Cache gpu suitability in DisplayItemList, remove SetUnsuitable...ForTesting

cc/playback/display_item_list.cc

Index: cc/playback/display_item_list.cc
diff --git a/cc/playback/display_item_list.cc b/cc/playback/display_item_list.cc
index edc67c00e6da71eb53a47b231f16be8a429b5950..88f4909200560b27be6a1b1e940b2de94b4cc82f 100644
--- a/cc/playback/display_item_list.cc
+++ b/cc/playback/display_item_list.cc
@@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ DisplayItemList::DisplayItemList(gfx::Rect layer_rect,
       use_cached_picture_(settings.use_cached_picture),
       retain_individual_display_items_(retain_individual_display_items),
       layer_rect_(layer_rect),
-      all_items_are_suitable_for_gpu_rasterization_(true),
+      is_suitable_for_gpu_rasterization_(true),
       approximate_op_count_(0),
       picture_memory_usage_(0),
       external_memory_usage_(0) {
@@ -123,13 +123,19 @@ void DisplayItemList::ProcessAppendedItems() {
   needs_process_ = false;
 #endif
   for (const DisplayItem* item : items_) {
-    all_items_are_suitable_for_gpu_rasterization_ &=
-        item->is_suitable_for_gpu_rasterization();
-    approximate_op_count_ += item->approximate_op_count();
-
     if (use_cached_picture_) {
+      // When using a cached picture we will calculate gpu suitability on the
+      // entire cached picture instead of the items. This is more permissive
+      // since none of the items might individually trigger a veto even though
+      // they collectively have enough "bad" operations that a corresponding
+      // Picture would get vetoed. See crbug.com/513016.
       DCHECK(canvas_);
-      item->Raster(canvas_.get(), gfx::Rect(), NULL);
+      approximate_op_count_ += item->approximate_op_count();
+      item->Raster(canvas_.get(), gfx::Rect(), nullptr);
+    } else {
+      is_suitable_for_gpu_rasterization_ &=
+          item->is_suitable_for_gpu_rasterization();
+      approximate_op_count_ += item->approximate_op_count();
     }
 
     if (retain_individual_display_items_) {
@@ -146,11 +152,9 @@ void DisplayItemList::ProcessAppendedItems() {
 void DisplayItemList::RasterIntoCanvas(const DisplayItem& item) {
   DCHECK(canvas_);
   DCHECK(!retain_individual_display_items_);
-  all_items_are_suitable_for_gpu_rasterization_ &=
-      item.is_suitable_for_gpu_rasterization();
   approximate_op_count_ += item.approximate_op_count();
 
-  item.Raster(canvas_.get(), gfx::Rect(), NULL);
+  item.Raster(canvas_.get(), gfx::Rect(), nullptr);
 }
 
 bool DisplayItemList::RetainsIndividualDisplayItems() const {
@@ -179,19 +183,14 @@ void DisplayItemList::Finalize() {
         SkPictureUtils::ApproximateBytesUsed(picture_.get());
     recorder_.reset();
     canvas_.clear();
+    is_suitable_for_gpu_rasterization_ =
+        picture_->suitableForGpuRasterization(nullptr);
   }
 }
 
 bool DisplayItemList::IsSuitableForGpuRasterization() const {
   DCHECK(ProcessAppendedItemsCalled());
-  if (use_cached_picture_)
-    return picture_->suitableForGpuRasterization(NULL);
-
-  // This is more permissive than Picture's implementation, since none of the
-  // items might individually trigger a veto even though they collectively have
-  // enough "bad" operations that a corresponding Picture would get vetoed. See
-  // crbug.com/513016.
-  return all_items_are_suitable_for_gpu_rasterization_;
+  return is_suitable_for_gpu_rasterization_;
 }
 
 int DisplayItemList::ApproximateOpCount() const {