Chromium Code Reviews
|
|
Chromium Code Reviews
Issue
1881883002:
SRGB_EXT is a valid format of texture in WebGL1.0 and ES2.0 contexts (Closed)
|
Created:
4 years, 8 months ago by xinghua.cao Modified:
4 years, 7 months ago Base URL:
https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src.git@master Target Ref:
refs/pending/heads/master Project:
chromium Visibility:
Public. |
DescriptionSRGB_EXT is a valid format of texture in WebGL1.0 and ES2.0 contexts.
BUG=602544
TestCase= /conformance/extensions/ext-sRGB.html
CQ_INCLUDE_TRYBOTS=tryserver.chromium.win:win_optional_gpu_tests_rel;tryserver.chromium.mac:mac_optional_gpu_tests_rel
Committed: https://crrev.com/60cce09ca802ba394b12dbcf0dd4728d7125df24
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#392296}
Patch Set 1 #Patch Set 2 : test #Patch Set 3 : revert test #
Total comments: 2
Patch Set 4 : SRGB_EXT is valid texture internal format, but not a color-renderable format #
Total comments: 2
Patch Set 5 : Address ken's and zhenyao's nice comments #Patch Set 6 : Correct texture format parameter #
Total comments: 5
Patch Set 7 : Address zhenyao's comment #
Total comments: 3
Patch Set 8 : Address zhenyao's comment: mapping format when context is not es2. #
Total comments: 4
Patch Set 9 : Address ken's comment: shrink the context range #
Messages
Total messages: 45 (17 generated)
Description was changed from ========== SRGB_EXT is an valid internal format of texture. BUG= ========== to ========== SRGB_EXT is an valid internal format of texture. BUG= CQ_INCLUDE_TRYBOTS=tryserver.chromium.win:win_optional_gpu_tests_rel;tryserver.chromium.mac:mac_optional_gpu_tests_rel ==========
Description was changed from ========== SRGB_EXT is an valid internal format of texture. BUG= CQ_INCLUDE_TRYBOTS=tryserver.chromium.win:win_optional_gpu_tests_rel;tryserver.chromium.mac:mac_optional_gpu_tests_rel ========== to ========== SRGB_EXT is an valid internal format of texture. BUG=602544 CQ_INCLUDE_TRYBOTS=tryserver.chromium.win:win_optional_gpu_tests_rel;tryserver.chromium.mac:mac_optional_gpu_tests_rel ==========
xinghua.cao@intel.com changed reviewers: + qiankun.miao@intel.com, yunchao.he@intel.com
On 2016/04/12 07:04:22, xinghua.cao wrote: > mailto:xinghua.cao@intel.com changed reviewers: > + mailto:qiankun.miao@intel.com, mailto:yunchao.he@intel.com Read https://www.opengl.org/registry/specs/EXT/texture_sRGB.txt, I think GL_SRGB_EXT is an valid internal format of texture.
You should attach the WebGL extension registry webpage, instead of OGL extension registry webpage. WebGL has no commitment to support all OGL extensions. https://codereview.chromium.org/1881883002/diff/40001/gpu/command_buffer/serv... File gpu/command_buffer/service/feature_info.cc (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/1881883002/diff/40001/gpu/command_buffer/serv... gpu/command_buffer/service/feature_info.cc:614: validators_.texture_unsized_internal_format.AddValue(GL_SRGB_EXT); This ext has been added into texture_internal_format and texture_format. Why it needs to be added into texture_unsized_internal_format? Is there any test case?
On 2016/04/12 07:21:34, yunchao wrote: > You should attach the WebGL extension registry webpage, instead of OGL extension > registry webpage. WebGL has no commitment to support all OGL extensions. > > https://codereview.chromium.org/1881883002/diff/40001/gpu/command_buffer/serv... > File gpu/command_buffer/service/feature_info.cc (right): > > https://codereview.chromium.org/1881883002/diff/40001/gpu/command_buffer/serv... > gpu/command_buffer/service/feature_info.cc:614: > validators_.texture_unsized_internal_format.AddValue(GL_SRGB_EXT); > This ext has been added into texture_internal_format and texture_format. Why it > needs to be added into texture_unsized_internal_format? Is there any test case? The webgl extensions explain https://www.khronos.org/registry/webgl/extensions/EXT_sRGB/
Description was changed from ========== SRGB_EXT is an valid internal format of texture. BUG=602544 CQ_INCLUDE_TRYBOTS=tryserver.chromium.win:win_optional_gpu_tests_rel;tryserver.chromium.mac:mac_optional_gpu_tests_rel ========== to ========== SRGB_EXT is an valid internal format of texture. BUG=602544 TestCase= /conformance/extensions/ext-sRGB.html CQ_INCLUDE_TRYBOTS=tryserver.chromium.win:win_optional_gpu_tests_rel;tryserver.chromium.mac:mac_optional_gpu_tests_rel ==========
LGTM, thanks. https://codereview.chromium.org/1881883002/diff/40001/gpu/command_buffer/serv... File gpu/command_buffer/service/feature_info.cc (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/1881883002/diff/40001/gpu/command_buffer/serv... gpu/command_buffer/service/feature_info.cc:614: validators_.texture_unsized_internal_format.AddValue(GL_SRGB_EXT); On 2016/04/12 07:21:34, yunchao wrote: > This ext has been added into texture_internal_format and texture_format. Why it > needs to be added into texture_unsized_internal_format? Is there any test case? GLES extension spec can be found at https://www.khronos.org/registry/gles/extensions/EXT/EXT_sRGB.txt. It is based on gles2: "Modify Section 3.7.1, Texture Image Specification: Add 2 new rows to Table 3.3 SRGB_EXT R, G, B Color SRGB_ALPHA_EXT R, G, B, A Color Add 2 new rows to Table 3.4 SRGB_EXT UNSIGNED_BYTE 3 SRGB_ALPHA_EXT UNSIGNED_BYTE 4 " So map to gles3, SRGB_EXT should be added to table 3.3 in https://www.khronos.org/registry/gles/specs/3.0/es_spec_3.0.4.pdf.
xinghua.cao@intel.com changed reviewers: + kondapallykalyan@gmail.com
xinghua.cao@intel.com changed reviewers: + kalyan.kondapally@intel.com - kondapallykalyan@gmail.com
xinghua.cao@intel.com changed reviewers: + kbr@chromium.org, zmo@chromium.org
On 2016/04/12 11:01:50, qiankun wrote: > LGTM, thanks. > > https://codereview.chromium.org/1881883002/diff/40001/gpu/command_buffer/serv... > File gpu/command_buffer/service/feature_info.cc (right): > > https://codereview.chromium.org/1881883002/diff/40001/gpu/command_buffer/serv... > gpu/command_buffer/service/feature_info.cc:614: > validators_.texture_unsized_internal_format.AddValue(GL_SRGB_EXT); > On 2016/04/12 07:21:34, yunchao wrote: > > This ext has been added into texture_internal_format and texture_format. Why > it > > needs to be added into texture_unsized_internal_format? Is there any test > case? > > GLES extension spec can be found at > https://www.khronos.org/registry/gles/extensions/EXT/EXT_sRGB.txt. It is based > on gles2: > "Modify Section 3.7.1, Texture Image Specification: > > Add 2 new rows to Table 3.3 > > SRGB_EXT R, G, B Color > SRGB_ALPHA_EXT R, G, B, A Color > > Add 2 new rows to Table 3.4 > > SRGB_EXT UNSIGNED_BYTE 3 > SRGB_ALPHA_EXT UNSIGNED_BYTE 4 > " > So map to gles3, SRGB_EXT should be added to table 3.3 in > https://www.khronos.org/registry/gles/specs/3.0/es_spec_3.0.4.pdf. Zhenyao & Ken, Please help to review it, thank you.
Sorry for the delay. lgtm, but I'm not an OWNER.
https://codereview.chromium.org/1881883002/diff/60001/gpu/command_buffer/serv... File gpu/command_buffer/service/feature_info.cc (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/1881883002/diff/60001/gpu/command_buffer/serv... gpu/command_buffer/service/feature_info.cc:614: validators_.texture_unsized_internal_format.AddValue(GL_SRGB_EXT); One point. This should only be added for ES 2.0 + the EXT_srgb extension. If the context is for ES 3.0 / WebGL 2.0, GL_SRGB (which was promoted to core in ES 3.0) is not a valid internal format. Only the sized internal formats GL_SRGB8 and GL_SRGB8_ALPHA8 are valid. Can you please figure out how to add this constraint? Can you also please extend the WebGL 2.0 conformance tests to make sure that GL_SRGB is tested as an invalid internal format, if it isn't being already? Thanks.
https://codereview.chromium.org/1881883002/diff/60001/gpu/command_buffer/serv... File gpu/command_buffer/service/feature_info.cc (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/1881883002/diff/60001/gpu/command_buffer/serv... gpu/command_buffer/service/feature_info.cc:614: validators_.texture_unsized_internal_format.AddValue(GL_SRGB_EXT); On 2016/04/24 15:57:22, Ken Russell OOO till 5-2-2016 wrote: > One point. This should only be added for ES 2.0 + the EXT_srgb extension. If the > context is for ES 3.0 / WebGL 2.0, GL_SRGB (which was promoted to core in ES > 3.0) is not a valid internal format. Only the sized internal formats GL_SRGB8 > and GL_SRGB8_ALPHA8 are valid. Can you please figure out how to add this > constraint? Can you also please extend the WebGL 2.0 conformance tests to make > sure that GL_SRGB is tested as an invalid internal format, if it isn't being > already? Thanks. Right. This is an issue existing before this CL. We should only expose this extension if the context_type_ is WEBGL1 or ES2. Then on ES3 and Desktop, in Tex{Sub}Image handling, we need to map SRGB and SRGB_ALPHA to SRGB8 and SRGB8_ALPHA8.
On 2016/04/25 18:00:00, Zhenyao Mo wrote: > https://codereview.chromium.org/1881883002/diff/60001/gpu/command_buffer/serv... > File gpu/command_buffer/service/feature_info.cc (right): > > https://codereview.chromium.org/1881883002/diff/60001/gpu/command_buffer/serv... > gpu/command_buffer/service/feature_info.cc:614: > validators_.texture_unsized_internal_format.AddValue(GL_SRGB_EXT); > On 2016/04/24 15:57:22, Ken Russell OOO till 5-2-2016 wrote: > > One point. This should only be added for ES 2.0 + the EXT_srgb extension. If > the > > context is for ES 3.0 / WebGL 2.0, GL_SRGB (which was promoted to core in ES > > 3.0) is not a valid internal format. Only the sized internal formats GL_SRGB8 > > and GL_SRGB8_ALPHA8 are valid. Can you please figure out how to add this > > constraint? Can you also please extend the WebGL 2.0 conformance tests to make > > sure that GL_SRGB is tested as an invalid internal format, if it isn't being > > already? Thanks. > > Right. This is an issue existing before this CL. We should only expose this > extension if the context_type_ is WEBGL1 or ES2. > > Then on ES3 and Desktop, in Tex{Sub}Image handling, we need to map SRGB and > SRGB_ALPHA to SRGB8 and SRGB8_ALPHA8. Thank you, zhenyao. I think I should also expose SRGB_ALPHA_EXT extension when the context_type_ is WEBGL1 or ES2. Is that right? And I do not understand your second part comment, "Then on ES3 and Desktop, in Tex{Sub}Image handling, we need to map SRGB and SRGB_ALPHA to SRGB8 and SRGB8_ALPHA8". Could you give me some details, thank you.
On 2016/04/26 10:24:11, xinghua.cao wrote: > On 2016/04/25 18:00:00, Zhenyao Mo wrote: > > > https://codereview.chromium.org/1881883002/diff/60001/gpu/command_buffer/serv... > > File gpu/command_buffer/service/feature_info.cc (right): > > > > > https://codereview.chromium.org/1881883002/diff/60001/gpu/command_buffer/serv... > > gpu/command_buffer/service/feature_info.cc:614: > > validators_.texture_unsized_internal_format.AddValue(GL_SRGB_EXT); > > On 2016/04/24 15:57:22, Ken Russell OOO till 5-2-2016 wrote: > > > One point. This should only be added for ES 2.0 + the EXT_srgb extension. If > > the > > > context is for ES 3.0 / WebGL 2.0, GL_SRGB (which was promoted to core in ES > > > 3.0) is not a valid internal format. Only the sized internal formats > GL_SRGB8 > > > and GL_SRGB8_ALPHA8 are valid. Can you please figure out how to add this > > > constraint? Can you also please extend the WebGL 2.0 conformance tests to > make > > > sure that GL_SRGB is tested as an invalid internal format, if it isn't being > > > already? Thanks. > > > > Right. This is an issue existing before this CL. We should only expose this > > extension if the context_type_ is WEBGL1 or ES2. > > > > Then on ES3 and Desktop, in Tex{Sub}Image handling, we need to map SRGB and > > SRGB_ALPHA to SRGB8 and SRGB8_ALPHA8. > > Thank you, zhenyao. I think I should also expose SRGB_ALPHA_EXT extension when > the context_type_ is WEBGL1 or ES2. Is that right? Not to speak for Mo, but to help speed up the review process: - The GL_EXT_sRGB extension adds the GL_SRGB_ALPHA_EXT token. Yes, this token should become valid in ES 2.0 / WebGL 1.0 contexts. That is the only place where the GL_EXT_sRGB extension should be advertised. - For ES 3.0 / WebGL 2.0 contexts, the GL_EXT_sRGB extension should *not* be advertised. See gl3.h. The only sRGB-related internal formats that are valid in ES 3.0 are GL_SRGB8 and GL_SRGB8_ALPHA8. (The unsized internal formats are not valid.) > And I do not understand your second part comment, "Then on ES3 and Desktop, in > Tex{Sub}Image handling, we need to map SRGB and SRGB_ALPHA to SRGB8 and > SRGB8_ALPHA8". Could you give me some details, thank you. The command buffer needs to accept these tokens from the client when it's providing ES 2.0 / WebGL 1.0 contexts. However, when the command buffer is running on top of desktop GL or ES 3.0, then it would have to translate these unsized internal formats to the appropriate sized internal formats, when calling out to the GL driver. (For keeping better track of conversations, it is best to use the line-by-line comment feature in the code review tool. I suggest doing that in the future.)
Thanks Ken for the clear explanation. On desktop GL, the spec is ambiguous whether the unsigned SRGB and SRGB_ALPHA are acceptable internal formats, so it's better to be on the safe side to also do the unsized -> sized mapping in command buffer.
Description was changed from ========== SRGB_EXT is an valid internal format of texture. BUG=602544 TestCase= /conformance/extensions/ext-sRGB.html CQ_INCLUDE_TRYBOTS=tryserver.chromium.win:win_optional_gpu_tests_rel;tryserver.chromium.mac:mac_optional_gpu_tests_rel ========== to ========== SRGB_EXT is a valid format of texture in WebGL1.0 and ES2.0 contexts. BUG=602544 TestCase= /conformance/extensions/ext-sRGB.html CQ_INCLUDE_TRYBOTS=tryserver.chromium.win:win_optional_gpu_tests_rel;tryserver.chromium.mac:mac_optional_gpu_tests_rel ==========
On 2016/04/26 17:10:37, Zhenyao Mo wrote: > Thanks Ken for the clear explanation. On desktop GL, the spec is ambiguous > whether the unsigned SRGB and SRGB_ALPHA are acceptable internal formats, so > it's better to be on the safe side to also do the unsized -> sized mapping in > command buffer. ken & zhenyao, please help to review it again. Thank you.
https://codereview.chromium.org/1881883002/diff/100001/gpu/command_buffer/ser... File gpu/command_buffer/service/feature_info.cc (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/1881883002/diff/100001/gpu/command_buffer/ser... gpu/command_buffer/service/feature_info.cc:557: context_type_ == CONTEXT_TYPE_OPENGLES2) { This should be part of the "if" condition in line 545. We don't need to expose GL_EXT_sRGB otherwise. https://codereview.chromium.org/1881883002/diff/100001/gpu/command_buffer/ser... File gpu/command_buffer/service/gles2_cmd_decoder.cc (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/1881883002/diff/100001/gpu/command_buffer/ser... gpu/command_buffer/service/gles2_cmd_decoder.cc:11453: feature_info_->context_type() == CONTEXT_TYPE_OPENGLES3)) { I just realized we have a different place for such mapping: ui/gl/gl_gl_api_implementation.cc::GetTexInternalFormat() Although I think we should just move that function into command buffer, but at the moment let's put such mapping all in one place. On a separate note, and it doesn't matter if this code is moved to the ui/gl, your current code is incorrect. feature_info_->context_type() is the command buffer's context type, whereas you should check the underlying GL driver's type, which is feature_info_->gl_version_info(). https://codereview.chromium.org/1881883002/diff/100001/gpu/command_buffer/ser... gpu/command_buffer/service/gles2_cmd_decoder.cc:12034: if ((format == GL_SRGB_EXT || format == GL_SRGB_ALPHA_EXT) && Same here. Let's do the mapping in ui/gl/gl_gl_api_implementation.cc
https://codereview.chromium.org/1881883002/diff/100001/gpu/command_buffer/ser... File gpu/command_buffer/service/feature_info.cc (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/1881883002/diff/100001/gpu/command_buffer/ser... gpu/command_buffer/service/feature_info.cc:557: context_type_ == CONTEXT_TYPE_OPENGLES2) { On 2016/04/27 17:12:26, Zhenyao Mo wrote: > This should be part of the "if" condition in line 545. We don't need to expose > GL_EXT_sRGB otherwise. Done. https://codereview.chromium.org/1881883002/diff/100001/gpu/command_buffer/ser... File gpu/command_buffer/service/gles2_cmd_decoder.cc (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/1881883002/diff/100001/gpu/command_buffer/ser... gpu/command_buffer/service/gles2_cmd_decoder.cc:11453: feature_info_->context_type() == CONTEXT_TYPE_OPENGLES3)) { On 2016/04/27 17:12:26, Zhenyao Mo wrote: > I just realized we have a different place for such mapping: > ui/gl/gl_gl_api_implementation.cc::GetTexInternalFormat() > > Although I think we should just move that function into command buffer, but at > the moment let's put such mapping all in one place. I have put this mapping in gl_gl_api_implementation.cc. > > On a separate note, and it doesn't matter if this code is moved to the ui/gl, > your current code is incorrect. feature_info_->context_type() is the command > buffer's context type, whereas you should check the underlying GL driver's type, > which is feature_info_->gl_version_info(). Zhenyao, you are right. here should identify the GL driver's type when mapping internal format and format.
Mostly looks good with one question. https://codereview.chromium.org/1881883002/diff/120001/ui/gl/gl_gl_api_implem... File ui/gl/gl_gl_api_implementation.cc (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/1881883002/diff/120001/ui/gl/gl_gl_api_implem... ui/gl/gl_gl_api_implementation.cc:159: gfx::g_version_info->is_desktop_core_profile) { Should we also do the same for compatibility profile? If yes, then this if condition can just be !(gfx::g_version_info->is_es2). https://codereview.chromium.org/1881883002/diff/120001/ui/gl/gl_gl_api_implem... ui/gl/gl_gl_api_implementation.cc:180: gfx::g_version_info->is_desktop_core_profile) { Same question here?
https://codereview.chromium.org/1881883002/diff/120001/ui/gl/gl_gl_api_implem... File ui/gl/gl_gl_api_implementation.cc (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/1881883002/diff/120001/ui/gl/gl_gl_api_implem... ui/gl/gl_gl_api_implementation.cc:159: gfx::g_version_info->is_desktop_core_profile) { On 2016/04/28 23:29:42, Zhenyao Mo wrote: > Should we also do the same for compatibility profile? If yes, then this if > condition can just be !(gfx::g_version_info->is_es2). Yes, I have read the spec, mapping format is needed in compatibility profile context. Thank you very much. Done.
lgtm
The CQ bit was checked by zmo@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run
Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1881883002/140001 View timeline at https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1881883002/140001
zmo@chromium.org changed reviewers: + sievers@chromium.org
Daniel: ui/gl
The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org
Dry run: This issue passed the CQ dry run.
ui/gl lgtm with one comment addressed. https://codereview.chromium.org/1881883002/diff/140001/ui/gl/gl_gl_api_implem... File ui/gl/gl_gl_api_implementation.cc (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/1881883002/diff/140001/ui/gl/gl_gl_api_implem... ui/gl/gl_gl_api_implementation.cc:158: if (!(gfx::g_version_info->is_es2)) { This negative if-statement is pretty broad and I think could have unexpected consequences in the future. Could you please rewrite it as: if ((gfx::g_version_info->IsAtLeastGL(2, 1) || gfx::g_version_info->IsAtLeastGLES(3, 0)) { ... } https://codereview.chromium.org/1881883002/diff/140001/ui/gl/gl_gl_api_implem... ui/gl/gl_gl_api_implementation.cc:178: if (!(gfx::g_version_info->is_es2)) { Same comment as above in GetTexInternalFormat.
Sorry, delay reply for vacation. https://codereview.chromium.org/1881883002/diff/140001/ui/gl/gl_gl_api_implem... File ui/gl/gl_gl_api_implementation.cc (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/1881883002/diff/140001/ui/gl/gl_gl_api_implem... ui/gl/gl_gl_api_implementation.cc:158: if (!(gfx::g_version_info->is_es2)) { On 2016/05/02 21:16:48, Ken Russell wrote: > This negative if-statement is pretty broad and I think could have unexpected > consequences in the future. Could you please rewrite it as: > > if ((gfx::g_version_info->IsAtLeastGL(2, 1) || > gfx::g_version_info->IsAtLeastGLES(3, 0)) { ... } Done. https://codereview.chromium.org/1881883002/diff/140001/ui/gl/gl_gl_api_implem... ui/gl/gl_gl_api_implementation.cc:178: if (!(gfx::g_version_info->is_es2)) { On 2016/05/02 21:16:48, Ken Russell wrote: > Same comment as above in GetTexInternalFormat. Done.
lgtm
The CQ bit was checked by zmo@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run
Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1881883002/160001 View timeline at https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1881883002/160001
The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org
Dry run: This issue passed the CQ dry run.
The CQ bit was checked by xinghua.cao@intel.com
The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from qiankun.miao@intel.com, kbr@chromium.org Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/1881883002/#ps160001 (title: "Address ken's comment: shrink the context range")
CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1881883002/160001 View timeline at https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1881883002/160001
Message was sent while issue was closed.
Description was changed from ========== SRGB_EXT is a valid format of texture in WebGL1.0 and ES2.0 contexts. BUG=602544 TestCase= /conformance/extensions/ext-sRGB.html CQ_INCLUDE_TRYBOTS=tryserver.chromium.win:win_optional_gpu_tests_rel;tryserver.chromium.mac:mac_optional_gpu_tests_rel ========== to ========== SRGB_EXT is a valid format of texture in WebGL1.0 and ES2.0 contexts. BUG=602544 TestCase= /conformance/extensions/ext-sRGB.html CQ_INCLUDE_TRYBOTS=tryserver.chromium.win:win_optional_gpu_tests_rel;tryserver.chromium.mac:mac_optional_gpu_tests_rel ==========
Message was sent while issue was closed.
Committed patchset #9 (id:160001)
Message was sent while issue was closed.
Description was changed from ========== SRGB_EXT is a valid format of texture in WebGL1.0 and ES2.0 contexts. BUG=602544 TestCase= /conformance/extensions/ext-sRGB.html CQ_INCLUDE_TRYBOTS=tryserver.chromium.win:win_optional_gpu_tests_rel;tryserver.chromium.mac:mac_optional_gpu_tests_rel ========== to ========== SRGB_EXT is a valid format of texture in WebGL1.0 and ES2.0 contexts. BUG=602544 TestCase= /conformance/extensions/ext-sRGB.html CQ_INCLUDE_TRYBOTS=tryserver.chromium.win:win_optional_gpu_tests_rel;tryserver.chromium.mac:mac_optional_gpu_tests_rel Committed: https://crrev.com/60cce09ca802ba394b12dbcf0dd4728d7125df24 Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#392296} ==========
Message was sent while issue was closed.
Patchset 9 (id:??) landed as https://crrev.com/60cce09ca802ba394b12dbcf0dd4728d7125df24 Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#392296} |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
