bc3eebc722
This is a reland of 487f9a17e426fd14bb06b13e861071b3f15d119b Original change's description: > Reland "Refactor SCTP data channels to use DataChannelTransportInterface." > > Also clears SctpTransport before deleting JsepTransport. > > SctpTransport is ref-counted, but the underlying transport is deleted when > JsepTransport clears the rtp_dtls_transport. This results in crashes when > usrsctp attempts to send outgoing packets through a dangling pointer to the > underlying transport. > > Clearing SctpTransport before DtlsTransport removes the pointer to the > underlying transport before it becomes invalid. > > This fixes a crash in chromium's web platform tests (see > https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/1776711). > > Original change's description: > > Refactor SCTP data channels to use DataChannelTransportInterface. > > > > This change moves SctpTransport to be owned by JsepTransport, which now > > holds a DataChannelTransport implementation for SCTP when it is used for > > data channels. > > > > This simplifies negotiation and fallback to SCTP. Negotiation can now > > use a composite DataChannelTransport, just as negotiation for RTP uses a > > composite RTP transport. > > > > PeerConnection also has one fewer way it needs to manage data channels. > > It now handles SCTP and datagram- or media-transport-based data channels > > the same way. > > > > There are a few leaky abstractions left. For example, PeerConnection > > calls Start() on the SctpTransport at a particular point in negotiation, > > but does not need to call this for other transports. Similarly, PC > > exposes an interface to the SCTP transport directly to the user; there > > is no equivalent for other transports. > > Bug: webrtc:9719 > Change-Id: I64e94b88afb119fdbf5f22750f88c8a084d53937 > Reviewed-on: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/151981 > Reviewed-by: Benjamin Wright <benwright@webrtc.org> > Reviewed-by: Steve Anton <steveanton@webrtc.org> > Commit-Queue: Benjamin Wright <benwright@webrtc.org> > Commit-Queue: Bjorn Mellem <mellem@webrtc.org> > Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#29120} Bug: webrtc:9719 Change-Id: I28481a3de64a3506bc57748106383eeba4ef205c Reviewed-on: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/152740 Reviewed-by: Artem Titov <titovartem@webrtc.org> Reviewed-by: Benjamin Wright <benwright@webrtc.org> Reviewed-by: Seth Hampson <shampson@webrtc.org> Commit-Queue: Bjorn Mellem <mellem@webrtc.org> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#29290}
How to write code in the api/ directory
Mostly, just follow the regular style guide, but:
- Note that
api/code is not exempt from the “.hand.ccfiles come in pairs” rule, so if you declare something inapi/path/to/foo.h, it should be defined inapi/path/to/foo.cc. - Headers in
api/should, if possible, not#includeheaders outsideapi/. It’s not always possible to avoid this, but be aware that it adds to a small mountain of technical debt that we’re trying to shrink. .ccfiles inapi/, on the other hand, are free to#includeheaders outsideapi/.
That is, the preferred way for api/ code to access non-api/ code is to call
it from a .cc file, so that users of our API headers won’t transitively
#include non-public headers.
For headers in api/ that need to refer to non-public types, forward
declarations are often a lesser evil than including non-public header files. The
usual rules still apply, though.
.cc files in api/ should preferably be kept reasonably small. If a
substantial implementation is needed, consider putting it with our non-public
code, and just call it from the api/ .cc file.