Added missing null check to avoid crash.

Added missing null check to avoid crash.

Added missing null check for RenderLayerScrollableArea to avoid crash.
This is a fix done by code inspection. That's why we have no test.

Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/blink?view=rev&revision=174176

[ankit, 2014-05-15 05:57:56]

PTAL

[haraken, 2014-05-15 06:05:17]

Would you add a test for this?

[ankit, 2014-05-15 07:38:26]

On 2014/05/15 06:05:17, haraken wrote:
> Would you add a test for this?

Please correct me if I am wrong.
All the other places where we are using RenderLayerScrollableArea object we are
checking for null condition. I found it missing so I added it.
I have put a null check for already existing code. So according to me adding
test case will not result in any further check.

[haraken, 2014-05-15 16:25:51]

On 2014/05/15 07:38:26, ankit2.kumar wrote:
> On 2014/05/15 06:05:17, haraken wrote:
> > Would you add a test for this?
> 
> Please correct me if I am wrong.
> All the other places where we are using RenderLayerScrollableArea object we
are
> checking for null condition. I found it missing so I added it.
> I have put a null check for already existing code. So according to me adding
> test case will not result in any further check.

I'm not familiar with the code, so I'm not sure if we should add whether the
null check or ASSERT(!innerScrollableArea). Would you cc folks who touch the
code around it?

[ankit, 2014-05-16 03:46:41]

PTAL

[Julien - ping for review, 2014-05-16 10:50:55]

AFAICT nothing prevents the scrollable area to be NULL so lgtm.

[Julien - ping for review, 2014-05-16 10:51:00]

The CQ bit was checked by jchaffraix@chromium.org

[Julien - ping for review, 2014-05-16 10:51:03]

The CQ bit was unchecked by jchaffraix@chromium.org

[Julien - ping for review, 2014-05-16 10:55:32]

Some comments about the description of the bug though:
- It should be wrapped below 80 characters (see
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!topic/blink-dev/rqGhY7PfkYY). I
like to use 72 as mentioned in the thread but reasonable people may disagree.
- Remove the unneeded BUG= entry (gcl adds it by default but it's not giving any
useful information).
- Please add to the description that this is a fix done by code inspection,
that's why we have no test (Blink's culture is to add tests whenever possible).

Once this is fixed, just ask a committer to cq the patch for you.

[ankit, 2014-05-16 12:23:37]

On 2014/05/16 10:55:32, Julien Chaffraix - CET wrote:
> Some comments about the description of the bug though:
> - It should be wrapped below 80 characters (see
> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!topic/blink-dev/rqGhY7PfkYY).
I
> like to use 72 as mentioned in the thread but reasonable people may disagree.
> - Remove the unneeded BUG= entry (gcl adds it by default but it's not giving
any
> useful information).
> - Please add to the description that this is a fix done by code inspection,
> that's why we have no test (Blink's culture is to add tests whenever
possible).
> 
> Once this is fixed, just ask a committer to cq the patch for you.


Updated the description as suggested. 
PTAL

[Julien - ping for review, 2014-05-16 13:47:57]

The CQ bit was checked by jchaffraix@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-16 13:48:04]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/ankit2.kumar@samsung.com/288143002/1

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-16 15:19:51]

Change committed as 174176