net: FileStream::Read/Write() to take IOBuffer* instead of char*

net: FileStream::Read/Write() to take IOBuffer* instead of char*

This will make it easier to use these functions.
    
BUG=72001
TEST=try bots


Committed: http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=122267

[satorux1, 2012-02-15 22:32:57]

jam@ for content changes
kinuko@ for webkit changes.

[willchan no longer on Chromium, 2012-02-15 23:24:00]

http://codereview.chromium.org/9402014/diff/9003/net/base/file_stream.h
File net/base/file_stream.h (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/9402014/diff/9003/net/base/file_stream.h#newco...
net/base/file_stream.h:111: virtual int ReadSync(char* buf, int buf_len);
How about the sync APIs? It seems pretty incongruous to do this =/ If you want
to keep it like this, how long will the incongruity last?

[satorux1, 2012-02-15 23:32:00]

http://codereview.chromium.org/9402014/diff/9003/net/base/file_stream.h
File net/base/file_stream.h (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/9402014/diff/9003/net/base/file_stream.h#newco...
net/base/file_stream.h:111: virtual int ReadSync(char* buf, int buf_len);
On 2012/02/15 23:24:00, willchan wrote:
> How about the sync APIs? It seems pretty incongruous to do this =/ If you want
> to keep it like this, how long will the incongruity last?

It's intentionally kept as char*. There is no good reason to use IOBuffer if
operations are synchronous, so char* would make more sense for synchronous read
and write.

[willchan no longer on Chromium, 2012-02-15 23:37:49]

LGTM

http://codereview.chromium.org/9402014/diff/9003/net/base/file_stream_win.cc
File net/base/file_stream_win.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/9402014/diff/9003/net/base/file_stream_win.cc#...
net/base/file_stream_win.cc:336: base::ThreadRestrictions::AssertIOAllowed();
Can this move up higher?

http://codereview.chromium.org/9402014/diff/9003/net/base/file_stream_win.cc#...
net/base/file_stream_win.cc:426: base::ThreadRestrictions::AssertIOAllowed();
This too.

[jam, 2012-02-16 00:07:05]

lgtm

[satorux1, 2012-02-16 00:11:57]

Turned out PAITest.* are failing. Now looking...

http://codereview.chromium.org/9402014/diff/9003/net/base/file_stream_win.cc
File net/base/file_stream_win.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/9402014/diff/9003/net/base/file_stream_win.cc#...
net/base/file_stream_win.cc:336: base::ThreadRestrictions::AssertIOAllowed();
On 2012/02/15 23:37:49, willchan wrote:
> Can this move up higher?

Done.

http://codereview.chromium.org/9402014/diff/9003/net/base/file_stream_win.cc#...
net/base/file_stream_win.cc:426: base::ThreadRestrictions::AssertIOAllowed();
On 2012/02/15 23:37:49, willchan wrote:
> This too.

Done.

[satorux1, 2012-02-16 01:47:04]

PAITest.* failures are now fixed. There was a subtle regression in
redirect_to_file_resource_handler.cc. Glad tests caught it.

[satorux1, 2012-02-16 03:13:12]

adding michaeln@. forgot kinuko was ooo.

[kinuko, 2012-02-16 04:42:13]

On 2012/02/16 03:13:12, satorux1 wrote:
> adding michaeln@. forgot kinuko was ooo.

webkit/fileapi lgtm

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-02-16 08:25:11]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/satorux@chromium.org/9402014/13006

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-02-16 09:59:21]

Change committed as 122267