cc :: Fix sublayer scale bug when we have scroll parents

cc :: Fix sublayer scale bug when we have scroll parents

The current visible rect computation logic with property trees assumes that
whenever a layer's target is different from its clip node's target, it is
because the layer has a clip parent. But, this case is possible even when the
layer has a scroll parent. When we have scroll parent, we need to apply scales
differently because clip parent is an ancestor but scroll parent is not.

BUG=576959
CQ_INCLUDE_TRYBOTS=tryserver.blink:linux_blink_rel

Committed: https://crrev.com/2489a446981f61142c2e2679b4b39435d8b8958b
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#372257}

[jaydasika, 2016-01-29 00:07:23]

Description was changed from

==========
cc :: Fix sublayer scale bug when we have scroll parents

The current visible rect computation logic with property trees assumes that
whenever a layer's target is different from its clip node's target, it is
because the layer has a clip parent. But, this case is possible even when the
layer has a scroll parent. When we have scroll parent, we need to apply scales
differently because clip parent is an ancestor but scroll parent is not.

BUG=576959
==========

to

==========
cc :: Fix sublayer scale bug when we have scroll parents

The current visible rect computation logic with property trees assumes that
whenever a layer's target is different from its clip node's target, it is
because the layer has a clip parent. But, this case is possible even when the
layer has a scroll parent. When we have scroll parent, we need to apply scales
differently because clip parent is an ancestor but scroll parent is not.

BUG=576959
CQ_INCLUDE_TRYBOTS=tryserver.blink:linux_blink_rel
==========

[jaydasika, 2016-01-29 00:23:56]

jaydasika@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ ajuma@chromium.org, enne@chromium.org, weiliangc@chromium.org

[jaydasika, 2016-01-29 00:23:57]

PTAL!

[ajuma, 2016-01-29 00:40:30]

lgtm with a question:

https://codereview.chromium.org/1643053002/diff/40001/cc/trees/layer_tree_hos...
File cc/trees/layer_tree_host_common_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1643053002/diff/40001/cc/trees/layer_tree_hos...
cc/trees/layer_tree_host_common_unittest.cc:6577:
inputs.property_trees->needs_rebuild = true;
Is this line needed? (It doesn't look like we've built property trees before
this point, so this should already be true.)

[jaydasika, 2016-01-29 00:58:25]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1643053002/diff/40001/cc/trees/layer_tree_hos...
File cc/trees/layer_tree_host_common_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1643053002/diff/40001/cc/trees/layer_tree_hos...
cc/trees/layer_tree_host_common_unittest.cc:6577:
inputs.property_trees->needs_rebuild = true;
On 2016/01/29 00:40:29, ajuma wrote:
> Is this line needed? (It doesn't look like we've built property trees before
> this point, so this should already be true.)

That's not required. Sorry for the oversight, I copied that block of code
directly from another test.

[jaydasika, 2016-01-29 00:58:40]

The CQ bit was checked by jaydasika@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-01-29 00:59:33]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1643053002/60001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1643053002/60001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-01-29 02:18:35]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-01-29 02:18:36]

Dry run: This issue passed the CQ dry run.

[jaydasika, 2016-01-29 02:19:17]

The CQ bit was checked by jaydasika@chromium.org

[jaydasika, 2016-01-29 02:19:18]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from ajuma@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/1643053002/#ps60001
(title: " ")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-01-29 02:20:03]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1643053002/60001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1643053002/60001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-01-29 02:26:09]

Committed patchset #4 (id:60001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-01-29 02:27:05]

Description was changed from

==========
cc :: Fix sublayer scale bug when we have scroll parents

The current visible rect computation logic with property trees assumes that
whenever a layer's target is different from its clip node's target, it is
because the layer has a clip parent. But, this case is possible even when the
layer has a scroll parent. When we have scroll parent, we need to apply scales
differently because clip parent is an ancestor but scroll parent is not.

BUG=576959
CQ_INCLUDE_TRYBOTS=tryserver.blink:linux_blink_rel
==========

to

==========
cc :: Fix sublayer scale bug when we have scroll parents

The current visible rect computation logic with property trees assumes that
whenever a layer's target is different from its clip node's target, it is
because the layer has a clip parent. But, this case is possible even when the
layer has a scroll parent. When we have scroll parent, we need to apply scales
differently because clip parent is an ancestor but scroll parent is not.

BUG=576959
CQ_INCLUDE_TRYBOTS=tryserver.blink:linux_blink_rel

Committed: https://crrev.com/2489a446981f61142c2e2679b4b39435d8b8958b
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#372257}
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-01-29 02:27:05]

Patchset 4 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/2489a446981f61142c2e2679b4b39435d8b8958b
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#372257}