Currently, CoordinatedLayerTreeHostProxy manages the surface of UpdateAtlas, but all other resources are managed by LayerTreeRenderer. This patch matches the surface of UpdateAtlas to other resources.
Created attachment 183370 [details] Patch
CoordinatedLayerTreeHostProxy::m_surface is obstacle that TextureMapperScene handles all resources, so I move m_surface from CoordinatedLayerTreeHostProxy to LayerTreeRenderer.
noam: ping
Could noam review please?
Comment on attachment 183370 [details] Patch ... why is this needed? I think it makes sense for the web process to manage the lifestyle of update atlases.
(In reply to comment #5) > (From update of attachment 183370 [details]) > ... why is this needed? > I think it makes sense for the web process to manage the lifestyle of update atlases. web process still manage the lifecycle. It just moves surface map from CoordinatedLayerTreeHostProxy to LayerTreeRenderer, because other resources (e.g. ImageBacking, Canvas Surface, CoordinatedTiledBackingStore, etc.) belong to LayerTreeRenderer. On the other hands, I don't want CoordinatedLayerTreeHostProxy to have this kind of code because we will remain only enqueueCoordinatedOperation and commitCoordinatedCoperations in CoordinatedLayerTreeHostProxy.
Comment on attachment 183370 [details] Patch LGTM
(In reply to comment #6) > (In reply to comment #5) > > (From update of attachment 183370 [details] [details]) > > ... why is this needed? > > I think it makes sense for the web process to manage the lifestyle of update atlases. > > web process still manage the lifecycle. > It just moves surface map from CoordinatedLayerTreeHostProxy to LayerTreeRenderer, because other resources (e.g. ImageBacking, Canvas Surface, CoordinatedTiledBackingStore, etc.) belong to LayerTreeRenderer. > > On the other hands, I don't want CoordinatedLayerTreeHostProxy to have this kind of code because we will remain only enqueueCoordinatedOperation and commitCoordinatedCoperations in CoordinatedLayerTreeHostProxy. Right, I was misunderstanding the patch (haven't had coffee yet...)
(In reply to comment #8) > Right, I was misunderstanding the patch (haven't had coffee yet...) hehe :)
(In reply to comment #7) > (From update of attachment 183370 [details]) > LGTM benjaminp, could you take a look?
Comment on attachment 183370 [details] Patch I am okay with this and Noam reviewed.
Comment on attachment 183370 [details] Patch Clearing flags on attachment: 183370 Committed r141325: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/141325>
All reviewed patches have been landed. Closing bug.