Convert remaining WebContentsObservers loading callbacks to use RFH.

Convert remaining WebContentsObservers loading callbacks to use RFH.

Fix several WebContentsObserver implementations that are incorrectly
caching only frame routing IDs in order to act only on that frame in
later callbacks. Frame routing IDs by themselves are not suitable for
identity comparisons, since they are only unique within a given
RenderProcessHost.

Also clean up WebContentsObservers with a redundant WebContents
field. By definition, a WebContentsObserver must know which
WebContents it's observing, so there's no need for derived classes
to maintain their own WebContents field.

BUG=none

Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=282043

[dcheng, 2014-07-07 07:42:29]

+jam for overall review.

+fsamuel for a closer look at web_guest_view changes
+nyquist for a closer look at dom_distiller changes

In all circumstances, I believe the new code is more correct than the original
code--frame routing IDs are only unique within a given RenderProcessHost. So
saving just the frame routing ID and comparing it later is a programming error.
This also leads me to wonder if we should rename RFH::GetRoutingID() to make it
clear that, alone, it is not suitable for identity comparisons.

[Fady Samuel, 2014-07-07 14:40:56]

web_view_guest lgtm

[nyquist, 2014-07-07 22:03:35]

dom_distiller lgtm. Thanks!

https://codereview.chromium.org/373623002/diff/80001/components/dom_distiller...
File components/dom_distiller/content/dom_distiller_viewer_source.cc (left):

https://codereview.chromium.org/373623002/diff/80001/components/dom_distiller...
components/dom_distiller/content/dom_distiller_viewer_source.cc:118: // Balanced
with constructor although can be a no-op if frame navigated away.
I wasn't aware that this was unnecessary. Thanks.

Feel free to remove the web_contents_ member field in
SelfDeletingRequestDelegate in chrome/browser/dom_distiller/tab_utils.cc and the
NULL-call to Observer in the destructor in this CL as well.

[Avi (use Gerrit), 2014-07-08 20:22:34]

FWIW, the content code LGTM. I remember discussions about not wanting to expose
RFH from content; whatever happened to that?

[dcheng, 2014-07-08 21:12:15]

The CQ bit was checked by dcheng@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-07-08 21:14:25]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/dcheng@chromium.org/373623002/80001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-07-08 21:21:22]

FYI, CQ is re-trying this CL (attempt #1).
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...)
  win8_chromium_rel on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/win8_chromium_rel/bui...)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-07-08 21:25:35]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-07-08 21:25:37]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  ios_rel_device_ninja on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/ios_rel_device_ninja/...)
  win8_chromium_rel on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/win8_chromium_rel/bui...)

[dcheng, 2014-07-08 21:38:03]

The CQ bit was checked by dcheng@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-07-08 21:40:33]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/dcheng@chromium.org/373623002/90001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-07-09 00:33:12]

FYI, CQ is re-trying this CL (attempt #1).
The failing builders are:
  chromium_presubmit on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/chromium_presubmit/bu...)
  linux_chromium_chromeos_clang_dbg on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/linux_chromium_chrome...)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-07-09 00:36:39]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-07-09 00:36:40]

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

[dcheng, 2014-07-09 01:16:27]

+thakis for OWNERS review of chrome/browser changes.

[Nico, 2014-07-09 01:24:54]

thakis is away

[jochen (gone - plz use gerrit), 2014-07-09 09:39:29]

lgtm

[dcheng, 2014-07-09 09:42:15]

The CQ bit was checked by dcheng@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-07-09 09:43:00]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/dcheng@chromium.org/373623002/110001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-07-09 13:48:59]

FYI, CQ is re-trying this CL (attempt #1).
The failing builders are:
  mac_chromium_rel on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/mac_chromium_rel/buil...)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-07-09 15:45:33]

Change committed as 282043