Support wbmp that are supported by SkImageDecoder

Support wbmp that are supported by SkImageDecoder

The wbmp version of SkImageDecoder will support decoding an image where
the second byte can be masked away with 0x9F. Prior to this CL, SkCodec
checked that the entire byte was zero. The SkCodec implementation
appears to be more correct (at least according to Wikipedia [1]), but
it also means we could regress if someone was using an image that did
not quite fit the specification.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_Application_Protocol_Bitmap_Format

BUG=skia:3257
Committed: https://skia.googlesource.com/skia/+/b9a1e34362c282e21d9e99edededf987a48e98de

[scroggo, 2015-11-25 19:09:35]

scroggo@google.com changed reviewers:
+ msarett@google.com

[msarett, 2015-11-30 13:24:55]

lgtm

https://codereview.chromium.org/1473673005/diff/1/tests/CodexTest.cpp
File tests/CodexTest.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1473673005/diff/1/tests/CodexTest.cpp#newcode856
tests/CodexTest.cpp:856: const char* path = "mandrill.wbmp";
Did we fail on this image before you made this change?

[scroggo, 2015-11-30 13:48:13]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1473673005/diff/1/tests/CodexTest.cpp
File tests/CodexTest.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1473673005/diff/1/tests/CodexTest.cpp#newcode856
tests/CodexTest.cpp:856: const char* path = "mandrill.wbmp";
On 2015/11/30 13:24:55, msarett wrote:
> Did we fail on this image before you made this change?

No. See below - I had to modify the image to make it fail. With the code change,
the modified image succeeds.

Let me know if I should add comments to clarify this.

[msarett, 2015-11-30 14:00:44]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1473673005/diff/1/tests/CodexTest.cpp
File tests/CodexTest.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1473673005/diff/1/tests/CodexTest.cpp#newcode856
tests/CodexTest.cpp:856: const char* path = "mandrill.wbmp";
On 2015/11/30 13:48:13, scroggo wrote:
> On 2015/11/30 13:24:55, msarett wrote:
> > Did we fail on this image before you made this change?
> 
> No. See below - I had to modify the image to make it fail. With the code
change,
> the modified image succeeds.
> 
> Let me know if I should add comments to clarify this.

My mistake, it's perfectly clear.

[scroggo, 2015-11-30 14:12:49]

The CQ bit was checked by scroggo@google.com

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-11-30 14:13:04]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1473673005/1
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1473673005/1

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-11-30 14:25:33]

Description was changed from

==========
Support wbmp that are supported by SkImageDecoder

The wbmp version of SkImageDecoder will support decoding an image where
the second byte can be masked away with 0x9F. Prior to this CL, SkCodec
checked that the entire byte was zero. The SkCodec implementation
appears to be more correct (at least according to Wikipedia [1]), but
it also means we could regress if someone was using an image that did
not quite fit the specification.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_Application_Protocol_Bitmap_Format

BUG=skia:3257
==========

to

==========
Support wbmp that are supported by SkImageDecoder

The wbmp version of SkImageDecoder will support decoding an image where
the second byte can be masked away with 0x9F. Prior to this CL, SkCodec
checked that the entire byte was zero. The SkCodec implementation
appears to be more correct (at least according to Wikipedia [1]), but
it also means we could regress if someone was using an image that did
not quite fit the specification.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_Application_Protocol_Bitmap_Format

BUG=skia:3257

Committed:
https://skia.googlesource.com/skia/+/b9a1e34362c282e21d9e99edededf987a48e98de
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-11-30 14:25:33]

Committed patchset #1 (id:1) as
https://skia.googlesource.com/skia/+/b9a1e34362c282e21d9e99edededf987a48e98de