Implement PushManager#hasPermission

chrome/browser/services/gcm/push_messaging_service_impl.cc

Index: chrome/browser/services/gcm/push_messaging_service_impl.cc
diff --git a/chrome/browser/services/gcm/push_messaging_service_impl.cc b/chrome/browser/services/gcm/push_messaging_service_impl.cc
index ec7b461420d340288fffabedf7ac30dc566b2b98..8b45e310b4641ca2cb84c9121dbd7a9207ebfed7 100644
--- a/chrome/browser/services/gcm/push_messaging_service_impl.cc
+++ b/chrome/browser/services/gcm/push_messaging_service_impl.cc
@@ -231,6 +231,44 @@ void PushMessagingServiceImpl::Register(
                  callback));
 }
 
+static PushPermissionStatus ToPushPermission(
+    ContentSetting setting) {
+  switch (setting) {
+    case CONTENT_SETTING_ALLOW:
+      return PushPermissionStatus::PushPermissionGranted;
+    case CONTENT_SETTING_BLOCK:
+      return PushPermissionStatus::PushPermissionDenied;
+    case CONTENT_SETTING_ASK:
+      return PushPermissionStatus::PushPermissionDefault;

[mlamouri (slow - plz ping), 2014/10/16 09:04:57]

Why isn't that named PushPermissionAsk?

[Miguel Garcia, 2014/10/16 13:50:26]

The API permission is defined as default. Since this enum comes from blink it
seems more reasonable to call it default. I don't feel too strongly about it
though.

+    default:

[mlamouri (slow - plz ping), 2014/10/16 09:04:57]

What about the other values? Shouldn't SESSION_ONLY be allowed? and DEFAULT?

[Miguel Garcia, 2014/10/16 13:50:26]

I rather keep it simple.
- Default does not mean anything in this context
- Session only exists in the enum but as far as I can see it is actually never
used for permissions as we understand them, they seem specific to cookies and
indexdb

https://cs.corp.google.com/#search/&sq=package:%5Eclankium$&q=SESSION_ONLY%20...

[mlamouri (slow - plz ping), 2014/10/17 09:30:56]

I would prefer to have SESSION_ONLY be respected and expose the permission as
granted in that case but if this is being mostly ignored by other users, I will
not insist ;)

This said, what about CONTENT_SETTING_DEFAULT? Shouldn't that be handled? Aren't
we going to reach NOTREACHED() if the value is DEFAULT?

+      NOTREACHED();
+      return PushPermissionStatus::PushPermissionDenied;
+  }
+}
+
+PushPermissionStatus PushMessagingServiceImpl::PermissionStatus(
+    const GURL& requesting_origin, int renderer_id, int render_frame_id) {
+  content::RenderFrameHost* render_frame_host =
+      content::RenderFrameHost::FromID(renderer_id, render_frame_id);
+
+  // The frame doesn't exist any more, or we received a bad frame id.
+  if (!render_frame_host)
+    return PushPermissionStatus::PushPermissionDenied;
+
+  content::WebContents* web_contents =
+      content::WebContents::FromRenderFrameHost(render_frame_host);
+
+  // The page doesn't exist any more or we got a bad render frame host.
+  if (!web_contents)
+    return PushPermissionStatus::PushPermissionDenied;
+
+  GURL embedder_origin = web_contents->GetLastCommittedURL().GetOrigin();
+  gcm::PushMessagingPermissionContext* permission_context =
+        gcm::PushMessagingPermissionContextFactory::GetForProfile(profile_);
+  return ToPushPermission(
+      permission_context->PermissionStatus(requesting_origin, embedder_origin));
+}
+
 void PushMessagingServiceImpl::RegisterEnd(
     const content::PushMessagingService::RegisterCallback& callback,
     const std::string& registration_id,