Remove policy watching from It2MeHost.

remoting/host/it2me/it2me_native_messaging_host.cc

Index: remoting/host/it2me/it2me_native_messaging_host.cc
diff --git a/remoting/host/it2me/it2me_native_messaging_host.cc b/remoting/host/it2me/it2me_native_messaging_host.cc
index 9580d3d555249d70943723bdbeb25d8f6098a31c..1fe7d649e311ce4d53681031d845560aa5f389ce 100644
--- a/remoting/host/it2me/it2me_native_messaging_host.cc
+++ b/remoting/host/it2me/it2me_native_messaging_host.cc
@@ -320,6 +320,7 @@ void It2MeNativeMessagingHost::ProcessConnect(
   it2me_host_ = factory_->CreateIt2MeHost(
       host_context_->Copy(), policy_service_, weak_ptr_,
       std::move(signal_strategy), username, directory_bot_jid);
+  it2me_host_->OnPolicyUpdate(policy_watcher_->GetCurrentPolicies());

[rkjnsn, 2017/05/04 20:45:45]

Looking at the code, I realized that It2MeNativeMessagingHost creates a
PolicyWatcher using the standard Create method, even when running tests. That
means that with this change, it2me_host will be passed the real policies from
the local machine when running the It2MeNativeMessagingHost tests. I don't
*think* that can cause a test failure, since we override Connect and Disconnect
for testing, but it might make it easier for a future change to introduce test
dependence on the host system.

[Jamie, 2017/05/04 22:11:51]

Given that It2MeNativeMessagingHost is currently constructed from a
PolicyService instance, which is only used to construct the PolicyWatcher, I
think it might as well just be constructed with a PolicyWatcher directly, which
would allow tests to control it. I think that belongs in this CL.

   it2me_host_->Connect();
 
   SendMessageToClient(std::move(response));
@@ -469,30 +470,33 @@ std::string It2MeNativeMessagingHost::HostStateToString(
 
 void It2MeNativeMessagingHost::OnPolicyUpdate(
     std::unique_ptr<base::DictionaryValue> policies) {
-  if (policy_received_) {
-    // Don't dynamically change how the host operates since we don't have a good
-    // way to communicate changes to the user.
-    return;
-  }
-
-  bool allow_elevated_host = false;
-  if (!policies->GetBoolean(
-          policy::key::kRemoteAccessHostAllowUiAccessForRemoteAssistance,
-          &allow_elevated_host)) {
-    LOG(WARNING) << "Failed to retrieve elevated host policy value.";
-  }
+  // Don't dynamically change the elevation status since we don't have a good
+  // way to communicate changes to the user.
+  if (!policy_received_) {
+    bool allow_elevated_host = false;
+    if (!policies->GetBoolean(
+            policy::key::kRemoteAccessHostAllowUiAccessForRemoteAssistance,
+            &allow_elevated_host)) {
+      LOG(WARNING) << "Failed to retrieve elevated host policy value.";
+    }
 #if defined(OS_WIN)
-  LOG(INFO) << "Allow UiAccess for Remote Assistance: " << allow_elevated_host;
+    LOG(INFO) << "Allow UiAccess for Remote Assistance: "
+              << allow_elevated_host;
 #endif  // defined(OS_WIN)
 
-  policy_received_ = true;
+    policy_received_ = true;
 
-  // If |allow_elevated_host| is false, then we will fall back to using a host
-  // running in the current context regardless of the elevation request.  This
-  // may not be ideal, but is still functional.
-  needs_elevation_ = needs_elevation_ && allow_elevated_host;
-  if (!pending_connect_.is_null()) {
-    base::ResetAndReturn(&pending_connect_).Run();
+    // If |allow_elevated_host| is false, then we will fall back to using a host
+    // running in the current context regardless of the elevation request.  This
+    // may not be ideal, but is still functional.
+    needs_elevation_ = needs_elevation_ && allow_elevated_host;
+    if (!pending_connect_.is_null()) {
+      base::ResetAndReturn(&pending_connect_).Run();
+    }
+  }
+
+  if (it2me_host_.get()) {
+    it2me_host_->OnPolicyUpdate(std::move(policies));
   }
 }