Add pass operation on handles.

Add pass operation on handles.

Also refactor tests to ease closing handles.

R=viettrungluu@chromium.org,rmcilroy@chromium.org

Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=280215

[rmcilroy, 2014-06-19 12:02:44]

https://codereview.chromium.org/325953006/diff/20001/mojo/android/javatests/s...
File mojo/android/javatests/src/org/chromium/mojo/system/impl/CoreImplTest.java
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/325953006/diff/20001/mojo/android/javatests/s...
mojo/android/javatests/src/org/chromium/mojo/system/impl/CoreImplTest.java:438:
private static void checkSharing(SharedBufferHandle in, SharedBufferHandle out)
{
nit - move this method up below checkSendingData

https://codereview.chromium.org/325953006/diff/20001/mojo/public/java/src/org...
File mojo/public/java/src/org/chromium/mojo/system/Handle.java (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/325953006/diff/20001/mojo/public/java/src/org...
mojo/public/java/src/org/chromium/mojo/system/Handle.java:48: * Clone this
handle, invalidating this object in the process.
I realize that in some way this is emulating the scoped_ptr "release" operation,
however, in Java "release" is more associated with releasing resources (e.g., a
close operation).  Therefore I think "release" might be an unclear name, but I
can't think of a better alternative since I'm a bit unclear as to how this will
be used given that Java doesn't really support a RAII design model - is there a
situation where you need to invalidate a handle when cloning it which isn't
covered by toUntypedHandle?

[qsr, 2014-06-19 13:39:30]

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/325953006/diff/20001/mojo/public/java/...
File mojo/public/java/src/org/chromium/mojo/system/Handle.java (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/325953006/diff/20001/mojo/public/java/...
mojo/public/java/src/org/chromium/mojo/system/Handle.java:48: * Clone this
handle, invalidating this object in the process.
On 2014/06/19 12:02:44, rmcilroy wrote:
> I realize that in some way this is emulating the scoped_ptr "release"
operation,
> however, in Java "release" is more associated with releasing resources (e.g.,
a
> close operation).  Therefore I think "release" might be an unclear name, but I
> can't think of a better alternative since I'm a bit unclear as to how this
will
> be used given that Java doesn't really support a RAII design model - is there
a
> situation where you need to invalidate a handle when cloning it which isn't
> covered by toUntypedHandle?

 I have multiple point when I need to do toUntypedHandle.toFooHandle() when I
want to pass ownership from a message to a proxy. As having a method to do this
is clearer and also allow to not create an intermediary object, I'd like to have
it in the API. What about pass() ?

[rmcilroy, 2014-06-20 09:54:09]

On 2014/06/19 13:39:30, qsr wrote:
>
https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/325953006/diff/20001/mojo/public/java/...
> File mojo/public/java/src/org/chromium/mojo/system/Handle.java (right):
> 
>
https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/325953006/diff/20001/mojo/public/java/...
> mojo/public/java/src/org/chromium/mojo/system/Handle.java:48: * Clone this
> handle, invalidating this object in the process.
> On 2014/06/19 12:02:44, rmcilroy wrote:
> > I realize that in some way this is emulating the scoped_ptr "release"
> operation,
> > however, in Java "release" is more associated with releasing resources
(e.g.,
> a
> > close operation).  Therefore I think "release" might be an unclear name, but
I
> > can't think of a better alternative since I'm a bit unclear as to how this
> will
> > be used given that Java doesn't really support a RAII design model - is
there
> a
> > situation where you need to invalidate a handle when cloning it which isn't
> > covered by toUntypedHandle?
> 
>  I have multiple point when I need to do toUntypedHandle.toFooHandle() when I
> want to pass ownership from a message to a proxy. As having a method to do
this
> is clearer and also allow to not create an intermediary object, I'd like to
have
> it in the API. What about pass() ?

Ok sounds reasonably.  pass() sounds good, but make sure the Javadoc explicitly
states something like "Passes ownership of the handle from |handle| to the newly
created Handle object, invalidating the |handle| object in the process.

[qsr, 2014-06-23 13:25:13]

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/325953006/diff/20001/mojo/android/java...
File mojo/android/javatests/src/org/chromium/mojo/system/impl/CoreImplTest.java
(right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/325953006/diff/20001/mojo/android/java...
mojo/android/javatests/src/org/chromium/mojo/system/impl/CoreImplTest.java:438:
private static void checkSharing(SharedBufferHandle in, SharedBufferHandle out)
{
On 2014/06/19 12:02:44, rmcilroy wrote:
> nit - move this method up below checkSendingData

Done.

[qsr, 2014-06-25 12:19:23]

gentle ping?

[rmcilroy, 2014-06-25 16:55:55]

Sorry didn't realize you had renamed the methods.  Please update the CL
description and summary to incorporate rename and mention the change in tests.

lgtm

https://codereview.chromium.org/325953006/diff/40001/mojo/android/javatests/s...
File mojo/android/javatests/src/org/chromium/mojo/system/impl/CoreImplTest.java
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/325953006/diff/40001/mojo/android/javatests/s...
mojo/android/javatests/src/org/chromium/mojo/system/impl/CoreImplTest.java:795:
addHandleToClose(handleClone);
nit - add some comments / whitespace to clarify testing code and setup /
teardown code.

[viettrungluu, 2014-06-25 17:18:38]

Rubberstamp LGTM.

[qsr, 2014-06-26 09:37:45]

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/325953006/diff/40001/mojo/android/java...
File mojo/android/javatests/src/org/chromium/mojo/system/impl/CoreImplTest.java
(right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/325953006/diff/40001/mojo/android/java...
mojo/android/javatests/src/org/chromium/mojo/system/impl/CoreImplTest.java:795:
addHandleToClose(handleClone);
On 2014/06/25 16:55:55, rmcilroy wrote:
> nit - add some comments / whitespace to clarify testing code and setup /
> teardown code. 

Done.

[qsr, 2014-06-26 09:37:49]

The CQ bit was checked by qsr@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-06-26 09:38:29]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/qsr@chromium.org/325953006/60001

[qsr, 2014-06-26 10:35:30]

The CQ bit was checked by qsr@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-06-26 10:35:46]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/qsr@chromium.org/325953006/80001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-06-27 02:53:48]

Change committed as 280215