aura/cros: Rename MessagePump{X => AuraX11} and move the atom cache into it.

aura/cros: Rename MessagePump{X => AuraX11}.

So rename the MessagePumpX, which is an aurax11 only class now to MessagePumpAuraX11 (which also simplifies the gyp files).

BUG=129075
TEST=none


Committed: http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=139421

[Elliot Glaysher, 2012-05-24 19:56:54]

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10441028/diff/1/base/base.gypi
File base/base.gypi (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10441028/diff/1/base/base.gypi#newcode489
base/base.gypi:489: 'sources!': [ 'message_pump_gtk.cc', ],
Can I safely delete this block too?

[sadrul, 2012-05-24 20:02:52]

One alternate solution could be to install aura::Env as a DestructionObserver to
the message-loop, and do a DeleteInstance from the callback (or clear all the
data).

[Daniel Erat, 2012-05-24 21:17:42]

I think I'm with Sadrul here in that I'd prefer for the cache to be separate if
it's not too difficult to do -- I wouldn't expect a message pump to be caching
an arbitrary set of atoms, and just doing that because it's hard to manage the
cache's lifetime feels gross.  I think that there are other
per-instance-of-the-X-server or -of-Aura resources that we cache (cursors?), so
this seems like something that we'll need to deal with anyway.

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10441028/diff/1/base/base.gypi
File base/base.gypi (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10441028/diff/1/base/base.gypi#newcode489
base/base.gypi:489: 'sources!': [ 'message_pump_gtk.cc', ],
On 2012/05/24 19:56:55, Elliot Glaysher wrote:
> Can I safely delete this block too?

Probably; does the linux_chromeos bot pass?

[Elliot Glaysher, 2012-05-24 21:56:24]

This patch is now purely about renaming message_loop_x,events_x. Changing the
cache implementation to not be a singleton will be pushed forward to another
patch.

[Daniel Erat, 2012-05-24 22:16:17]

lgtm

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-05-24 22:20:45]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/erg@chromium.org/10441028/7002

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-05-24 22:21:08]

Presubmit check for 10441028-7002 failed and returned exit status 1.

Running presubmit commit checks ...

** Presubmit ERRORS **
Missing LGTM from an OWNER for files in these directories:
    content/browser
    ui/aura
    content/common/gpu/media
    base
    ui/views

Presubmit checks took 2.7s to calculate.

Was the presubmit check useful? Please send feedback & hate mail to
maruel@chromium.org!

[sadrul, 2012-05-24 22:23:26]

LGTM (won't help with OWNERS though) :)

[Elliot Glaysher, 2012-05-24 22:25:27]

willchan: base
scherkus: media
sky: auras

[scherkus (not reviewing), 2012-05-24 22:26:42]

media lgtm

[sky, 2012-05-24 22:30:46]

LGTM

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-05-25 17:10:08]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/erg@chromium.org/10441028/2007

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-05-25 17:10:21]

Presubmit check for 10441028-2007 failed and returned exit status 1.

Running presubmit commit checks ...

** Presubmit ERRORS **
Missing LGTM from an OWNER for files in these directories:
    base

Presubmit checks took 2.1s to calculate.

[Elliot Glaysher, 2012-05-25 17:31:03]

+brettw for base review

[brettw, 2012-05-29 19:38:24]

lgtm

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-05-29 19:52:18]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/erg@chromium.org/10441028/10002

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-05-29 23:25:51]

Change committed as 139421