exo: Handle cross-fade animations properly.

exo: Handle cross-fade animations properly.

Cross-fade animations used for example when maximizing a
window will recreate the layer hierarchy and cross fade between
the old layers and the new layers. This relies on the contents
of the new layers being updated within some amount of time.

Produce new texture mailboxes when a layer is recreated until
we have an interface that provides some guarantee that the
client will.

BUG=549781
TEST=exo_unittests

Committed: https://crrev.com/56f34590a84abdd52b7643bb6316c3f54d361984
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#397968}

[reveman, 2016-06-05 15:42:16]

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

[reveman, 2016-06-05 15:42:27]

reveman@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ dcastagna@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-06-05 15:42:28]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/2041663002/1

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-06-05 16:41:02]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-06-05 16:41:03]

Dry run: This issue passed the CQ dry run.

[Daniele Castagna, 2016-06-06 02:47:53]

LGTM
Just two nits and a question.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2041663002/diff/1/components/exo/buffer.cc
File components/exo/buffer.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2041663002/diff/1/components/exo/buffer.cc#ne...
components/exo/buffer.cc:373: // Non-client usage can only be allowed when the
client is no allowed to
no allow? no longer allowed? not allowed?

https://codereview.chromium.org/2041663002/diff/1/components/exo/buffer.cc#ne...
components/exo/buffer.cc:379: DLOG_IF(WARNING, use_count_ && !non_client_usage)
I'd avoid the double negation of !non if possible.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2041663002/diff/1/components/exo/buffer.h
File components/exo/buffer.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2041663002/diff/1/components/exo/buffer.h#new...
components/exo/buffer.h:63: bool non_client_usage);
I think in general is better to avoid negative names.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2041663002/diff/1/components/exo/surface.cc
File components/exo/surface.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2041663002/diff/1/components/exo/surface.cc#n...
components/exo/surface.cc:491: layer()->SetTextureAlpha(alpha_);
Is there any reason why you moved this before?

[reveman, 2016-06-06 03:17:35]

The CQ bit was checked by reveman@chromium.org

[reveman, 2016-06-06 03:17:37]

https://codereview.chromium.org/2041663002/diff/1/components/exo/buffer.cc
File components/exo/buffer.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2041663002/diff/1/components/exo/buffer.cc#ne...
components/exo/buffer.cc:373: // Non-client usage can only be allowed when the
client is no allowed to
On 2016/06/06 at 02:47:53, Daniele Castagna wrote:
> no allow? no longer allowed? not allowed?

not allowed, fixed.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2041663002/diff/1/components/exo/buffer.cc#ne...
components/exo/buffer.cc:379: DLOG_IF(WARNING, use_count_ && !non_client_usage)
On 2016/06/06 at 02:47:53, Daniele Castagna wrote:
> I'd avoid the double negation of !non if possible.

done

https://codereview.chromium.org/2041663002/diff/1/components/exo/buffer.h
File components/exo/buffer.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2041663002/diff/1/components/exo/buffer.h#new...
components/exo/buffer.h:63: bool non_client_usage);
On 2016/06/06 at 02:47:53, Daniele Castagna wrote:
> I think in general is better to avoid negative names.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2041663002/diff/1/components/exo/surface.cc
File components/exo/surface.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2041663002/diff/1/components/exo/surface.cc#n...
components/exo/surface.cc:491: layer()->SetTextureAlpha(alpha_);
On 2016/06/06 at 02:47:53, Daniele Castagna wrote:
> Is there any reason why you moved this before?

Not really. Just seemed a bit better to group the "Texture" related calls
together.

[reveman, 2016-06-06 03:17:37]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from
dcastagna@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/2041663002/#ps20001
(title: "remove double negative")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-06-06 03:17:51]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/2041663002/20001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-06-06 03:58:50]

Committed patchset #2 (id:20001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-06-06 04:01:04]

Description was changed from

==========
exo: Handle cross-fade animations properly.

Cross-fade animations used for example when maximizing a
window will recreate the layer hierarchy and cross fade between
the old layers and the new layers. This relies on the contents
of the new layers being updated within some amount of time.

Produce new texture mailboxes when a layer is recreated until
we have an interface that provides some guarantee that the
client will.

BUG=549781
TEST=exo_unittests
==========

to

==========
exo: Handle cross-fade animations properly.

Cross-fade animations used for example when maximizing a
window will recreate the layer hierarchy and cross fade between
the old layers and the new layers. This relies on the contents
of the new layers being updated within some amount of time.

Produce new texture mailboxes when a layer is recreated until
we have an interface that provides some guarantee that the
client will.

BUG=549781
TEST=exo_unittests

Committed: https://crrev.com/56f34590a84abdd52b7643bb6316c3f54d361984
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#397968}
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-06-06 04:01:05]

Patchset 2 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/56f34590a84abdd52b7643bb6316c3f54d361984
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#397968}