Mandoline: Merge Surfaces and Views apps

components/view_manager/surfaces/top_level_display_client.cc

Index: components/view_manager/surfaces/top_level_display_client.cc
diff --git a/components/view_manager/surfaces/top_level_display_client.cc b/components/view_manager/surfaces/top_level_display_client.cc
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..6f894df54453c80a4354f1fd21e5730a623fd93e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/components/view_manager/surfaces/top_level_display_client.cc
@@ -0,0 +1,120 @@
+// Copyright 2015 The Chromium Authors. All rights reserved.
+// Use of this source code is governed by a BSD-style license that can be
+// found in the LICENSE file.
+
+#include "components/view_manager/surfaces/top_level_display_client.h"
+
+#include "cc/output/compositor_frame.h"
+#include "cc/surfaces/display.h"
+#include "components/view_manager/gles2/gpu_state.h"
+#include "components/view_manager/surfaces/surfaces_context_provider.h"
+#include "components/view_manager/surfaces/surfaces_output_surface.h"
+#include "components/view_manager/surfaces/surfaces_scheduler.h"
+#include "components/view_manager/surfaces/surfaces_state.h"
+#include "mojo/converters/geometry/geometry_type_converters.h"
+#include "mojo/converters/surfaces/surfaces_type_converters.h"
+
+namespace surfaces {
+namespace {
+void CallCallback(const mojo::Closure& callback, cc::SurfaceDrawStatus status) {
+  callback.Run();
+}
+}
+
+TopLevelDisplayClient::TopLevelDisplayClient(
+    gfx::AcceleratedWidget widget,
+    const scoped_refptr<gles2::GpuState>& gpu_state,
+    const scoped_refptr<SurfacesState>& surfaces_state)
+    : gpu_state_(gpu_state),
+      surfaces_state_(surfaces_state),
+      factory_(surfaces_state->manager(), this),
+      cc_id_(static_cast<uint64_t>(surfaces_state->next_id_namespace()) << 32) {

[rjkroege, 2015/08/06 00:16:22]

this seems a tiny bit hacky. Aren't these the pairs of numbers a,b where a is
allocated by the ViewManager and b is allocated by the html viewer? If so,
wouldn't a struct { uint32, uint32 } be clearer?

[Fady Samuel, 2015/08/06 16:48:24]

Well, the display isn't created by html_viewer, because it's the top level
surface. Yes, I agree this is hacky. Can I make it better in another CL? :-)

+  factory_.Create(cc_id_);
+
+  display_.reset(new cc::Display(this, surfaces_state_->manager(), nullptr,
+                                 nullptr, cc::RendererSettings()));
+  surfaces_state_->scheduler()->AddDisplay(display_.get());
+
+  // TODO(brianderson): Reconcile with SurfacesScheduler crbug.com/476676
+  cc::DisplayScheduler* null_display_scheduler = nullptr;
+  display_->Initialize(
+      make_scoped_ptr(new surfaces::DirectOutputSurface(
+          new SurfacesContextProvider(this, widget, gpu_state))),
+      null_display_scheduler);
+
+  display_->Resize(last_submitted_frame_size_);
+
+  // TODO(fsamuel): Plumb the proper device scale factor.
+  display_->SetSurfaceId(cc_id_, 1.f /* device_scale_factor */);
+}
+
+void TopLevelDisplayClient::OnContextCreated() {
+}
+
+TopLevelDisplayClient::~TopLevelDisplayClient() {
+  if (display_) {
+    factory_.Destroy(cc_id_);
+    surfaces_state_->scheduler()->RemoveDisplay(display_.get());
+    // By deleting the object after display_ is reset, OutputSurfaceLost can
+    // know not to do anything (which would result in double delete).
+    delete display_.release();
+  }
+}
+
+void TopLevelDisplayClient::SubmitFrame(mojo::FramePtr frame,
+                                        const base::Closure& callback) {
+  DCHECK(pending_callback_.is_null());
+  pending_frame_ = frame.Pass();
+  pending_callback_ = callback;
+  if (display_)
+    Draw();
+}
+
+void TopLevelDisplayClient::Draw() {
+  gfx::Size frame_size =
+      pending_frame_->passes[0]->output_rect.To<gfx::Rect>().size();
+  last_submitted_frame_size_ = frame_size;
+  display_->Resize(frame_size);
+  factory_.SubmitFrame(cc_id_,
+                       pending_frame_.To<scoped_ptr<cc::CompositorFrame>>(),
+                       base::Bind(&CallCallback, pending_callback_));
+  pending_frame_.reset();
+  surfaces_state_->scheduler()->SetNeedsDraw();
+  pending_callback_.Reset();
+}
+
+void TopLevelDisplayClient::CommitVSyncParameters(base::TimeTicks timebase,
+                                                  base::TimeDelta interval) {
+}
+
+void TopLevelDisplayClient::OutputSurfaceLost() {
+  if (!display_)  // Shutdown case
+    return;
+
+  // If our OutputSurface is lost we can't draw until we get a new one. For now,
+  // destroy the display and create a new one when our ContextProvider provides
+  // a new one.
+  // TODO: This is more violent than necessary - we could simply remove this
+  // display from the scheduler's set and pass a new context in to the
+  // OutputSurface. It should be able to reinitialize properly.
+  surfaces_state_->scheduler()->RemoveDisplay(display_.get());
+  display_.reset();
+}
+
+void TopLevelDisplayClient::SetMemoryPolicy(
+    const cc::ManagedMemoryPolicy& policy) {
+}
+
+void TopLevelDisplayClient::OnVSyncParametersUpdated(int64_t timebase,
+                                                     int64_t interval) {
+  surfaces_state_->scheduler()->OnVSyncParametersUpdated(
+      base::TimeTicks::FromInternalValue(timebase),
+      base::TimeDelta::FromInternalValue(interval));
+}
+
+void TopLevelDisplayClient::ReturnResources(
+    const cc::ReturnedResourceArray& resources) {
+  // TODO(fsamuel): Implement this.

[rjkroege, 2015/08/06 00:16:22]

I presume that you are leaking resource if you close the PlatformWindow?

[Fady Samuel, 2015/08/06 16:48:24]

Probably. :-) I'm hoping to rework resource management stuff once Views and
Surfaces become more tightly coupled.

+}
+
+}  // namespace surfaces