Making BasicPortAllocator tests slightly less fragile.

Making BasicPortAllocator tests slightly less fragile.

Many of the tests follow a pattern of "wait for N candidates to be 
gathered, then (without waiting) assert that gathering is complete". But 
this only works if the "gathering complete" signal happens in the same
task as the last candidate being gathered, which isn't an API guarantee.
So the tests will be less fragile if they do the reverse: "wait for
gathering to be complete, then (without waiting) assert that N candidates
were gathered".

Also fixing some somewhat unrelated issues elsewhere. Like a test that
was supposed to be waiting for some period of time and ensuring no
additional candidates were gathered, but wasn't actually waiting at all.

BUG=None

Review-Url: https://codereview.webrtc.org/3018493002
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#19872}
Committed: https://webrtc.googlesource.com/src/+/7f1563facf231bf6498703ce34ef3040bb380a76

[Taylor Brandstetter, 2017-09-14 23:28:10]

Description was changed from

==========
Revert unneeded test changes.


Revert test changes.


Fixing rest of stuff.


Getting rid of junk.

BUG=
==========

to

==========
Making BasicPortAllocator tests slightly less fragile.

Many of the tests follow a pattern of "wait for N candidates to be 
gathered, then (without waiting) assert that gathering is complete". But 
this only works if the "gathering complete" signal happens in the same
task as the last candidate being gathered, which isn't an API guarantee.
So the tests will be less fragile if they do the reverse: "wait for
gathering to be complete, then (without waiting) assert that N candidates
were gathered".

Also fixing some somewhat unrelated issues elsewhere. Like a test that
was supposed to be waiting for some period of time and ensuring no
additional candidates were gathered, but wasn't actually waiting at all.

BUG=None
==========

[Taylor Brandstetter, 2017-09-14 23:32:54]

deadbeef@webrtc.org changed reviewers:
+ pthatcher@webrtc.org, zhihuang@webrtc.org

[Taylor Brandstetter, 2017-09-14 23:32:55]

PTAL Peter or Zhi

[Zhi Huang, 2017-09-15 05:51:47]

On 2017/09/14 23:32:55, Taylor Brandstetter wrote:
> PTAL Peter or Zhi

lgtm.

[Taylor Brandstetter, 2017-09-15 23:00:29]

The CQ bit was checked by deadbeef@webrtc.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-09-15 23:00:35]

CQ is trying da patch.

Follow status at:
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.webrtc.org/...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-09-15 23:03:04]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-09-15 23:03:06]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  ios_arm64_dbg on master.tryserver.webrtc (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.webrtc/builders/ios_arm64_dbg/builds/24089)

[Taylor Brandstetter, 2017-09-16 00:10:02]

The CQ bit was checked by deadbeef@webrtc.org

[Taylor Brandstetter, 2017-09-16 00:10:02]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from zhihuang@webrtc.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.webrtc.org/3018493002/#ps60001 (title:
"Rebase onto master")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-09-16 00:10:05]

CQ is trying da patch.

Follow status at:
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.webrtc.org/...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-09-16 00:40:02]

CQ is committing da patch.

Bot data: {"patchset_id": 60001, "attempt_start_ts": 1505520602263830,
"parent_rev": "930021d465cc1bcf7e14fd56fdbbe463a38f7678", "commit_rev":
"7f1563facf231bf6498703ce34ef3040bb380a76"}

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-09-16 00:40:06]

Description was changed from

==========
Making BasicPortAllocator tests slightly less fragile.

Many of the tests follow a pattern of "wait for N candidates to be 
gathered, then (without waiting) assert that gathering is complete". But 
this only works if the "gathering complete" signal happens in the same
task as the last candidate being gathered, which isn't an API guarantee.
So the tests will be less fragile if they do the reverse: "wait for
gathering to be complete, then (without waiting) assert that N candidates
were gathered".

Also fixing some somewhat unrelated issues elsewhere. Like a test that
was supposed to be waiting for some period of time and ensuring no
additional candidates were gathered, but wasn't actually waiting at all.

BUG=None
==========

to

==========
Making BasicPortAllocator tests slightly less fragile.

Many of the tests follow a pattern of "wait for N candidates to be 
gathered, then (without waiting) assert that gathering is complete". But 
this only works if the "gathering complete" signal happens in the same
task as the last candidate being gathered, which isn't an API guarantee.
So the tests will be less fragile if they do the reverse: "wait for
gathering to be complete, then (without waiting) assert that N candidates
were gathered".

Also fixing some somewhat unrelated issues elsewhere. Like a test that
was supposed to be waiting for some period of time and ensuring no
additional candidates were gathered, but wasn't actually waiting at all.

BUG=None

Review-Url: https://codereview.webrtc.org/3018493002
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#19872}
Committed:
https://webrtc.googlesource.com/src/+/7f1563facf231bf6498703ce34ef3040bb380a76
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2017-09-16 00:40:07]

Committed patchset #4 (id:60001) as
https://webrtc.googlesource.com/src/+/7f1563facf231bf6498703ce34ef3040bb380a76