Chromium Code Reviews
|
|
Chromium Code Reviews
Issue
1311013002:
[Ozone] Fix SingleOnTop issue by checking if the quad is clipped. (Closed)
|
Created:
5 years, 4 months ago by william.xie1 Modified:
5 years, 3 months ago Base URL:
https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src.git@master Target Ref:
refs/pending/heads/master Project:
chromium Visibility:
Public. |
Description[Ozone] Fix SingleOnTop issue by checking if the quad is clipped.
Video quad may be clipped.
We need to check that before use overlay
BUG=
CQ_INCLUDE_TRYBOTS=tryserver.blink:linux_blink_rel
Committed: https://crrev.com/34621bb4e4c471a4fe79f5de117b3584b97aabdd
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#347892}
Patch Set 1 #Patch Set 2 : Check if the quad is clipped before use overlay #
Total comments: 4
Patch Set 3 : #
Total comments: 3
Patch Set 4 : #
Total comments: 18
Patch Set 5 : #
Total comments: 7
Patch Set 6 : #Patch Set 7 : Rebase and add unit test #
Total comments: 8
Patch Set 8 : Allow clipped #
Total comments: 1
Patch Set 9 : #
Total comments: 1
Patch Set 10 : #Patch Set 11 : Rebase #
Messages
Total messages: 47 (9 generated)
william.xie@intel.com changed reviewers: + achaulk@chromium.org, alexst@chromium.org, danakj@chromium.org
PTAL
Hi Dana, Updated after the discussion, would you please take a look again?
https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/20001/cc/output/overlay_strat... File cc/output/overlay_strategy_single_on_top.cc (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/20001/cc/output/overlay_strat... cc/output/overlay_strategy_single_on_top.cc:33: if (draw_quad->shared_quad_state->visible_quad_layer_rect.size() != I don't think this is the right place to check for it. For example, this would work fine on MacOS. OverlayCandidate should already contain enough info in it to figure out this scenario (if not, we should add what's missing), and instead of rejecting it here,we need to reject it as part of line 58 capability_checker->CheckOverlaySupport(&candidates); Which on ChromeOS will go to https://code.google.com/p/chromium/codesearch#chromium/src/ui/ozone/platform/... and some place else on other platforms.
On 2015/08/27 12:42:36, alexst wrote: > https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/20001/cc/output/overlay_strat... > File cc/output/overlay_strategy_single_on_top.cc (right): > > https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/20001/cc/output/overlay_strat... > cc/output/overlay_strategy_single_on_top.cc:33: if > (draw_quad->shared_quad_state->visible_quad_layer_rect.size() != > I don't think this is the right place to check for it. For example, this would > work fine on MacOS. > > OverlayCandidate should already contain enough info in it to figure out this > scenario (if not, we should add what's missing), and instead of rejecting it > here,we need to reject it as part of line 58 > capability_checker->CheckOverlaySupport(&candidates); > > Which on ChromeOS will go to > > https://code.google.com/p/chromium/codesearch#chromium/src/ui/ozone/platform/... > > and some place else on other platforms. That's good idea, thanks Alex! Just as you pointed earlier, how about fill the cropped info into uv_rect of OverlayCandidate and reject it in DrmOverlayCandidatesHost::CheckSingleOverlay?
On 2015/08/27 13:35:49, william.xie wrote: > On 2015/08/27 12:42:36, alexst wrote: > > > https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/20001/cc/output/overlay_strat... > > File cc/output/overlay_strategy_single_on_top.cc (right): > > > > > https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/20001/cc/output/overlay_strat... > > cc/output/overlay_strategy_single_on_top.cc:33: if > > (draw_quad->shared_quad_state->visible_quad_layer_rect.size() != > > I don't think this is the right place to check for it. For example, this would > > work fine on MacOS. > > > > OverlayCandidate should already contain enough info in it to figure out this > > scenario (if not, we should add what's missing), and instead of rejecting it > > here,we need to reject it as part of line 58 > > capability_checker->CheckOverlaySupport(&candidates); > > > > Which on ChromeOS will go to > > > > > https://code.google.com/p/chromium/codesearch#chromium/src/ui/ozone/platform/... > > > > and some place else on other platforms. > > That's good idea, > thanks Alex! > > Just as you pointed earlier, how about fill the cropped info into uv_rect of > OverlayCandidate and reject it in DrmOverlayCandidatesHost::CheckSingleOverlay? Yeah, sounds good, we should fill in whatever information the compositor is using to paint the cropped version of the rect. Which it sounds like the visible area and proper UV coords.
https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/20001/cc/output/overlay_strat... File cc/output/overlay_strategy_single_on_top.cc (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/20001/cc/output/overlay_strat... cc/output/overlay_strategy_single_on_top.cc:34: draw_quad->shared_quad_state->quad_layer_bounds) Can you just use the draw_quad->shared_quad_state->is_clipped bool?
https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/20001/cc/output/overlay_strat... File cc/output/overlay_strategy_single_on_top.cc (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/20001/cc/output/overlay_strat... cc/output/overlay_strategy_single_on_top.cc:34: draw_quad->shared_quad_state->quad_layer_bounds) On 2015/08/27 17:37:54, danakj wrote: > Can you just use the draw_quad->shared_quad_state->is_clipped bool? Hi Dana, I tried it, but is_clipped was always true, it maybe used for other purpose?
PTAL
lgtm, thank you! Dana is an owner of these files, please wait for her to comment as well.
https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/40001/cc/output/overlay_candi... File cc/output/overlay_candidate.h (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/40001/cc/output/overlay_candi... cc/output/overlay_candidate.h:45: // Original visible area of the quad period at the end can you explain what you mean by original vs actual? original before what? actual is after what? I think these names may be misleading. One is the visible rect in the quad. One is the visible bounds of the layer the quad came from. They are not even in the same coordinate space, one is in layer space, one is in quad geometry space. https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/40001/cc/output/overlay_candi... cc/output/overlay_candidate.h:48: // Actual visible area of the quad ditto
https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/20001/cc/output/overlay_strat... File cc/output/overlay_strategy_single_on_top.cc (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/20001/cc/output/overlay_strat... cc/output/overlay_strategy_single_on_top.cc:34: draw_quad->shared_quad_state->quad_layer_bounds) On 2015/08/28 00:00:46, william.xie wrote: > On 2015/08/27 17:37:54, danakj wrote: > > Can you just use the draw_quad->shared_quad_state->is_clipped bool? > Hi Dana, I tried it, but is_clipped was always true, it maybe used for other > purpose? Ah, ok well even if it's always true, it won't always clip something. To determine if a quad is clipped the correct method would be to map the quad's |rect| with the quad_to_target_transform and verify if the clip_rect.Contains() that mapped rect. If not, then it will get clipped. And if is_clipped is false you don't need to do any of that.
https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/40001/cc/output/overlay_candi... File cc/output/overlay_candidate.h (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/40001/cc/output/overlay_candi... cc/output/overlay_candidate.h:45: // Original visible area of the quad On 2015/08/28 22:48:10, danakj wrote: > period at the end > > can you explain what you mean by original vs actual? original before what? > actual is after what? > > I think these names may be misleading. One is the visible rect in the quad. One > is the visible bounds of the layer the quad came from. They are not even in the > same coordinate space, one is in layer space, one is in quad geometry space. Hi Dana, Thanks for your comments. My previous meaning is, original means before composition, actual means after composition. From my testing, original rect doesn not change, it only reply on the page scaling factor. Actual rect will change to the actual visible rect if the quad is clipped. So it is workable by comparing these two rects to decide if quad is clipped. Do you agree on this? also, do you think we should find good names to describe these two rects?
PTAL
https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/60001/cc/output/overlay_candi... File cc/output/overlay_candidate.h (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/60001/cc/output/overlay_candi... cc/output/overlay_candidate.h:44: don't add whitespace between each one? the old fields don't have this https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/60001/cc/output/overlay_candi... cc/output/overlay_candidate.h:46: gfx::RectF geometry_rect; call this quad_rect_in_target_space? https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/60001/cc/output/overlay_candi... cc/output/overlay_candidate.h:46: gfx::RectF geometry_rect; can you make this a Rect https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/60001/cc/output/overlay_strat... File cc/output/overlay_strategy_common.cc (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/60001/cc/output/overlay_strat... cc/output/overlay_strategy_common.cc:103: quad.shared_quad_state->quad_to_target_transform.TransformRect( Please use MathUtil::MapEnclosingClippedRect instead https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/60001/ui/ozone/platform/drm/h... File ui/ozone/platform/drm/host/drm_overlay_candidates_host.cc (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/60001/ui/ozone/platform/drm/h... ui/ozone/platform/drm/host/drm_overlay_candidates_host.cc:82: if (!(overlay->is_clipped && this doesn't quite look right? you want to abort if the quad is clipped and the cliprect doesn't contain the geometry rect? that would be if is_clipped && !Contains? https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/60001/ui/ozone/platform/drm/h... ui/ozone/platform/drm/host/drm_overlay_candidates_host.cc:84: gfx::ToEnclosingRect(overlay->geometry_rect)))) if you make the geometry_rect a gfx::Rect you don't need the ToEnclosingRect here. https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/60001/ui/ozone/public/overlay... File ui/ozone/public/overlay_candidates_ozone.h (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/60001/ui/ozone/public/overlay... ui/ozone/public/overlay_candidates_ozone.h:39: gfx::RectF geometry_rect; Rect also
https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/60001/ui/ozone/platform/drm/h... File ui/ozone/platform/drm/host/drm_overlay_candidates_host.cc (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/60001/ui/ozone/platform/drm/h... ui/ozone/platform/drm/host/drm_overlay_candidates_host.cc:82: if (!(overlay->is_clipped && On 2015/08/31 22:11:47, danakj wrote: > this doesn't quite look right? > > you want to abort if the quad is clipped and the cliprect doesn't contain the > geometry rect? > > that would be if is_clipped && !Contains? btw, where are the unit tests for this? they would catch logic mistakes.
Update per Dana's comments, Would you please take a look at again? https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/60001/cc/output/overlay_candi... File cc/output/overlay_candidate.h (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/60001/cc/output/overlay_candi... cc/output/overlay_candidate.h:44: On 2015/08/31 22:11:47, danakj wrote: > don't add whitespace between each one? the old fields don't have this Done. https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/60001/cc/output/overlay_candi... cc/output/overlay_candidate.h:46: gfx::RectF geometry_rect; On 2015/08/31 22:11:47, danakj wrote: > call this quad_rect_in_target_space? Done. https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/60001/cc/output/overlay_strat... File cc/output/overlay_strategy_common.cc (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/60001/cc/output/overlay_strat... cc/output/overlay_strategy_common.cc:103: quad.shared_quad_state->quad_to_target_transform.TransformRect( On 2015/08/31 22:11:47, danakj wrote: > Please use MathUtil::MapEnclosingClippedRect instead Done. https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/60001/ui/ozone/platform/drm/h... File ui/ozone/platform/drm/host/drm_overlay_candidates_host.cc (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/60001/ui/ozone/platform/drm/h... ui/ozone/platform/drm/host/drm_overlay_candidates_host.cc:82: if (!(overlay->is_clipped && On 2015/08/31 22:11:47, danakj wrote: > this doesn't quite look right? > > you want to abort if the quad is clipped and the cliprect doesn't contain the > geometry rect? > > that would be if is_clipped && !Contains? Done. https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/60001/ui/ozone/platform/drm/h... ui/ozone/platform/drm/host/drm_overlay_candidates_host.cc:82: if (!(overlay->is_clipped && On 2015/08/31 22:11:47, danakj wrote: > this doesn't quite look right? > > you want to abort if the quad is clipped and the cliprect doesn't contain the > geometry rect? > > that would be if is_clipped && !Contains? Done. https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/60001/ui/ozone/platform/drm/h... ui/ozone/platform/drm/host/drm_overlay_candidates_host.cc:82: if (!(overlay->is_clipped && On 2015/08/31 22:24:36, danakj wrote: > On 2015/08/31 22:11:47, danakj wrote: > > this doesn't quite look right? > > > > you want to abort if the quad is clipped and the cliprect doesn't contain the > > geometry rect? > > > > that would be if is_clipped && !Contains? > > btw, where are the unit tests for this? they would catch logic mistakes. Done. https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/60001/ui/ozone/platform/drm/h... ui/ozone/platform/drm/host/drm_overlay_candidates_host.cc:84: gfx::ToEnclosingRect(overlay->geometry_rect)))) On 2015/08/31 22:11:47, danakj wrote: > if you make the geometry_rect a gfx::Rect you don't need the ToEnclosingRect > here. Done. https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/60001/ui/ozone/platform/drm/h... ui/ozone/platform/drm/host/drm_overlay_candidates_host.cc:84: gfx::ToEnclosingRect(overlay->geometry_rect)))) On 2015/08/31 22:11:47, danakj wrote: > if you make the geometry_rect a gfx::Rect you don't need the ToEnclosingRect > here. Done. https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/60001/ui/ozone/platform/drm/h... ui/ozone/platform/drm/host/drm_overlay_candidates_host.cc:84: gfx::ToEnclosingRect(overlay->geometry_rect)))) On 2015/08/31 22:11:47, danakj wrote: > if you make the geometry_rect a gfx::Rect you don't need the ToEnclosingRect > here. Done. https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/60001/ui/ozone/public/overlay... File ui/ozone/public/overlay_candidates_ozone.h (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/60001/ui/ozone/public/overlay... ui/ozone/public/overlay_candidates_ozone.h:39: gfx::RectF geometry_rect; On 2015/08/31 22:11:47, danakj wrote: > Rect also Done.
Patchset #5 (id:80001) has been deleted
https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/100001/cc/output/overlay_cand... File cc/output/overlay_candidate.h (left): https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/100001/cc/output/overlay_cand... cc/output/overlay_candidate.h:49: leave this https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/100001/cc/output/overlay_cand... File cc/output/overlay_candidate.h (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/100001/cc/output/overlay_cand... cc/output/overlay_candidate.h:49: bool is_clipped; you need to initialize this in the constructor https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/100001/cc/output/overlay_stra... File cc/output/overlay_strategy_common.cc (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/100001/cc/output/overlay_stra... cc/output/overlay_strategy_common.cc:72: bool OverlayStrategyCommon::GetTextureQuadInfo(const TextureDrawQuad& quad, How come only video quad needs the clipped stuff? https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/100001/ui/ozone/public/overla... File ui/ozone/public/overlay_candidates_ozone.h (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/100001/ui/ozone/public/overla... ui/ozone/public/overlay_candidates_ozone.h:43: bool is_clipped; initialize in the constructor
Thanks Dana. Would you please take a look again? https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/100001/cc/output/overlay_cand... File cc/output/overlay_candidate.h (left): https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/100001/cc/output/overlay_cand... cc/output/overlay_candidate.h:49: On 2015/09/01 20:35:24, danakj wrote: > leave this Done. https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/100001/cc/output/overlay_cand... File cc/output/overlay_candidate.h (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/100001/cc/output/overlay_cand... cc/output/overlay_candidate.h:49: bool is_clipped; On 2015/09/01 20:35:24, danakj wrote: > you need to initialize this in the constructor Done. https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/100001/ui/ozone/public/overla... File ui/ozone/public/overlay_candidates_ozone.h (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/100001/ui/ozone/public/overla... ui/ozone/public/overlay_candidates_ozone.h:43: bool is_clipped; On 2015/09/01 20:35:25, danakj wrote: > initialize in the constructor Done.
Thanks, looks good. Needs some tests.
Hi Dana, Rebased and added unit test case, Would you please take a look again?
PTAL
https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/140001/cc/output/overlay_unit... File cc/output/overlay_unittest.cc (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/140001/cc/output/overlay_unit... cc/output/overlay_unittest.cc:70: if (candidate.is_clipped && How come this is added here? https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/140001/cc/output/overlay_unit... cc/output/overlay_unittest.cc:755: TEST_F(SingleOverlayOnTopTest, RejectClipped) { Is this testing OverlayStrategyCommon or is it just testing the SingleOverlayValidator above? https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/140001/cc/output/overlay_unit... cc/output/overlay_unittest.cc:761: pass->shared_quad_state_list.back()->clip_rect = kOverlayClipRect; can you test the case where the clip rect exists but contains the overlay?
PTAL https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/140001/cc/output/overlay_unit... File cc/output/overlay_unittest.cc (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/140001/cc/output/overlay_unit... cc/output/overlay_unittest.cc:70: if (candidate.is_clipped && On 2015/09/02 21:50:21, danakj wrote: > How come this is added here? Hi Dana, cc_unittest uses its own OverlayCandidateValidator defined here, that's why I added the same logic as in DrmOverlayCandidatesHost. https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/140001/cc/output/overlay_unit... cc/output/overlay_unittest.cc:755: TEST_F(SingleOverlayOnTopTest, RejectClipped) { On 2015/09/02 21:50:21, danakj wrote: > Is this testing OverlayStrategyCommon or is it just testing the > SingleOverlayValidator above? It will test OverlayStrategyCommon because ProcessForOverlays will call into OverlayStrategyCommon, but the final decision is made by OverlayCandidateValidator. https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/140001/cc/output/overlay_unit... cc/output/overlay_unittest.cc:761: pass->shared_quad_state_list.back()->clip_rect = kOverlayClipRect; On 2015/09/02 21:50:21, danakj wrote: > can you test the case where the clip rect exists but contains the overlay? Done.
https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/140001/cc/output/overlay_unit... File cc/output/overlay_unittest.cc (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/140001/cc/output/overlay_unit... cc/output/overlay_unittest.cc:70: if (candidate.is_clipped && On 2015/09/02 22:04:49, william.xie wrote: > On 2015/09/02 21:50:21, danakj wrote: > > How come this is added here? > > Hi Dana, > cc_unittest uses its own OverlayCandidateValidator defined here, that's why I > added the same logic as in DrmOverlayCandidatesHost. How come all the other logic from there isn't replicated here?
https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/140001/cc/output/overlay_unit... File cc/output/overlay_unittest.cc (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/140001/cc/output/overlay_unit... cc/output/overlay_unittest.cc:755: TEST_F(SingleOverlayOnTopTest, RejectClipped) { On 2015/09/02 22:04:49, william.xie wrote: > On 2015/09/02 21:50:21, danakj wrote: > > Is this testing OverlayStrategyCommon or is it just testing the > > SingleOverlayValidator above? > > It will test OverlayStrategyCommon because ProcessForOverlays will call into > OverlayStrategyCommon, but the final decision is made by > OverlayCandidateValidator. OK I think I see.. there is no point in writing a test that is just checking test-only logic though. You could perhaps just use this test to verify that the candidates that come out have appropriate clipping info in them? There's no need to test accept/reject if that's just part of the test code. https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/160001/ui/ozone/platform/drm/... File ui/ozone/platform/drm/host/drm_overlay_candidates_host.cc (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/160001/ui/ozone/platform/drm/... ui/ozone/platform/drm/host/drm_overlay_candidates_host.cc:82: if (overlay->is_clipped && Where does this file get tested?
Hi Dana, I updated the unit test cae, PTAL, thank you!
Thanks that looks better. Still wondering though, how do we test ui/ozone/platform/drm/host/drm_overlay_candidates_host.cc ? https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/180001/cc/output/overlay_unit... File cc/output/overlay_unittest.cc (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/180001/cc/output/overlay_unit... cc/output/overlay_unittest.cc:81: if (candidate.is_clipped) can you also EXPECT that is_clipped is true for that test? Maybe you have to add a field to this class that says what it expects from is_clipped?
On 2015/09/04 18:00:39, danakj wrote: > Thanks that looks better. > > Still wondering though, how do we test > ui/ozone/platform/drm/host/drm_overlay_candidates_host.cc ? > > https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/180001/cc/output/overlay_unit... > File cc/output/overlay_unittest.cc (right): > > https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/diff/180001/cc/output/overlay_unit... > cc/output/overlay_unittest.cc:81: if (candidate.is_clipped) > can you also EXPECT that is_clipped is true for that test? > > Maybe you have to add a field to this class that says what it expects from > is_clipped? 2 channels of communication :) I touched on this in my e-mail. This is meant to ultimately go into the driver for validation, so both clip and no clip are valid, and testing acceptance or rejection is Chrome doesn't really make sense.
Hi Dana, Updated test case, how about it? PTAL.
That's not quite what I meant, but I guess it's fine. LGTM
On 2015/09/08 18:42:57, danakj wrote: > That's not quite what I meant, but I guess it's fine. LGTM Thanks, Dana
The CQ bit was checked by william.xie@intel.com
The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from alexst@chromium.org Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/#ps200001 (title: " ")
CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1311013002/200001 View timeline at https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1311013002/200001
The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org
Try jobs failed on following builders: ios_rel_device_ninja on tryserver.chromium.mac (JOB_FAILED, http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.mac/builders/ios_rel_device_ni...) mac_chromium_compile_dbg_ng on tryserver.chromium.mac (JOB_FAILED, http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.mac/builders/mac_chromium_comp...) mac_chromium_rel_ng on tryserver.chromium.mac (JOB_FAILED, http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.mac/builders/mac_chromium_rel_...)
The CQ bit was checked by william.xie@intel.com to run a CQ dry run
Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1311013002/220001 View timeline at https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1311013002/220001
The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org
Dry run: This issue passed the CQ dry run.
The CQ bit was checked by william.xie@intel.com
The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from alexst@chromium.org, danakj@chromium.org Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/1311013002/#ps220001 (title: "Rebase")
CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1311013002/220001 View timeline at https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1311013002/220001
Message was sent while issue was closed.
Committed patchset #11 (id:220001)
Message was sent while issue was closed.
Patchset 11 (id:??) landed as https://crrev.com/34621bb4e4c471a4fe79f5de117b3584b97aabdd Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#347892} |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
