Chromium Code Reviews| Index: cc/layers/texture_layer.cc |
| diff --git a/cc/layers/texture_layer.cc b/cc/layers/texture_layer.cc |
| index bc6b58a0342145bce3130c02d6983591f33855f9..0f683695feb843411c5cfa7a297ec840b25bdec3 100644 |
| --- a/cc/layers/texture_layer.cc |
| +++ b/cc/layers/texture_layer.cc |
| @@ -276,6 +276,12 @@ void TextureLayer::PushPropertiesTo(LayerImpl* layer) { |
| } |
| } |
| +void TextureLayer::OnOutputSurfaceCreated() { |
| + if (uses_mailbox_) { |
|
danakj
2014/02/11 19:58:59
If we release the mailbox here, we should be calli
boliu
2014/02/11 21:44:07
That's already handled on the impl side (DeferredI
boliu
2014/02/12 01:48:57
Actually I'm not clear what your concern is about
danakj
2014/02/12 15:40:01
I did mean content, the impl side texture. But the
boliu
2014/02/12 17:45:27
Good suggestion. Caught an edge case that I haven'
|
| + holder_ref_.reset(); |
|
boliu
2014/02/07 04:29:55
So for mailboxes the contract is maintained implic
danakj
2014/02/11 19:58:59
It'd be nice to just mark the layer as "bad" until
boliu
2014/02/11 21:44:07
Could I do this in a follow up? :p
Or do you thin
boliu
2014/02/12 01:48:57
This should just work right now?
Without a valid
danakj
2014/02/12 15:40:01
Oh, we'll draw a frame without the layer there, wh
|
| + } |
| +} |
| + |
| Region TextureLayer::VisibleContentOpaqueRegion() const { |
| if (contents_opaque()) |
| return visible_content_rect(); |