Revision 8f1ef70886a1443ccd9980448031c88a44c3faea authored by Ben Pastene on 13 April 2018, 17:03:33 UTC, committed by Chromium WPT Sync on 13 April 2018, 17:03:33 UTC
This reverts commit 7c3d1d13f940e88ef6706fd8b5c257a81d340ed9.

Reason for revert: WebviewLoginTest.Basic is still flaky on linux-chromeos-rel
https://ci.chromium.org/buildbot/chromium.chromiumos/linux-chromeos-rel/6886
https://ci.chromium.org/buildbot/chromium.chromiumos/linux-chromeos-rel/6887

Original change's description:
> Reland: Use PostTask to schedule cross-process postMessage forwarding.
>
> Changes from original attempt at https://crrev.com/c/999182:
> - fix flakiness in two additional ChromeOS login tests
> - fix CSP WPT tests to not depend on ordering between iframe's onload
>   and postMessage - see https://crbug.com/832319.
>
> Previously, we sent the IPC to forward a cross-process postMessage
> immediately.  This caused a behavioral difference from the
> same-process case where the postMessage is always scheduled.  Namely,
> in a scenario like this:
>
>   frame.postMessage(...);
>   doSomethingThatSendsIPCsToFrame(frame);
>
> the IPCs from JS following the postMessage would've been ordered
> incorrectly, causing |frame| to see their side effects after the
> postMessage dispatch in the cross-process case, whereas they would be
> seen before the postMessage dispatch in the same-process case.  One
> example of this is frame.focus(), and another is a frame element
> onload event (dispatched via FrameHostMsg_DispatchLoad) arriving after
> a postMessage dispatched from an inline script while the frame was
> still loading.
>
> To resolve these ordering concerns, this CL changes cross-process
> postMessage to do a PostTask on the sender side before sending the
> message to the browser process.  This improves the current state of
> the world, but does not yet achieve a perfect match for the IPC
> ordering in the same-process case - see discussion on the bug.
>
> Bug: 828529
> Change-Id: I62a627c501526d09900be4f5bd2c899acf4d1e07
> Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/999182
> Reviewed-by: Xiyuan Xia <xiyuan@chromium.org>
> Reviewed-by: Daniel Cheng <dcheng@chromium.org>
> Commit-Queue: Alex Moshchuk <alexmos@chromium.org>
> Cr-Original-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#550284}
> Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/1011287
> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#550621}

TBR=xiyuan@chromium.org,dcheng@chromium.org,alexmos@chromium.org

Change-Id: Ic0637a6038bed6e5334a26e1934bee81faad3b9e
No-Presubmit: true
No-Tree-Checks: true
No-Try: true
Bug: 828529
Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/1012138
Reviewed-by: Ben Pastene <bpastene@chromium.org>
Commit-Queue: Ben Pastene <bpastene@chromium.org>
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#550649}
1 parent 1e5a5fe
Raw File
RTCDataChannel-id.html
<!doctype html>
<meta charset=utf-8>
<title>RTCDataChannel id attribute</title>
<script src=/resources/testharness.js></script>
<script src=/resources/testharnessreport.js></script>
<script>
'use strict';

// This and the test below verify that after a description is set that
// negotiates the DTLS role used by SCTP, data channels with unset IDs
// have IDs set according to the rules in rtcweb-data-channel.
promise_test(test => {
  const pc = new RTCPeerConnection;
  const channel = pc.createDataChannel('');
  return pc.createOffer()
  .then(offer => pc.setLocalDescription(offer))
  .then(() => {
    // Turn our own offer SDP into valid answer SDP by setting the DTLS role to
    // "active".
    const answer = {
      type: "answer",
      sdp: pc.localDescription.sdp.replace("actpass", "active")
    };
    return pc.setRemoteDescription(answer);
  })
  .then(() => {
    // Since the remote description had an "active" DTLS role, we're the server
    // and should use odd data channel IDs, according to rtcweb-data-channel.
    assert_equals(channel.id % 2, 1, 'id');
    const another_channel = pc.createDataChannel('another');
    assert_equals(another_channel.id % 2, 1, 'id');
    assert_not_equals(channel.id, another_channel.id);
  })
}, "DTLS client uses odd data channel IDs");

promise_test(test => {
  const pc = new RTCPeerConnection;
  const channel = pc.createDataChannel('');
  return pc.createOffer()
  .then(offer => pc.setLocalDescription(offer))
  .then(() => {
    // Turn our own offer SDP into valid answer SDP by setting the DTLS role to
    // "passive".
    const answer = {
      type: "answer",
      sdp: pc.localDescription.sdp.replace("actpass", "passive")
    };
    return pc.setRemoteDescription(answer);
  })
  .then(() => {
    // Since the remote description had a "passive" DTLS role, we're the client
    // and should use even data channel IDs, according to rtcweb-data-channel.
    assert_equals(channel.id % 2, 0, 'id');
    const another_channel = pc.createDataChannel('another');
    assert_equals(another_channel.id % 2, 0, 'id');
    assert_not_equals(channel.id, another_channel.id);
  })
}, "DTLS server uses even data channel IDs");

</script>
back to top