Disables camera hardware dependent tests.

Disables camera hardware dependent tests.
Also increase the time the test is allowed to wait for a video frame. 

TEST= 
BUG=94134
Committed: http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=98691

[perkj_chrome, 2011-08-26 13:13:03]

Can you please review?

[Ami GONE FROM CHROMIUM, 2011-08-26 15:27:57]

LGTM
Add a TODO pointing to the crbug and describing *why* these tests are disabled?

[Paweł Hajdan Jr., 2011-08-26 21:56:18]

Drive-by with a testing comment.

http://codereview.chromium.org/7757002/diff/1/media/video/capture/video_captu...
File media/video/capture/video_capture_device_unittest.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/7757002/diff/1/media/video/capture/video_captu...
media/video/capture/video_capture_device_unittest.cc:19: const int kWaitTime =
5000;
Why not base/test/test_timeouts?

[perkj_chrome, 2011-08-29 11:34:14]

Fixed comments. 
Scherkus, ready to commit? 

Thanks
Per

http://codereview.chromium.org/7757002/diff/1/media/video/capture/video_captu...
File media/video/capture/video_capture_device_unittest.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/7757002/diff/1/media/video/capture/video_captu...
media/video/capture/video_capture_device_unittest.cc:19: const int kWaitTime =
5000;
On 2011/08/26 21:56:18, Paweł Hajdan Jr. wrote:
> Why not base/test/test_timeouts?

Done.

[scherkus (not reviewing), 2011-08-29 16:22:27]

nits on comments but LGTM!

thanks!

http://codereview.chromium.org/7757002/diff/8001/media/video/capture/video_ca...
File media/video/capture/video_capture_device_unittest.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/7757002/diff/8001/media/video/capture/video_ca...
media/video/capture/video_capture_device_unittest.cc:74: // Also we don't want
to run the test on try-bots since there is no camera
nit: these comments about not running on try bots aren't needed (they're handled
by the check for names_.size())

http://codereview.chromium.org/7757002/diff/8001/media/video/capture/video_ca...
media/video/capture/video_capture_device_unittest.cc:78: // Make sure there are
more than 0 cameras.
other tests have this comment removed -- want to follow suit?

http://codereview.chromium.org/7757002/diff/8001/media/video/capture/video_ca...
media/video/capture/video_capture_device_unittest.cc:110: // Make sure there are
more than 0 cameras.
ditto on both comments

http://codereview.chromium.org/7757002/diff/8001/media/video/capture/video_ca...
media/video/capture/video_capture_device_unittest.cc:140: // Also we don't want
to run the test on try-bots since there is no camera
ditto

http://codereview.chromium.org/7757002/diff/8001/media/video/capture/video_ca...
media/video/capture/video_capture_device_unittest.cc:171: // Also we don't want
to run the test on try-bots since there is no camera
ditto

http://codereview.chromium.org/7757002/diff/8001/media/video/capture/video_ca...
media/video/capture/video_capture_device_unittest.cc:197: // available.
ditto

http://codereview.chromium.org/7757002/diff/8001/media/video/capture/video_ca...
media/video/capture/video_capture_device_unittest.cc:233: // available.
ditto

[perkj_chrome, 2011-08-29 16:50:22]

http://codereview.chromium.org/7757002/diff/8001/media/video/capture/video_ca...
File media/video/capture/video_capture_device_unittest.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/7757002/diff/8001/media/video/capture/video_ca...
media/video/capture/video_capture_device_unittest.cc:74: // Also we don't want
to run the test on try-bots since there is no camera
On 2011/08/29 16:22:28, scherkus wrote:
> nit: these comments about not running on try bots aren't needed (they're
handled
> by the check for names_.size())

Done.

http://codereview.chromium.org/7757002/diff/8001/media/video/capture/video_ca...
media/video/capture/video_capture_device_unittest.cc:78: // Make sure there are
more than 0 cameras.
On 2011/08/29 16:22:28, scherkus wrote:
> other tests have this comment removed -- want to follow suit?

Done.

http://codereview.chromium.org/7757002/diff/8001/media/video/capture/video_ca...
media/video/capture/video_capture_device_unittest.cc:110: // Make sure there are
more than 0 cameras.
On 2011/08/29 16:22:28, scherkus wrote:
> ditto on both comments

Done.

http://codereview.chromium.org/7757002/diff/8001/media/video/capture/video_ca...
media/video/capture/video_capture_device_unittest.cc:140: // Also we don't want
to run the test on try-bots since there is no camera
On 2011/08/29 16:22:28, scherkus wrote:
> ditto

Done.

http://codereview.chromium.org/7757002/diff/8001/media/video/capture/video_ca...
media/video/capture/video_capture_device_unittest.cc:171: // Also we don't want
to run the test on try-bots since there is no camera
On 2011/08/29 16:22:28, scherkus wrote:
> ditto

Done.

http://codereview.chromium.org/7757002/diff/8001/media/video/capture/video_ca...
media/video/capture/video_capture_device_unittest.cc:197: // available.
On 2011/08/29 16:22:28, scherkus wrote:
> ditto

Done.

http://codereview.chromium.org/7757002/diff/8001/media/video/capture/video_ca...
media/video/capture/video_capture_device_unittest.cc:233: // available.
On 2011/08/29 16:22:28, scherkus wrote:
> ditto

Done.

[Paweł Hajdan Jr., 2011-08-29 16:52:35]

Code I commented in the drive-by LGTM. Isn't action_max_timeout too long though?
Ideally you should use action_timeout.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2011-08-29 20:42:59]

Change committed as 98691

[perkj_chrome, 2011-08-30 07:48:49]

On 2011/08/29 16:52:35, Paweł Hajdan Jr. wrote:
> Code I commented in the drive-by LGTM. Isn't action_max_timeout too long
though?
> Ideally you should use action_timeout.

It was not enough. The test waits for the camera to provides its first frames.
It can take up to 4s with some cameras.