Update encryption mechanism in libvpx

Update encryption mechanism in libvpx

"This allows code calling the library can choose an arbitrary
encryption algorithm."
https://gerrit.chromium.org/gerrit/#/c/58562/

Pull to update encryption:
https://codereview.chromium.org/17009012/

Pull to fix win64 warnings:
https://codereview.chromium.org/17451020/

Update README.chromium:
https://codereview.chromium.org/17493003/

Another win64 warning:
https://codereview.chromium.org/16835006/

README.chromium:
https://codereview.chromium.org/17267003/

Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=207944

[wwcv, 2013-06-20 00:21:31]

Waiting for the bots to come back clean so this can go in tomorrow morning. Any
chance I can get a provisional OK? I promise to only submit if the bots say it's
good.

[scherkus (not reviewing), 2013-06-20 00:24:30]

lgtm w/ CL description nit

future reference: try to have a single reviewer for these rolls -- having 5
reviewers makes it confusing as to who should be doing the review

also, can we get the CL description beefed up to describe _why_ we're doing the
roll? is there some bug / feature that we want, or is this regular maintenance?

[wwcv, 2013-06-20 00:33:04]

On 2013/06/20 00:24:30, scherkus wrote:
> lgtm w/ CL description nit
> 
> future reference: try to have a single reviewer for these rolls -- having 5
> reviewers makes it confusing as to who should be doing the review
> 
> also, can we get the CL description beefed up to describe _why_ we're doing
the
> roll? is there some bug / feature that we want, or is this regular
maintenance?

Thanks. Sorry about the multiple reviewers. I should have put fgalligan and jpet
in CC.

[scherkus (not reviewing), 2013-06-20 00:38:54]

On 2013/06/20 00:33:04, wwcv wrote:
> On 2013/06/20 00:24:30, scherkus wrote:
> > lgtm w/ CL description nit
> > 
> > future reference: try to have a single reviewer for these rolls -- having 5
> > reviewers makes it confusing as to who should be doing the review
> > 
> > also, can we get the CL description beefed up to describe _why_ we're doing
> the
> > roll? is there some bug / feature that we want, or is this regular
> maintenance?
> 
> Thanks. Sorry about the multiple reviewers. I should have put fgalligan and
jpet
> in CC.

lgtm++!

[jpet1, 2013-06-20 16:12:10]

lgtm

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-06-21 17:09:11]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/johannkoenig@chromium.org/17470002/40001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-06-21 22:50:10]

Change committed as 207944