Remove image decoder down sampling

Remove image decoder down sampling

Remove IMAGE_DECODER_DOWN_SAMPLING feature: chrome has never
used/needed this feature and it has no tests.

TEST=Covered by existing image layout tests.
BUG=None

Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/blink?view=rev&revision=150783

[eseidel, 2013-05-20 19:39:29]

lgtm

Seems reasonable.  In the future world where the compositor does all the image
painting anyway, they'll do their own downsampling.

Doesn't impl-side paiting already have some sort of downsampling support for
low-res paints?

[Peter Kasting, 2013-05-20 23:04:24]

LGTM.  Given my comment below, perhaps we can make setSize() non-virtual?

https://codereview.chromium.org/15466003/diff/1/Source/core/platform/image-de...
File Source/core/platform/image-decoders/gif/GIFImageDecoder.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/15466003/diff/1/Source/core/platform/image-de...
Source/core/platform/image-decoders/gif/GIFImageDecoder.cpp:70: return
ImageDecoder::setSize(width, height);
It seems like we no longer need to override setSize() at all in this class,
since the return at top here doesn't really change the outcome of anything.

[Noel Gordon, 2013-05-21 04:20:51]

On 2013/05/20 19:39:29, eseidel wrote:
> lgtm
> 
> Seems reasonable.  In the future world where the compositor does all the image
> painting anyway, they'll do their own downsampling.

And sometimes that downsampling must be CSS aware (CSS3/4 image-rendering).

> Doesn't impl-side painting already have some sort of downsampling support for
> low-res paints?

Yes, ask nduca for details.

[Noel Gordon, 2013-05-21 04:24:03]

https://codereview.chromium.org/15466003/diff/1/Source/core/platform/image-de...
File Source/core/platform/image-decoders/gif/GIFImageDecoder.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/15466003/diff/1/Source/core/platform/image-de...
Source/core/platform/image-decoders/gif/GIFImageDecoder.cpp:70: return
ImageDecoder::setSize(width, height);
On 2013/05/20 23:04:24, Peter Kasting wrote:
> It seems like we no longer need to override setSize() at all in this class,
> since the return at top here doesn't really change the outcome of anything.

Yes I had wondered about that, and I wanted confirmation that I could remove it
in the GIF case ...

[Noel Gordon, 2013-05-21 04:37:44]

Right, removed setSize() from GIF decoder.

> Given my comment below, perhaps we can make setSize() non-virtual?

Did you mean make setSize() non-virtual in ImageDecoder.h here?

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-05-21 05:53:05]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/noel@chromium.org/15466003/8001

[Noel Gordon, 2013-05-21 05:53:46]

On 2013/05/21 04:37:44, Noel Gordon (Google) wrote:

> Did you mean make setSize() non-virtual in ImageDecoder.h here?

Anyway, if so, let's deal with that in a follow up.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-05-21 06:36:52]

Retried try job too often on linux_layout_rel for step(s) webkit_tests
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/buildstatus?builder=linux_layo...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-05-21 08:12:38]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/noel@chromium.org/15466003/8001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-05-21 09:48:49]

Retried try job too often on linux_layout_rel for step(s) webkit_tests
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/buildstatus?builder=linux_layo...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-05-21 12:37:28]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/noel@chromium.org/15466003/8001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-05-21 12:52:57]

Change committed as 150783

[Peter Kasting, 2013-05-21 20:32:05]

On 2013/05/21 05:53:46, Noel Gordon (Google) wrote:
> On 2013/05/21 04:37:44, Noel Gordon (Google) wrote:
> 
> > Did you mean make setSize() non-virtual in ImageDecoder.h here?
> 
> Anyway, if so, let's deal with that in a follow up.

Yes, I meant to make it non-virtual in ImageDecoder.h.

[danakj, 2013-05-21 20:34:13]

On 2013/05/20 19:39:29, eseidel wrote:
> lgtm
> 
> Seems reasonable.  In the future world where the compositor does all the image
> painting anyway, they'll do their own downsampling.
> 
> Doesn't impl-side paiting already have some sort of downsampling support for
> low-res paints?

+trchen for impl-side image stuff.

[Noel Gordon, 2013-05-22 04:33:11]

On 2013/05/21 20:32:05, Peter Kasting wrote:

> Yes, I meant to make it non-virtual in ImageDecoder.h.

Right, https://codereview.chromium.org/15656002 sent.