Create setting that disables password stores

components/os_crypt/key_storage_linux.h

Index: components/os_crypt/key_storage_linux.h
diff --git a/components/os_crypt/key_storage_linux.h b/components/os_crypt/key_storage_linux.h
index 394b6b38173be0b67fa890974ba40e6fcab08ac1..f3045a46990cdb510cec6174e8c7ed4c39201dd9 100644
--- a/components/os_crypt/key_storage_linux.h
+++ b/components/os_crypt/key_storage_linux.h
@@ -12,6 +12,7 @@
 #include "base/memory/ref_counted.h"
 
 namespace base {
+class FilePath;
 class SingleThreadTaskRunner;
 }  // namespace base
 
@@ -34,6 +35,12 @@ class KeyStorageLinux {
   static void SetMainThreadRunner(
       scoped_refptr<base::SingleThreadTaskRunner> main_thread_runner);
 
+  // Enables the use of the preference on using or ignoring backends.
+  static void EnablePreference(bool enable_preference);

[vabr (Chromium), 2017/07/03 19:27:14]

optional nit: I'm a bit confused by "enabling". Calling this with false actually
disables the preference, right? So what about something like:

// Controls whether preference on using or ignoring backends is used.
static void RespectPreference(bool should_respect_preference).

No strong opposition on my side, though. Especially if this is already a pattern
in other pieces of code.

In any case, let's keep it consistent with os_crypt.h.

[cfroussios, 2017/07/04 09:58:15]

I have the same concerns with the name, but your proposal doesn't sound very
natural either. To me it implies a policy being introduced from outside.
WDYT of ShouldUsePreference?

[vabr (Chromium), 2017/07/04 10:11:01]

ShouldUsePreference sounds good to me.

+
+  // Preferences are stored in a separate file in the user data directory.
+  static void SetUserDataPath(const base::FilePath& path);
+
   // Tries to load the appropriate key storage. Returns null if none succeed.
   static std::unique_ptr<KeyStorageLinux> CreateService();