Accept all the media profiles required by JSEP.

webrtc/pc/mediasession_unittest.cc

Index: webrtc/pc/mediasession_unittest.cc
diff --git a/webrtc/pc/mediasession_unittest.cc b/webrtc/pc/mediasession_unittest.cc
index 6ea7aeb8ab93f0b317e3b323acb88b9f39b15268..4d46dd7df7497289e6b29713084f76e11b0ec0a1 100644
--- a/webrtc/pc/mediasession_unittest.cc
+++ b/webrtc/pc/mediasession_unittest.cc
@@ -180,6 +180,11 @@ static const char kDataTrack1[] = "data_1";
 static const char kDataTrack2[] = "data_2";
 static const char kDataTrack3[] = "data_3";
 
+static const char* kMediaProtocols[] = {"RTP/AVP", "RTP/SAVP", "RTP/AVPF"};

[Taylor Brandstetter, 2016/04/12 21:50:05]

What about RTP/SAVPF?

[Zhi Huang, 2016/04/12 23:00:20]

I thought the RTP/SAVPF is the default protocol use which had been covered
already. But I agree that it will be better to test all the valid protocols. I
will add it.

+static const char* kMediaProtocolsDtls[] = {
+    "TCP/TLS/RTP/SAVPF", "TCP/TLS/RTP/SAVP", "UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVPF",
+    "UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVP"};
+
 static bool IsMediaContentOfType(const ContentInfo* content,
                                  MediaType media_type) {
   const MediaContentDescription* mdesc =
@@ -2391,3 +2396,85 @@ TEST_F(MediaSessionDescriptionFactoryTest,
   EXPECT_EQ("video_modified", video_content->name);
   EXPECT_EQ("data_modified", data_content->name);
 }
+
+class MediaProtocolTest : public ::testing::TestWithParam<const char*> {
+ public:
+  MediaProtocolTest() : f1_(&tdf1_), f2_(&tdf2_) {
+    f1_.set_audio_codecs(MAKE_VECTOR(kAudioCodecs1));
+    f1_.set_video_codecs(MAKE_VECTOR(kVideoCodecs1));
+    f1_.set_data_codecs(MAKE_VECTOR(kDataCodecs1));
+    f2_.set_audio_codecs(MAKE_VECTOR(kAudioCodecs2));
+    f2_.set_video_codecs(MAKE_VECTOR(kVideoCodecs2));
+    f2_.set_data_codecs(MAKE_VECTOR(kDataCodecs2));
+    f1_.set_secure(SEC_ENABLED);
+    f2_.set_secure(SEC_ENABLED);
+    tdf1_.set_certificate(rtc::RTCCertificate::Create(
+        rtc::scoped_ptr<rtc::SSLIdentity>(new rtc::FakeSSLIdentity("id1"))));
+    tdf2_.set_certificate(rtc::RTCCertificate::Create(
+        rtc::scoped_ptr<rtc::SSLIdentity>(new rtc::FakeSSLIdentity("id2"))));
+    tdf1_.set_secure(SEC_ENABLED);
+    tdf2_.set_secure(SEC_ENABLED);
+  }
+
+ protected:
+  MediaSessionDescriptionFactory f1_;
+  MediaSessionDescriptionFactory f2_;
+  TransportDescriptionFactory tdf1_;
+  TransportDescriptionFactory tdf2_;
+};
+
+TEST_P(MediaProtocolTest, TestAudioAcceptance) {
+  std::unique_ptr<SessionDescription> offer(
+      f1_.CreateOffer(MediaSessionOptions(), NULL));
+  ASSERT_TRUE(offer.get() != NULL);
+  static_cast<MediaContentDescription*>(offer.get()->contents()[0].description)
+      ->set_protocol(GetParam());
+  std::unique_ptr<SessionDescription> answer(
+      f2_.CreateAnswer(offer.get(), MediaSessionOptions(), NULL));
+  const ContentInfo* ac = answer->GetContentByName("audio");
+  const ContentInfo* vc = answer->GetContentByName("video");
+  ASSERT_TRUE(ac != NULL);
+  ASSERT_TRUE(vc == NULL);
+  EXPECT_FALSE(ac->rejected);  // the offer is accepted
+}
+
+TEST_P(MediaProtocolTest, TestVideoAcceptance) {

[Taylor Brandstetter, 2016/04/12 21:50:05]

I'd rename this to "TestAudioVideoAcceptance". And I think you can remove the
audio-only test; if a profile string is accepted for both audio and video, we
can probably assume it will be accepted for audio only.

+  MediaSessionOptions opts;
+  opts.recv_video = true;
+  std::unique_ptr<SessionDescription> offer(f1_.CreateOffer(opts, NULL));

[Taylor Brandstetter, 2016/04/12 21:50:05]

nit: replace "NULL" with C++11 "nullptr"

+  ASSERT_TRUE(offer.get() != NULL);
+  static_cast<MediaContentDescription*>(offer.get()->contents()[0].description)
+      ->set_protocol(GetParam());
+  std::unique_ptr<SessionDescription> answer(
+      f2_.CreateAnswer(offer.get(), opts, NULL));
+  const ContentInfo* ac = answer->GetContentByName("audio");
+  const ContentInfo* vc = answer->GetContentByName("video");
+  ASSERT_TRUE(ac != NULL);
+  ASSERT_TRUE(vc != NULL);
+  EXPECT_FALSE(ac->rejected);  // the offer is accepted
+  EXPECT_FALSE(vc->rejected);

[Taylor Brandstetter, 2016/04/12 21:50:05]

One extra useful check would be that the protocol string in the answer is the
same as the one in the offer. In other words, if the offer is "RTP/SAVP", the
answer is too, and it isn't "UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVPF".

+}
+
+TEST_P(MediaProtocolTest, TestDataAcceptance) {

[Taylor Brandstetter, 2016/04/12 21:50:05]

I'd suggest leaving a TODO to remove this test when we remove the code for RTP
data channels. Or just remove it now, since we don't officially support RTP data
channels any more anyway.

+  MediaSessionOptions opts;
+  opts.data_channel_type = cricket::DCT_RTP;
+  std::unique_ptr<SessionDescription> offer(f1_.CreateOffer(opts, NULL));
+  ASSERT_TRUE(offer.get() != NULL);
+  static_cast<MediaContentDescription*>(offer.get()->contents()[0].description)
+      ->set_protocol(GetParam());
+  std::unique_ptr<SessionDescription> answer(
+      f2_.CreateAnswer(offer.get(), opts, NULL));
+  const ContentInfo* ac = answer->GetContentByName("audio");
+  const ContentInfo* vc = answer->GetContentByName("data");
+  ASSERT_TRUE(ac != NULL);
+  ASSERT_TRUE(vc != NULL);
+  EXPECT_FALSE(ac->rejected);  // the offer is accepted
+  EXPECT_FALSE(vc->rejected);
+}
+
+INSTANTIATE_TEST_CASE_P(MediaProtocolPatternTest,
+                        MediaProtocolTest,
+                        ::testing::ValuesIn(kMediaProtocols));
+INSTANTIATE_TEST_CASE_P(MediaProtocolDtlsPatternTest,
+                        MediaProtocolTest,
+                        ::testing::ValuesIn(kMediaProtocolsDtls));