Chromium Code Reviews
chromiumcodereview-hr@appspot.gserviceaccount.com (chromiumcodereview-hr) | Please choose your nickname with Settings | Help | Chromium Project | Gerrit Changes | Sign out
(164)

Issues Search
    My Issues | Starred     Open | Closed | All

Unified Diff: sync/engine/apply_updates_command_unittest.cc

Issue 11190013: sync: Remove UpdateProgress and related code (Closed) Base URL: svn://svn.chromium.org/chrome/trunk/src
Patch Set: Formatting improvements Created 8 years, 2 months ago
Use n/p to move between diff chunks; N/P to move between comments. Draft comments are only viewable by you.
Jump to:
View side-by-side diff with in-line comments
Download patch
« no previous file with comments | « sync/engine/apply_updates_command.cc ('k') | sync/engine/process_updates_command.cc » ('j') | no next file with comments »
Expand Comments ('e') | Collapse Comments ('c') | Show Comments Hide Comments ('s')
Index: sync/engine/apply_updates_command_unittest.cc
diff --git a/sync/engine/apply_updates_command_unittest.cc b/sync/engine/apply_updates_command_unittest.cc
index 01ddd93e70e803d01fbb816a1a00c58f77384869..b261c1dcd32127c0e26511ff5f9b964692aa78bb 100644
--- a/sync/engine/apply_updates_command_unittest.cc
+++ b/sync/engine/apply_updates_command_unittest.cc
@@ -81,19 +81,14 @@ TEST_F(ApplyUpdatesCommandTest, Simple) {
ExpectGroupToChange(apply_updates_command_, GROUP_UI);
apply_updates_command_.ExecuteImpl(session());
- sessions::StatusController* status = session()->mutable_status_controller();
-
- EXPECT_EQ(0, status->num_simple_conflicts())
+ const sessions::StatusController& status = session()->status_controller();
+ EXPECT_EQ(0, status.num_simple_conflicts())
<< "Simple update shouldn't result in conflicts";
- EXPECT_EQ(0, status->num_encryption_conflicts())
+ EXPECT_EQ(0, status.num_encryption_conflicts())
<< "Simple update shouldn't result in conflicts";
- EXPECT_EQ(0, status->num_hierarchy_conflicts())
+ EXPECT_EQ(0, status.num_hierarchy_conflicts())
<< "Simple update shouldn't result in conflicts";
- sessions::ScopedModelSafeGroupRestriction r(status, GROUP_UI);
- ASSERT_TRUE(status->update_progress());
- EXPECT_EQ(2, status->update_progress()->AppliedUpdatesSize())
- << "All updates should have been attempted";
- EXPECT_EQ(2, status->update_progress()->SuccessfullyAppliedUpdateCount())
+ EXPECT_EQ(2, status.num_updates_applied())
<< "All items should have been successfully applied";
}
@@ -115,14 +110,10 @@ TEST_F(ApplyUpdatesCommandTest, UpdateWithChildrenBeforeParents) {
ExpectGroupToChange(apply_updates_command_, GROUP_UI);
apply_updates_command_.ExecuteImpl(session());
- sessions::StatusController* status = session()->mutable_status_controller();
- EXPECT_EQ(0, status->num_simple_conflicts())
+ const sessions::StatusController& status = session()->status_controller();
+ EXPECT_EQ(0, status.num_simple_conflicts())
<< "Simple update shouldn't result in conflicts, even if out-of-order";
- sessions::ScopedModelSafeGroupRestriction r(status, GROUP_UI);
- ASSERT_TRUE(status->update_progress());
- EXPECT_EQ(5, status->update_progress()->AppliedUpdatesSize())
- << "All updates should have been attempted";
- EXPECT_EQ(5, status->update_progress()->SuccessfullyAppliedUpdateCount())
+ EXPECT_EQ(5, status.num_updates_applied())
<< "All updates should have been successfully applied";
}
@@ -136,8 +127,8 @@ TEST_F(ApplyUpdatesCommandTest, SimpleConflict) {
ExpectGroupToChange(apply_updates_command_, GROUP_UI);
apply_updates_command_.ExecuteImpl(session());
- sessions::StatusController* status = session()->mutable_status_controller();
- EXPECT_EQ(1, status->num_simple_conflicts())
+ const sessions::StatusController& status = session()->status_controller();
+ EXPECT_EQ(1, status.num_simple_conflicts())
<< "Unsynced and unapplied item should be a simple conflict";
}
@@ -164,15 +155,12 @@ TEST_F(ApplyUpdatesCommandTest, HierarchyAndSimpleConflict) {
ExpectGroupToChange(apply_updates_command_, GROUP_UI);
apply_updates_command_.ExecuteImpl(session());
- sessions::StatusController* status = session()->mutable_status_controller();
+ const sessions::StatusController& status = session()->status_controller();
// An update that is both a simple conflict and a hierarchy conflict should be
// treated as a hierarchy conflict.
- EXPECT_EQ(1, status->num_hierarchy_conflicts());
- EXPECT_EQ(0, status->num_simple_conflicts());
-
- sessions::ScopedModelSafeGroupRestriction r(status, GROUP_UI);
- EXPECT_EQ(1, status->update_progress()->AppliedUpdatesSize());
+ EXPECT_EQ(1, status.num_hierarchy_conflicts());
+ EXPECT_EQ(0, status.num_simple_conflicts());
}
@@ -210,14 +198,11 @@ TEST_F(ApplyUpdatesCommandTest, HierarchyConflictDirectoryLoop) {
ExpectGroupToChange(apply_updates_command_, GROUP_UI);
apply_updates_command_.ExecuteImpl(session());
- sessions::StatusController* status = session()->mutable_status_controller();
+ const sessions::StatusController& status = session()->status_controller();
// This should count as a hierarchy conflict.
- EXPECT_EQ(1, status->num_hierarchy_conflicts());
- EXPECT_EQ(0, status->num_simple_conflicts());
-
- sessions::ScopedModelSafeGroupRestriction r(status, GROUP_UI);
- EXPECT_EQ(1, status->update_progress()->AppliedUpdatesSize());
+ EXPECT_EQ(1, status.num_hierarchy_conflicts());
+ EXPECT_EQ(0, status.num_simple_conflicts());
}
// Runs the ApplyUpdatesCommand on a directory where the server sent us an
@@ -247,9 +232,9 @@ TEST_F(ApplyUpdatesCommandTest, HierarchyConflictDeletedParent) {
ExpectGroupToChange(apply_updates_command_, GROUP_UI);
apply_updates_command_.ExecuteImpl(session());
- sessions::StatusController* status = session()->mutable_status_controller();
- EXPECT_EQ(1, status->num_hierarchy_conflicts());
- EXPECT_EQ(0, status->num_simple_conflicts());
+ const sessions::StatusController& status = session()->status_controller();
+ EXPECT_EQ(1, status.num_hierarchy_conflicts());
+ EXPECT_EQ(0, status.num_simple_conflicts());
}
// Runs the ApplyUpdatesCommand on a directory where the server is trying to
@@ -285,10 +270,10 @@ TEST_F(ApplyUpdatesCommandTest, HierarchyConflictDeleteNonEmptyDirectory) {
ExpectGroupToChange(apply_updates_command_, GROUP_UI);
apply_updates_command_.ExecuteImpl(session());
- sessions::StatusController* status = session()->mutable_status_controller();
+ const sessions::StatusController& status = session()->status_controller();
// This should count as a hierarchy conflict.
- EXPECT_EQ(1, status->num_hierarchy_conflicts());
- EXPECT_EQ(0, status->num_simple_conflicts());
+ EXPECT_EQ(1, status.num_hierarchy_conflicts());
+ EXPECT_EQ(0, status.num_simple_conflicts());
}
// Runs the ApplyUpdatesCommand on a server-created item that has a locally
@@ -304,19 +289,13 @@ TEST_F(ApplyUpdatesCommandTest, HierarchyConflictUnknownParent) {
ExpectGroupToChange(apply_updates_command_, GROUP_UI);
apply_updates_command_.ExecuteImpl(session());
- sessions::StatusController* status = session()->mutable_status_controller();
-
- EXPECT_EQ(0, status->num_simple_conflicts())
+ const sessions::StatusController& status = session()->status_controller();
+ EXPECT_EQ(0, status.num_simple_conflicts())
<< "Updates with unknown parent should not be treated as 'simple'"
<< " conflicts";
- EXPECT_EQ(2, status->num_hierarchy_conflicts())
+ EXPECT_EQ(2, status.num_hierarchy_conflicts())
<< "All updates with an unknown ancestors should be in conflict";
-
- sessions::ScopedModelSafeGroupRestriction r(status, GROUP_UI);
- ASSERT_TRUE(status->update_progress());
- EXPECT_EQ(2, status->update_progress()->AppliedUpdatesSize())
- << "All updates should have been attempted";
- EXPECT_EQ(0, status->update_progress()->SuccessfullyAppliedUpdateCount())
+ EXPECT_EQ(0, status.num_updates_applied())
<< "No item with an unknown ancestor should be applied";
}
@@ -339,16 +318,10 @@ TEST_F(ApplyUpdatesCommandTest, ItemsBothKnownAndUnknown) {
ExpectGroupToChange(apply_updates_command_, GROUP_UI);
apply_updates_command_.ExecuteImpl(session());
- sessions::StatusController* status = session()->mutable_status_controller();
-
- EXPECT_EQ(2, status->num_hierarchy_conflicts())
+ const sessions::StatusController& status = session()->status_controller();
+ EXPECT_EQ(2, status.num_hierarchy_conflicts())
<< "The updates with unknown ancestors should be in conflict";
-
- sessions::ScopedModelSafeGroupRestriction r(status, GROUP_UI);
- ASSERT_TRUE(status->update_progress());
- EXPECT_EQ(6, status->update_progress()->AppliedUpdatesSize())
- << "All updates should have been attempted";
- EXPECT_EQ(4, status->update_progress()->SuccessfullyAppliedUpdateCount())
+ EXPECT_EQ(4, status.num_updates_applied())
<< "The updates with known ancestors should be successfully applied";
}
@@ -376,16 +349,10 @@ TEST_F(ApplyUpdatesCommandTest, DecryptablePassword) {
ExpectGroupToChange(apply_updates_command_, GROUP_PASSWORD);
apply_updates_command_.ExecuteImpl(session());
- sessions::StatusController* status = session()->mutable_status_controller();
-
- EXPECT_EQ(0, status->num_simple_conflicts())
+ const sessions::StatusController& status = session()->status_controller();
+ EXPECT_EQ(0, status.num_simple_conflicts())
<< "No update should be in conflict because they're all decryptable";
-
- sessions::ScopedModelSafeGroupRestriction r(status, GROUP_PASSWORD);
- ASSERT_TRUE(status->update_progress());
- EXPECT_EQ(1, status->update_progress()->AppliedUpdatesSize())
- << "All updates should have been attempted";
- EXPECT_EQ(1, status->update_progress()->SuccessfullyAppliedUpdateCount())
+ EXPECT_EQ(1, status.num_updates_applied())
<< "The updates that can be decrypted should be applied";
}
@@ -405,30 +372,16 @@ TEST_F(ApplyUpdatesCommandTest, UndecryptableData) {
ExpectGroupsToChange(apply_updates_command_, GROUP_UI, GROUP_PASSWORD);
apply_updates_command_.ExecuteImpl(session());
- sessions::StatusController* status = session()->mutable_status_controller();
- EXPECT_TRUE(status->HasConflictingUpdates())
- << "Updates that can't be decrypted should trigger the syncer to have "
- << "conflicting updates.";
- EXPECT_EQ(0, status->num_simple_conflicts())
+ const sessions::StatusController& status = session()->status_controller();
+ EXPECT_TRUE(status.HasConflictingUpdates())
+ << "Updates that can't be decrypted should trigger the syncer to have "
+ << "conflicting updates.";
+ EXPECT_EQ(0, status.num_simple_conflicts())
<< "Updates that can't be decrypted should not be in regular conflict";
- EXPECT_EQ(3, status->num_encryption_conflicts())
+ EXPECT_EQ(3, status.num_encryption_conflicts())
<< "Updates that can't be decrypted should be in encryption conflict";
- {
- sessions::ScopedModelSafeGroupRestriction r(status, GROUP_UI);
- ASSERT_TRUE(status->update_progress());
- EXPECT_EQ(2, status->update_progress()->AppliedUpdatesSize())
- << "All updates should have been attempted";
- EXPECT_EQ(0, status->update_progress()->SuccessfullyAppliedUpdateCount())
- << "No update that can't be decrypted should be applied";
- }
- {
- sessions::ScopedModelSafeGroupRestriction r(status, GROUP_PASSWORD);
- ASSERT_TRUE(status->update_progress());
- EXPECT_EQ(1, status->update_progress()->AppliedUpdatesSize())
- << "All updates should have been attempted";
- EXPECT_EQ(0, status->update_progress()->SuccessfullyAppliedUpdateCount())
- << "No update that can't be decrypted should be applied";
- }
+ EXPECT_EQ(0, status.num_updates_applied())
+ << "No update that can't be decrypted should be applied";
}
TEST_F(ApplyUpdatesCommandTest, SomeUndecryptablePassword) {
@@ -468,25 +421,18 @@ TEST_F(ApplyUpdatesCommandTest, SomeUndecryptablePassword) {
ExpectGroupToChange(apply_updates_command_, GROUP_PASSWORD);
apply_updates_command_.ExecuteImpl(session());
- sessions::StatusController* status = session()->mutable_status_controller();
- EXPECT_TRUE(status->HasConflictingUpdates())
- << "Updates that can't be decrypted should trigger the syncer to have "
- << "conflicting updates.";
- {
- EXPECT_EQ(0, status->num_simple_conflicts())
- << "The updates that can't be decrypted should not be in regular "
- << "conflict";
- EXPECT_EQ(1, status->num_encryption_conflicts())
- << "The updates that can't be decrypted should be in encryption "
- << "conflict";
-
- sessions::ScopedModelSafeGroupRestriction r(status, GROUP_PASSWORD);
- ASSERT_TRUE(status->update_progress());
- EXPECT_EQ(2, status->update_progress()->AppliedUpdatesSize())
- << "All updates should have been attempted";
- EXPECT_EQ(1, status->update_progress()->SuccessfullyAppliedUpdateCount())
- << "The undecryptable password update shouldn't be applied";
- }
+ const sessions::StatusController& status = session()->status_controller();
+ EXPECT_TRUE(status.HasConflictingUpdates())
+ << "Updates that can't be decrypted should trigger the syncer to have "
+ << "conflicting updates.";
+ EXPECT_EQ(0, status.num_simple_conflicts())
+ << "The updates that can't be decrypted should not be in regular "
+ << "conflict";
+ EXPECT_EQ(1, status.num_encryption_conflicts())
+ << "The updates that can't be decrypted should be in encryption "
+ << "conflict";
+ EXPECT_EQ(1, status.num_updates_applied())
+ << "The undecryptable password update shouldn't be applied";
}
} // namespace syncer
« no previous file with comments | « sync/engine/apply_updates_command.cc ('k') | sync/engine/process_updates_command.cc » ('j') | no next file with comments »

Powered by Google App Engine
This is Rietveld 408576698