trying to land it.

The app launcher is a good example because it uses lots of composited
layers/animations where current views examples do not. The ash_shell has a small
example app launcher but, without ash, the only way to experiment with the app
launcher at the moment is to Sign In to Chromium, navigate to the Web Store and
install a dozen apps..

[Ben Goodger (Google), 2014-05-20 22:57:49]

it makes me a little sad that this code depends on views/examples, which is
supposed to be more of a cul de sac & not have anyone depend on it.

i get though that what you're really after is the lightweight content
client impl. perhaps we could create a common one under src/ui somewhere
that views examples and app list could use?


On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 3:21 PM, <tapted@chromium.org> wrote:

> On 2014/05/20 19:29:00, Ben Goodger (Google) wrote:
>
>> What is the "app launcher example" app?
>>
>
> This is in Patchset 3 -
> https://codereview.chromium.org/284113011/diff/140016/ui/
> app_list/views/app_list_demo.cc
> - but it made the review diff a bit big.
>
> Patchset 1 has a self-contained version. However, it duplicates a whole
> heap of
> code in the views examples for setting up the mulitprocess/views runtime,
> so I
> went for this approach before trying to land it.
>
> The app launcher is a good example because it uses lots of composited
> layers/animations where current views examples do not. The ash_shell has a
> small
> example app launcher but, without ash, the only way to experiment with the
> app
> launcher at the moment is to Sign In to Chromium, navigate to the Web
> Store and
> install a dozen apps..
>
> https://codereview.chromium.org/284113011/
>

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to chromium-reviews+unsubscribe@chromium.org.

[tapted, 2014-05-20 23:32:52]

On 2014/05/20 22:57:49, Ben Goodger (Google) wrote:
> it makes me a little sad that this code depends on views/examples, which is
> supposed to be more of a cul de sac & not have anyone depend on it.
> 
> i get though that what you're really after is the lightweight content
> client impl. perhaps we could create a common one under src/ui somewhere
> that views examples and app list could use?

Sounds perfect :). ui/views/examples/content_client is already nicely structured
for something like this, so it should be straightforward. I'll try that out.

[tapted, 2014-05-21 10:02:15]

On 2014/05/20 22:57:49, Ben Goodger (Google) wrote:
> perhaps we could create a common one under src/ui somewhere
> that views examples and app list could use?

Done. 

(.. names are hard - I think these read OK, but I'm not attached to any of
them).

note rietveld is marking some 'D's as 'M', but they have the right annotations
in the raw diff.

[Ben Goodger (Google), 2014-05-22 17:20:28]

lgtm - thanks for doing this!

it's possible that ash_shell could end up using this too.

[tapted, 2014-05-23 00:17:17]

The CQ bit was checked by tapted@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-23 00:18:37]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/tapted@chromium.org/284113011/400024

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-23 00:33:29]

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:
  chromium_presubmit on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/chromium_presubmit/bu...)
  ios_rel_device_ninja on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/ios_rel_device_ninja/...)
  linux_chromium_chromeos_clang_dbg on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/linux_chromium_chrome...)
  win_chromium_rel on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/win_chromium_rel/buil...)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-23 00:39:08]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-23 00:39:09]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  chromium_presubmit on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/chromium_presubmit/bu...)
  ios_rel_device_ninja on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/ios_rel_device_ninja/...)

[tapted, 2014-05-23 01:44:10]

The CQ bit was checked by tapted@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-23 01:45:18]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/tapted@chromium.org/284113011/470001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-23 10:50:42]

Change committed as 272476

[alph, 2014-05-23 11:15:41]

A revert of this CL has been created in
https://codereview.chromium.org/288313012/ by alph@chromium.org.

The reason for reverting is: Broke Blink runhooks step
http://build.chromium.org/p/chromium.webkit/builders/WebKit%20Win%20x64%20Bui....

[tapted, 2014-05-26 03:27:15]

https://codereview.chromium.org/284113011/diff/470001/ui/views_content_client...
File ui/views_content_client/views_content_client.gyp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/284113011/diff/470001/ui/views_content_client...
ui/views_content_client/views_content_client.gyp:41: 'views_main_delegate.h',
There was just a stray line here, which broke the Blink bots. Somewhat amazed
this got through the CQ. Filed http://crbug.com/377349 to investigate, since
this should be preventable.

[tapted, 2014-05-26 03:27:24]

The CQ bit was checked by tapted@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-26 03:28:11]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/tapted@chromium.org/284113011/490001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-26 03:56:34]

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
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/android_aosp/builds/7...)
  android_chromium_gn_compile_rel on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/android_chromium_gn_c...)
  android_clang_dbg on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/android_clang_dbg/bui...)
  android_dbg on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/android_dbg/builds/18...)
  chromium_presubmit on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/chromium_presubmit/bu...)
  ios_dbg_simulator on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/ios_dbg_simulator/bui...)
  ios_rel_device on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/ios_rel_device/builds...)
  ios_rel_device_ninja on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/ios_rel_device_ninja/...)
  linux_chromium_chromeos_clang_dbg on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/linux_chromium_chrome...)
  linux_chromium_chromeos_rel on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/linux_chromium_chrome...)
  linux_chromium_clang_dbg on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/linux_chromium_clang_...)
  linux_chromium_gn_rel on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/linux_chromium_gn_rel...)
  linux_chromium_rel on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/linux_chromium_rel/bu...)
  mac_chromium_compile_dbg on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/mac_chromium_compile_...)
  mac_chromium_rel on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/mac_chromium_rel/buil...)
  win_chromium_compile_dbg on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/win_chromium_compile_...)
  win_chromium_rel on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/win_chromium_rel/buil...)
  win_chromium_x64_rel on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/win_chromium_x64_rel/...)
  linux_gpu on tryserver.chromium.gpu
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.gpu/builders/linux_gpu/builds/...)
  mac_gpu on tryserver.chromium.gpu
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.gpu/builders/mac_gpu/builds/9026)
  win_gpu on tryserver.chromium.gpu
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.gpu/builders/win_gpu/builds/12108)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-26 03:59:57]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-26 03:59:58]

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

[tapted, 2014-05-26 04:21:54]

The CQ bit was checked by tapted@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-26 04:22:35]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/tapted@chromium.org/284113011/530001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-26 05:50:15]

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_dbg_triggered_tests on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/android_dbg_triggered...)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-26 06:26:12]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-26 06:26:13]

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

[tapted, 2014-05-26 07:46:21]

The CQ bit was checked by tapted@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-26 07:46:46]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/tapted@chromium.org/284113011/530001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-26 09:29:52]

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_dbg_triggered_tests on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/android_dbg_triggered...)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-26 10:54:24]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-26 10:54:24]

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

[tapted, 2014-05-26 21:56:15]

The CQ bit was checked by tapted@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-26 21:56:28]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/tapted@chromium.org/284113011/530001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-26 23:10:28]

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_dbg_triggered_tests on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/android_dbg_triggered...)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-27 00:29:39]

Change committed as 272902

[Nico, 2015-01-20 17:24:52]

thakis@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ thakis@chromium.org

[Nico, 2015-01-20 17:24:53]

Belated comment: I found it fairly surprising that this ends up depending on
net_test_support, since nothing in its name suggests that this isn't production
code. In practice it looks like it's fine since nothing important depends on
views_content_client. Is this intentional? If so, should the target be renamed
so that its name makes this clear?

Dependency path:

$ tools/gyp-explain.py views_content_client# net_test_support#

These paths lead from
/usr/local/google/home/thakis/src/chrome/src/ui/views_content_client/views_content_client.gyp:views_content_client#target
to
/usr/local/google/home/thakis/src/chrome/src/net/net.gyp:net_test_support#target:
/usr/local/google/home/thakis/src/chrome/src/ui/views_content_client/views_content_client.gyp:views_content_client#target
->
/usr/local/google/home/thakis/src/chrome/src/content/content_shell_and_tests.gyp:content_shell_lib#target
->
/usr/local/google/home/thakis/src/chrome/src/content/content_shell_and_tests.gyp:layouttest_support_content#target
->
/usr/local/google/home/thakis/src/chrome/src/content/content_shell_and_tests.gyp:test_support_content#target
->
/usr/local/google/home/thakis/src/chrome/src/net/net.gyp:net_test_support#target


ash_shell depends on test code too, for the same reason. (I'm guessing that
historically, content_shell was written mostly to run layout tests and hence
depends on test code, but from what I understand it's used for other things too
these days and this dependency should probably be fixed?)

[tapted, 2015-01-21 12:50:32]

On 2015/01/20 17:24:53, Nico wrote:
> Belated comment: I found it fairly surprising that this ends up depending on
> net_test_support, since nothing in its name suggests that this isn't
production
> code. In practice it looks like it's fine since nothing important depends on
> views_content_client. Is this intentional?

The "nothing important" bit is intentional :). You're right that it's currently
just used for example code: views_examples_with_content_exe and app_list_demo.
The vision is to also use it for ash_shell to avoid some duplication - also
example code.

However, there may be other things that can benefit from this. And I don't think
there's really a need for it to depend on test code - I can probably find or
extract something better to depend on that content_shell_lib. I've filed
http://crbug.com/450575 to investigate.

One thing that comes to mind is `app_shell` [1] - it's not example code, and
might benefit from sharing some of the code here.

[1]
https://code.google.com/p/chromium/codesearch#chromium/src/extensions/shell/R...