Remove flags for Workers that violate multiple profile and storage isolation assumptions.

Remove flags for Workers that violate multiple profile and storage isolation assumptions.

These flags allow the user to have WebWorkers share renderer processes. Unforutnately
this sharing can cause WebWorkers from different Profiles or from different
StoragePartitons to be shared.  This violates state isolation boundaries so these
flags just don't work right anyways. Removing.

BUG=144549
Committed: http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=156738

[awong, 2012-09-11 21:30:16]

And now young commandline flags...you will die.

[michaeln, 2012-09-12 00:20:29]

LGTM (deleted code, hooray)

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10910207/diff/5001/content/worker/webs...
File content/worker/websharedworkerclient_proxy.cc (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10910207/diff/5001/content/worker/webs...
content/worker/websharedworkerclient_proxy.cc:198: // will exit the message loop
and subsequent ones won't be executed.
Should we comment on having to revisit this when somebody gets to supporting
multiple workers per process?

[awong, 2012-09-12 00:23:08]

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10910207/diff/5001/content/worker/webs...
File content/worker/websharedworkerclient_proxy.cc (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10910207/diff/5001/content/worker/webs...
content/worker/websharedworkerclient_proxy.cc:198: // will exit the message loop
and subsequent ones won't be executed.
On 2012/09/12 00:20:29, michaeln wrote:
> Should we comment on having to revisit this when somebody gets to supporting
> multiple workers per process?

I'm not sure it would get read.  My guess is that someone trying to add that
functionality would have to understand all this code anyways, and if they don't
end up readding it, then the comment becomes extra clutter.  Thus my inclination
is to not add it...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-09-12 23:51:52]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/ajwong@chromium.org/10910207/5001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-09-12 23:51:54]

Failed to apply patch for content/browser/worker_host/worker_service_impl.cc:
While running patch -p1 --forward --force;
patching file content/browser/worker_host/worker_service_impl.cc
Hunk #3 succeeded at 210 (offset 5 lines).
Hunk #4 FAILED at 272.
Hunk #5 succeeded at 306 (offset 8 lines).
1 out of 5 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file
content/browser/worker_host/worker_service_impl.cc.rej

[awong, 2012-09-14 00:40:49]

piman: git cl likes you for OWNERS :)

[piman, 2012-09-14 00:41:52]

lgtm

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-09-14 01:17:07]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/ajwong@chromium.org/10910207/3009

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-09-14 04:18:31]

Change committed as 156738