cc: Use BeginFrameArgs

cc/layers/texture_layer_unittest.cc

Index: cc/layers/texture_layer_unittest.cc
diff --git a/cc/layers/texture_layer_unittest.cc b/cc/layers/texture_layer_unittest.cc
index aa08e9f81ee9a854af56afa1ae2527637dd25656..2694a1ab38c661479b1b75c55618d9ef2e9eab30 100644
--- a/cc/layers/texture_layer_unittest.cc
+++ b/cc/layers/texture_layer_unittest.cc
@@ -1022,7 +1022,7 @@ class TextureLayerWithMailboxMainThreadDeleted : public LayerTreeTest {
     PostSetNeedsCommitToMainThread();
   }
 
-  virtual void DidCommitAndDrawFrame() OVERRIDE {
+  virtual void DidCommit() OVERRIDE {
     switch (layer_tree_host()->source_frame_number()) {
       case 1:
         // Delete the TextureLayer on the main thread while the mailbox is in
@@ -1090,7 +1090,7 @@ class TextureLayerWithMailboxImplThreadDeleted : public LayerTreeTest {
     PostSetNeedsCommitToMainThread();
   }
 
-  virtual void DidCommitAndDrawFrame() OVERRIDE {
+  virtual void DidCommit() OVERRIDE {

[enne (OOO), 2013/08/06 23:35:16]

It seems like this is not testing what it should be.  The test seems to be
waiting for the TextureLayerImpl to be deleted first as a result of the first
commit.  However, this won't be the case right after the second commit; it'll
only happen after the second activation?

[brianderson, 2013/08/07 01:55:51]

I changed this so that DidActivateTreeOnThread posts a task to the main thread
to delete the TextureLayer. Should that work?

[enne (OOO), 2013/08/07 15:44:19]

Yeah, that seems like the right approach.

[piman, 2013/08/07 19:39:52]

I would prefer that we wait for a frame to be drawn. We only create the resource
in WillDraw, and this is really meant to exercise this behavior (if we delete
the layer after the resource was created).

Why can't we keep DidCommitAndDrawFrame ?

[brianderson, 2013/08/07 20:12:29]

It's possible that DidCommitAndDrawFrame doesn't get called for the first time
until after two commits have occurred, so we end up not seeing all values of
source_frame_number() in DidCommitAndDrawFrame sometimes.

If we want to verify that a particular source_frame_number was activated or
drawn, we have to check that on the Impl thread.

Maybe it would help if DidCommitAndDrawFrame took the source_frame_number as an
argument that the Impl thread could communicate to the main thread?

For the purposes of this patch, however, my current plan is to post the task to
the main thread to delete the Texture layer from SwapBuffersCompleteOnThread
instead of DidActivateTreeOnThread as originally planned.

[piman, 2013/08/07 20:27:45]

You want to make sure you wait for the commit *and* the frame that corresponds
to that commit (i.e. not one before that).

I'm surprised we now see DidCommitAndDrawFrame being called after the next
commit (that increases the source frame number) happened. I suspect some amount
of synchronization depends on the current behavior.

Doesn't that mean that we have 2 commits in flight now? Isn't that a problem
(increasing memory load)?

[brianderson, 2013/08/07 20:33:01]

This patch doesn't allow 2 commits in flight, but it does allow a second commit
to start before the previous commit has drawn.  Previously, the commit was held
until after the draw.

     switch (layer_tree_host()->source_frame_number()) {
       case 1:
         // Remove the TextureLayer on the main thread while the mailbox is in