Bug 87436 - [chromium] Add a setForceRenderSurface to WebLayer for test/bench purpose
Summary: [chromium] Add a setForceRenderSurface to WebLayer for test/bench purpose
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: WebKit
Classification: Unclassified
Component: New Bugs (show other bugs)
Version: 528+ (Nightly build)
Hardware: Unspecified Unspecified
: P2 Normal
Assignee: Antoine Labour
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2012-05-24 15:51 PDT by Antoine Labour
Modified: 2012-05-24 18:02 PDT (History)
10 users (show)

See Also:

Attachments
Patch (12.42 KB, patch)
2012-05-24 15:52 PDT, Antoine Labour 		no flags Details | Formatted Diff | Diff
Patch for landing (12.28 KB, patch)
2012-05-24 16:28 PDT, Antoine Labour 		no flags Details | Formatted Diff | Diff
Show Obsolete (1) View All Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Antoine Labour 2012-05-24 15:51:52 PDT 
[chromium] Add a setForceRenderSurface to WebLayer for test/bench purpose
Comment 1 Antoine Labour 2012-05-24 15:52:48 PDT 
Created attachment 143910 [details]
Patch
Comment 2 WebKit Review Bot 2012-05-24 15:55:51 PDT 
Please wait for approval from abarth@webkit.org, dglazkov@chromium.org, fishd@chromium.org, jamesr@chromium.org or tkent@chromium.org before submitting, as this patch contains changes to the Chromium public API. See also https://trac.webkit.org/wiki/ChromiumWebKitAPI.
Comment 3 Dana Jansens 2012-05-24 15:56:29 PDT 
What about just using opacity != 1 with a child layer?
Comment 4 Antoine Labour 2012-05-24 16:00:29 PDT 
So that if we ever change the behavior of that (e.g. if this layer doesn't have content, and we only have a single child, we could bubble the opacity down), this still works. Also, changing opacity also means adding blending which has different perf characteristics.
It's really a "use a render surface, no questions asked" flag.
Comment 5 Dana Jansens 2012-05-24 16:05:42 PDT 
I do admit I've wanted this before :)
Comment 6 James Robinson 2012-05-24 16:07:02 PDT 
Comment on attachment 143910 [details]
Patch

View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=143910&action=review

Seems good but I'd drop the uncalled getters, personally.

> Source/Platform/chromium/public/WebLayer.h:130
> +    WEBKIT_EXPORT bool forceRenderSurface() const;

Why expose a getter? The caller should know if they've set this or not and if they care track it (I suspect many won't care).

Compulsively adding getters everywhere makes me feel a bit like writing I'm writing Java.
Comment 7 Antoine Labour 2012-05-24 16:28:50 PDT 
Created attachment 143919 [details]
Patch for landing
Comment 8 Antoine Labour 2012-05-24 16:30:51 PDT 
(In reply to comment #6)
> (From update of attachment 143910 [details])
> View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=143910&action=review
> 
> Seems good but I'd drop the uncalled getters, personally.
> 
> > Source/Platform/chromium/public/WebLayer.h:130
> > +    WEBKIT_EXPORT bool forceRenderSurface() const;
> 
> Why expose a getter? The caller should know if they've set this or not and if they care track it (I suspect many won't care).

I don't care either way. Removed

> Compulsively adding getters everywhere makes me feel a bit like writing I'm writing Java.

Nah, that must be because of the coding style ;)
Comment 9 WebKit Review Bot 2012-05-24 18:02:08 PDT 
Comment on attachment 143919 [details]
Patch for landing

Clearing flags on attachment: 143919

Committed r118454: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/118454>
Comment 10 WebKit Review Bot 2012-05-24 18:02:13 PDT 
All reviewed patches have been landed.  Closing bug.