Properly escape goma dir on windows

Properly escape goma dir on windows. Fixes errors in goma path.

BUG=394990
Committed: https://crrev.com/9d4ff75568bccbb9fe9ac1163a7ab4e7ba6bf5f5
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#295704}

[qyearsley, 2014-09-18 21:50:59]

qyearsley@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ qyearsley@chromium.org

[qyearsley, 2014-09-18 21:51:00]

Excellent! Maybe you could submit this CL (minus the print statements and change
to run-perf-test.cfg) as a fix to crbug.com/394990?

[sullivan, 2014-09-18 23:17:54]

Here is a successful try job using this patch:
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/win_8_perf_bisec...

IIUC, windows bisects have only been passing since we added goma support because
we usually grab prebuilt binaries instead of building.

There are a lot of possible bisect configs (all the different platforms, bisects
vs perf tryjobs, getting prebuilt binaries vs building locally vs using the
bisect_builder). Do we have a better way to test that a CL which fixes one
config does not break another besides submitting and watching the waterfall?

[sullivan, 2014-09-18 23:18:21]

This is ready for review.

[qyearsley, 2014-09-19 07:16:22]

This change LGTM; when I run `print
"C:\\b\\build\\goma".encode("string_escape")` in the interpreter, I get
"C:\\b\\build\\goma" as expected.

On 2014/09/18 23:17:54, sullivan wrote:
> IIUC, windows bisects have only been passing since we added goma support
because
> we usually grab prebuilt binaries instead of building.

Yes, I believe that's correct.

> There are a lot of possible bisect configs (all the different platforms,
bisects
> vs perf tryjobs, getting prebuilt binaries vs building locally vs using the
> bisect_builder). Do we have a better way to test that a CL which fixes one
> config does not break another besides submitting and watching the waterfall?

Good question. It would be hard to add unit tests which would test this; maybe
if it were easy to start try jobs with a lot of different "known good" config
files -- just put this into an issue at http://crbug.com/415890.

[sullivan, 2014-09-19 13:37:35]

The CQ bit was checked by sullivan@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-09-19 13:38:02]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/583793002/40001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-09-19 14:34:57]

Committed patchset #3 (id:40001) as 5d4d16a7711a8dd3f70f09c52cfd42d7c88f11e1

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-09-19 14:35:43]

Patchset 3 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/9d4ff75568bccbb9fe9ac1163a7ab4e7ba6bf5f5
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#295704}