Add interface implementations for WebVideoFrameImpl to give the exact video Format, textureId and t…

Add interface implementations for WebVideoFrameImpl to give the exact video Format, textureId and texture Target.

Signed-off-by: Jun Jiang <jun.a.jiang@intel.com>;

BUG=179754

[Jun Jiang, 2013-03-04 04:52:46]

This patch for http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=179754 is
expected to work together with that for
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111126 to improve texImage2D()
performance for HTML5VideoElement in WebGL.

[danakj, 2013-03-04 15:57:50]

https://codereview.chromium.org/12385073/diff/1/webkit/media/webvideoframe_im...
File webkit/media/webvideoframe_impl.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/12385073/diff/1/webkit/media/webvideoframe_im...
webkit/media/webvideoframe_impl.h:22: virtual WebKit::WebVideoFrame::Format
format() const;
Why can't you use the video_frame directly? This class is more or less slated
for deletion at some point.

[Ken Russell (switch to Gerrit), 2013-03-05 00:48:39]

https://codereview.chromium.org/12385073/diff/1/webkit/media/webvideoframe_im...
File webkit/media/webvideoframe_impl.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/12385073/diff/1/webkit/media/webvideoframe_im...
webkit/media/webvideoframe_impl.h:22: virtual WebKit::WebVideoFrame::Format
format() const;
On 2013/03/04 15:57:50, danakj wrote:
> Why can't you use the video_frame directly? This class is more or less slated
> for deletion at some point.

Is your suggestion to instead pass the WebVideoFrame* into a new method on
WebMediaPlayer to do the work?

[Jun Jiang, 2013-03-05 01:54:44]

On 2013/03/05 00:48:39, kbr wrote:
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/12385073/diff/1/webkit/media/webvideoframe_im...
> File webkit/media/webvideoframe_impl.h (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/12385073/diff/1/webkit/media/webvideoframe_im...
> webkit/media/webvideoframe_impl.h:22: virtual WebKit::WebVideoFrame::Format
> format() const;
> On 2013/03/04 15:57:50, danakj wrote:
> > Why can't you use the video_frame directly? This class is more or less
slated
> > for deletion at some point.
> 
> Is your suggestion to instead pass the WebVideoFrame* into a new method on
> WebMediaPlayer to do the work?

Hi, danakj and Kenneth. Thanks for your comments and suggestions. I think it is
better to add new APIs in WebMediaPlayer that uses video_frame directly and
drops use of WebVideoFrame.

[Jun Jiang, 2013-03-06 14:33:14]

In WebKit, media::VideoFrame is not accessible and WebVideoFrame would be
dropped in the future. The lifetime of VideoFrame is controlled either using a
scoped_refptr<media::VideoFrame> or in the WebMediaPlayerImp itself. The only
feasible method in WebKit is to let Chromium side to take charge of it.

I had make a mistake and a new code review is created at
https://codereview.chromium.org/12412007/. Please review
https://codereview.chromium.org/12412007/ instead.