mac: Include <IOSurface/IOSurface.h> instead of <IOSurface/IOSurfaceAPI.h>

mac: Include <IOSurface/IOSurface.h> instead of <IOSurface/IOSurfaceAPI.h>

Mac Developer Library [1] notes "In general, you should not include this header
directly. Instead, include <IOSurface/IOSurface.h>."

[1] https://developer.apple.com/library/mac/documentation/Miscellaneous/Reference/IOSurfaceAPI_header_reference/#//apple_ref/c/tdef/IOSurfaceRef

Committed: https://crrev.com/961aa9d0f3604c637d1424b386334c6575af42cd
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#339728}

[dshwang, 2015-07-20 10:27:19]

dongseong.hwang@intel.com changed reviewers:
+ sievers@chromium.org

[dshwang, 2015-07-20 10:27:19]

hi sievers, could you review?

[no sievers, 2015-07-20 17:11:31]

sievers@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ ccameron@chromium.org

[no sievers, 2015-07-20 17:11:43]

+ccameron

[ccameron, 2015-07-20 17:20:27]

Seems reasonable. If it builds, lgtm.

[dshwang, 2015-07-20 17:27:11]

dongseong.hwang@intel.com changed reviewers:
+ stuartmorgan@chromium.org

[dshwang, 2015-07-20 17:27:11]

thx for reviewing.

sievers, could you review gpu/ and ui/gl?
stuartmorgan, could you review ui/surface?

[stuartmorgan, 2015-07-20 17:30:05]

What problem are you trying to solve here?

[dshwang, 2015-07-20 17:35:43]

On 2015/07/20 17:30:05, stuartmorgan wrote:
> What problem are you trying to solve here?

there is no bug. It's kind of cosmetic CL.
chromium uses <IOSurface/IOSurfaceAPI.h> header but Mac Developer Library
recommends to not use the header directly.

[stuartmorgan, 2015-07-20 18:08:14]

ui/surface/ LGTM I guess, but this seems like low-value churn if there's nothing
but a very softly-worded recommendation.

[dshwang, 2015-07-21 10:02:26]

On 2015/07/20 18:08:14, stuartmorgan wrote:
> ui/surface/ LGTM I guess, but this seems like low-value churn if there's
nothing
> but a very softly-worded recommendation.

indeed, but better than now. thx for reviewing.

sievers, could you review gpu/ and ui/gl?

[no sievers, 2015-07-21 18:38:42]

On 2015/07/21 10:02:26, dshwang wrote:
> On 2015/07/20 18:08:14, stuartmorgan wrote:
> > ui/surface/ LGTM I guess, but this seems like low-value churn if there's
> nothing
> > but a very softly-worded recommendation.
> 
> indeed, but better than now. thx for reviewing.
> 
> sievers, could you review gpu/ and ui/gl?

lgtm

[dshwang, 2015-07-21 18:52:30]

The CQ bit was checked by dongseong.hwang@intel.com

[dshwang, 2015-07-21 18:52:48]

On 2015/07/21 18:38:42, sievers wrote:
> On 2015/07/21 10:02:26, dshwang wrote:
> > On 2015/07/20 18:08:14, stuartmorgan wrote:
> > > ui/surface/ LGTM I guess, but this seems like low-value churn if there's
> > nothing
> > > but a very softly-worded recommendation.
> > 
> > indeed, but better than now. thx for reviewing.
> > 
> > sievers, could you review gpu/ and ui/gl?
> 
> lgtm

thx for reviewing!

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-07-21 18:53:23]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1227363005/1

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-07-21 20:12:21]

Committed patchset #1 (id:1)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-07-21 20:13:29]

Patchset 1 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/961aa9d0f3604c637d1424b386334c6575af42cd
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#339728}