Reland of Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test.

Reland of Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test. (patchset #1 id:1 of https://codereview.chromium.org/2183873002/ )

The original CL caused a big regression after landing, as can be seen for example in
https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICgxozpqQkM,agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICght-9qAkM,agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICgxuK2sgkM

I now tell ffmpeg the desired resolution for the output file, which should prevent
causing such a big regression.

Also removed unused Firefox case in getStreamFromElement_ function.

Original issue's description:
> Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test.
>
> Retrite the WebRTC video quality test to use the MediaRecorder API
> instead of recording from a canvas.

BUG=631458
TBR=phoglund@chromium.org

Committed: https://crrev.com/62aca783c8e834c40bbade6e2076c583e9b51d61
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#409765}

[ehmaldonado_chromium, 2016-08-02 16:01:28]

Created Reland of Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test.

[ehmaldonado_chromium, 2016-08-02 16:07:50]

I ran this locally and the numbers I got seem to agree with the ones I got when
capturing from a canvas.

[kjellander_chromium, 2016-08-02 18:36:27]

lgtm but please wait for mcasas' approval as well (I think it would be best to
remove the TBR line in this case, as additional changes have been made for this
relanding).

[mcasas, 2016-08-02 19:01:33]

On 2016/08/02 18:36:27, kjellander_chromium wrote:
> lgtm but please wait for mcasas' approval as well (I think it would be best to
> remove the TBR line in this case, as additional changes have been made for
this
> relanding).

Will take a look; note that it's customary for relandings to 
upload the original CL as PS1, and label it sth like:
"verbatim https://.../123123123123"
and then add the modifications  in subsequent PSs to ease 
review. Also please double check the description that
is mixing up the new changes and the reason for revert.

[kjellander_chromium, 2016-08-02 19:16:54]

On 2016/08/02 19:01:33, mcasas wrote:
> On 2016/08/02 18:36:27, kjellander_chromium wrote:
> > lgtm but please wait for mcasas' approval as well (I think it would be best
to
> > remove the TBR line in this case, as additional changes have been made for
> this
> > relanding).
> 
> Will take a look; note that it's customary for relandings to 
> upload the original CL as PS1, and label it sth like:
> "verbatim https://.../123123123123"
> and then add the modifications  in subsequent PSs to ease 
> review. Also please double check the description that
> is mixing up the new changes and the reason for revert.

That's what Edward did (PS#1 is just missing a title like that).
I guess we could trim away some of the description regarding the revert as well,
to keep it focused on the original description + what's changed for this reland.

[mcasas, 2016-08-02 23:29:29]

lgtm with two minor comments, and a 
corrected CL description.

Also, if the reland additions are small,
try to collapse them into PS2.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2199373002/diff/110001/chrome/browser/media/w...
File chrome/browser/media/webrtc_video_quality_browsertest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2199373002/diff/110001/chrome/browser/media/w...
chrome/browser/media/webrtc_video_quality_browsertest.cc:154: base::CommandLine
ffmpeg_command(path_to_ffmpeg);
nit: can you add some minor comments on why and what the
arguments mean? Probably "-i" is not needed, but -b:v would.
Sth like:
// Set up ffmpeg to output a certain resolution (-s) and
// bitrate (-v). This is needed for blabla.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2199373002/diff/110001/chrome/test/data/webrt...
File chrome/test/data/webrtc/video_extraction.js (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2199373002/diff/110001/chrome/test/data/webrt...
chrome/test/data/webrtc/video_extraction.js:97: } else if (typeof
element.mozSrcObject !== 'undefined') {
I'm not sure our chrome browser_test is intended to
work in Firefox. Is it?

[ehmaldonado_chromium, 2016-08-03 07:37:44]

Description was changed from

==========
Reland of Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test. (patchset #1 id:1
of https://codereview.chromium.org/2199653002/ )

Reason for revert:
I now tell ffmpeg the desired resolution for the output file.



Original issue's description:
> Revert of Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test. (patchset #1
id:1 of https://codereview.chromium.org/2183873002/ )
> 
> Reason for revert:
> Performance numbers regressed a bit too much after landing this, example:
>
https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fu...
> 
> Original issue's description:
> > Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test.
> >
> > Retrite the WebRTC video quality test to use the MediaRecorder API
> > instead of recording from a canvas.
> >
> > BUG=631458
> >
> > Committed: https://crrev.com/0204f3d64d8472a25d93312356d2a1c4acbb600e
> > Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#408633}
> 
> TBR=phoglund@chromium.org,mcasas@chromium.org,ehmaldonado@chromium.org
> # Not skipping CQ checks because original CL landed more than 1 days ago.
> BUG=631458
> 
> Committed: https://crrev.com/668a1e44390e683f82f24a5318946bf0889cffe1
> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#408919}

TBR=phoglund@chromium.org,mcasas@chromium.org,kjellander@chromium.org
# Not skipping CQ checks because original CL landed more than 1 days ago.
BUG=631458
==========

to

==========
Reland of Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test. (patchset #1 id:1
of https://codereview.chromium.org/2199653002/ )

I now tell ffmpeg the desired resolution for the output file, which should
prevent causing such a big regression.



Original issue's description:
> Revert of Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test. (patchset #1
id:1 of https://codereview.chromium.org/2183873002/ )
> 
> Reason for revert:
> Performance numbers regressed a bit too much after landing this, example:
>
https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fu...
> 
> Original issue's description:
> > Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test.
> >
> > Retrite the WebRTC video quality test to use the MediaRecorder API
> > instead of recording from a canvas.
> >
> > BUG=631458
> >
> > Committed: https://crrev.com/0204f3d64d8472a25d93312356d2a1c4acbb600e
> > Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#408633}
> 
> TBR=phoglund@chromium.org,mcasas@chromium.org,ehmaldonado@chromium.org
> # Not skipping CQ checks because original CL landed more than 1 days ago.
> BUG=631458
> 
> Committed: https://crrev.com/668a1e44390e683f82f24a5318946bf0889cffe1
> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#408919}

TBR=phoglund@chromium.org,mcasas@chromium.org,kjellander@chromium.org
# Not skipping CQ checks because original CL landed more than 1 days ago.
BUG=631458
==========

[ehmaldonado_chromium, 2016-08-03 07:38:43]

Patchset #2 (id:90001) has been deleted

[ehmaldonado_chromium, 2016-08-03 07:43:08]

Description was changed from

==========
Reland of Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test. (patchset #1 id:1
of https://codereview.chromium.org/2199653002/ )

I now tell ffmpeg the desired resolution for the output file, which should
prevent causing such a big regression.



Original issue's description:
> Revert of Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test. (patchset #1
id:1 of https://codereview.chromium.org/2183873002/ )
> 
> Reason for revert:
> Performance numbers regressed a bit too much after landing this, example:
>
https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fu...
> 
> Original issue's description:
> > Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test.
> >
> > Retrite the WebRTC video quality test to use the MediaRecorder API
> > instead of recording from a canvas.
> >
> > BUG=631458
> >
> > Committed: https://crrev.com/0204f3d64d8472a25d93312356d2a1c4acbb600e
> > Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#408633}
> 
> TBR=phoglund@chromium.org,mcasas@chromium.org,ehmaldonado@chromium.org
> # Not skipping CQ checks because original CL landed more than 1 days ago.
> BUG=631458
> 
> Committed: https://crrev.com/668a1e44390e683f82f24a5318946bf0889cffe1
> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#408919}

TBR=phoglund@chromium.org,mcasas@chromium.org,kjellander@chromium.org
# Not skipping CQ checks because original CL landed more than 1 days ago.
BUG=631458
==========

to

==========
Reland of Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test. (patchset #1 id:1
of https://codereview.chromium.org/2199653002/ )

The original CL caused a big regression after landing, as can be seen for
example in 
https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fu...

I now tell ffmpeg the desired resolution for the output file, which should
prevent
causing such a big regression.


Original issue's description:
> Revert of Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test. (patchset #1
id:1 of https://codereview.chromium.org/2183873002/ )
> 
> Reason for revert:
> Performance numbers regressed a bit too much after landing this, example:
>
https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fu...
> 
> Original issue's description:
> > Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test.
> >
> > Retrite the WebRTC video quality test to use the MediaRecorder API
> > instead of recording from a canvas.
> >
> > BUG=631458
> >
> > Committed: https://crrev.com/0204f3d64d8472a25d93312356d2a1c4acbb600e
> > Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#408633}
> 
> TBR=phoglund@chromium.org,mcasas@chromium.org,ehmaldonado@chromium.org
> # Not skipping CQ checks because original CL landed more than 1 days ago.
> BUG=631458
> 
> Committed: https://crrev.com/668a1e44390e683f82f24a5318946bf0889cffe1
> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#408919}

BUG=631458
==========

[ehmaldonado_chromium, 2016-08-03 08:00:17]

Patchset #2 (id:110001) has been deleted

[ehmaldonado_chromium, 2016-08-03 08:01:48]

PTAL

[ehmaldonado_chromium, 2016-08-03 13:38:26]

Description was changed from

==========
Reland of Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test. (patchset #1 id:1
of https://codereview.chromium.org/2199653002/ )

The original CL caused a big regression after landing, as can be seen for
example in 
https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fu...

I now tell ffmpeg the desired resolution for the output file, which should
prevent
causing such a big regression.


Original issue's description:
> Revert of Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test. (patchset #1
id:1 of https://codereview.chromium.org/2183873002/ )
> 
> Reason for revert:
> Performance numbers regressed a bit too much after landing this, example:
>
https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fu...
> 
> Original issue's description:
> > Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test.
> >
> > Retrite the WebRTC video quality test to use the MediaRecorder API
> > instead of recording from a canvas.
> >
> > BUG=631458
> >
> > Committed: https://crrev.com/0204f3d64d8472a25d93312356d2a1c4acbb600e
> > Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#408633}
> 
> TBR=phoglund@chromium.org,mcasas@chromium.org,ehmaldonado@chromium.org
> # Not skipping CQ checks because original CL landed more than 1 days ago.
> BUG=631458
> 
> Committed: https://crrev.com/668a1e44390e683f82f24a5318946bf0889cffe1
> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#408919}

BUG=631458
==========

to

==========
Reland of Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test. (patchset #1 id:1
of https://codereview.chromium.org/2199653002/ )

The original CL caused a big regression after landing, as can be seen for
example in 
https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fu...

I now tell ffmpeg the desired resolution for the output file, which should
prevent
causing such a big regression.


Original issue's description:
> Revert of Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test. (patchset #1
id:1 of https://codereview.chromium.org/2183873002/ )
> 
> Reason for revert:
> Performance numbers regressed a bit too much after landing this, example:
>
https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fu...
> 
> Original issue's description:
> > Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test.
> >
> > Retrite the WebRTC video quality test to use the MediaRecorder API
> > instead of recording from a canvas.

BUG=631458
==========

[ehmaldonado_chromium, 2016-08-03 13:40:48]

Description was changed from

==========
Reland of Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test. (patchset #1 id:1
of https://codereview.chromium.org/2199653002/ )

The original CL caused a big regression after landing, as can be seen for
example in 
https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fu...

I now tell ffmpeg the desired resolution for the output file, which should
prevent
causing such a big regression.


Original issue's description:
> Revert of Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test. (patchset #1
id:1 of https://codereview.chromium.org/2183873002/ )
> 
> Reason for revert:
> Performance numbers regressed a bit too much after landing this, example:
>
https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fu...
> 
> Original issue's description:
> > Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test.
> >
> > Retrite the WebRTC video quality test to use the MediaRecorder API
> > instead of recording from a canvas.

BUG=631458
==========

to

==========
Reland of Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test. (patchset #1 id:1
of https://codereview.chromium.org/2199653002/ )

The original CL caused a big regression after landing, as can be seen for
example in 
https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fu...

I now tell ffmpeg the desired resolution for the output file, which should
prevent
causing such a big regression.

Original issue's description:
> Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test.
>
> Retrite the WebRTC video quality test to use the MediaRecorder API
> instead of recording from a canvas.

BUG=631458
==========

[ehmaldonado_chromium, 2016-08-03 13:44:36]

Description was changed from

==========
Reland of Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test. (patchset #1 id:1
of https://codereview.chromium.org/2199653002/ )

The original CL caused a big regression after landing, as can be seen for
example in 
https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fu...

I now tell ffmpeg the desired resolution for the output file, which should
prevent
causing such a big regression.

Original issue's description:
> Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test.
>
> Retrite the WebRTC video quality test to use the MediaRecorder API
> instead of recording from a canvas.

BUG=631458
==========

to

==========
Reland of Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test. (patchset #1 id:1
of https://codereview.chromium.org/2183873002/ )

The original CL caused a big regression after landing, as can be seen for
example in 
https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fu...

I now tell ffmpeg the desired resolution for the output file, which should
prevent
causing such a big regression.

Original issue's description:
> Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test.
>
> Retrite the WebRTC video quality test to use the MediaRecorder API
> instead of recording from a canvas.

BUG=631458
==========

[ehmaldonado_chromium, 2016-08-03 14:00:53]

Description was changed from

==========
Reland of Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test. (patchset #1 id:1
of https://codereview.chromium.org/2183873002/ )

The original CL caused a big regression after landing, as can be seen for
example in 
https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fu...

I now tell ffmpeg the desired resolution for the output file, which should
prevent
causing such a big regression.

Original issue's description:
> Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test.
>
> Retrite the WebRTC video quality test to use the MediaRecorder API
> instead of recording from a canvas.

BUG=631458
==========

to

==========
Reland of Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test. (patchset #1 id:1
of https://codereview.chromium.org/2183873002/ )

The original CL caused a big regression after landing, as can be seen for
example in 
https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fu...

I now tell ffmpeg the desired resolution for the output file, which should
prevent
causing such a big regression.

Also removed unused Firefox case in getStreamFromElement_ function.

Original issue's description:
> Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test.
>
> Retrite the WebRTC video quality test to use the MediaRecorder API
> instead of recording from a canvas.

BUG=631458
==========

[ehmaldonado_chromium, 2016-08-03 14:01:11]

https://codereview.chromium.org/2199373002/diff/1/chrome/test/data/webrtc/vid...
File chrome/test/data/webrtc/video_extraction.js (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2199373002/diff/1/chrome/test/data/webrtc/vid...
chrome/test/data/webrtc/video_extraction.js:81: } else if (typeof
element.mozSrcObject !== 'undefined') {
Original mcasas' comment:
>
 I'm not sure our chrome browser_test is intended to
 work in Firefox. Is it?
>

Probably not.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2199373002/diff/120001/chrome/browser/media/w...
File chrome/browser/media/webrtc_video_quality_browsertest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2199373002/diff/120001/chrome/browser/media/w...
chrome/browser/media/webrtc_video_quality_browsertest.cc:158: // to become
meaningless.
Sorry, I deleted the patch set and mcasas' comments disappeared.
>
 nit: can you add some minor comments on why and what the
 arguments mean? Probably "-i" is not needed, but -b:v would.
 Sth like:
 // Set up ffmpeg to output a certain resolution (-s) and
 // bitrate (-v). This is needed for blabla.
>

Done.

[ehmaldonado_chromium, 2016-08-04 07:41:17]

The CQ bit was checked by ehmaldonado@chromium.org

[ehmaldonado_chromium, 2016-08-04 07:41:18]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from
kjellander@chromium.org, mcasas@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/2199373002/#ps120001
(title: "Tell ffmpeg the desired output resolution.")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-08-04 07:41:35]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-08-04 07:47:32]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-08-04 07:47:33]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  chromium_presubmit on master.tryserver.chromium.linux (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/chromium_presub...)

[ehmaldonado_chromium, 2016-08-04 07:56:36]

ehmaldonado@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ tommi@chromium.org

[ehmaldonado_chromium, 2016-08-04 08:03:24]

tommi, please review/lgtm

[ehmaldonado_chromium, 2016-08-04 08:11:46]

Description was changed from

==========
Reland of Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test. (patchset #1 id:1
of https://codereview.chromium.org/2183873002/ )

The original CL caused a big regression after landing, as can be seen for
example in 
https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fu...

I now tell ffmpeg the desired resolution for the output file, which should
prevent
causing such a big regression.

Also removed unused Firefox case in getStreamFromElement_ function.

Original issue's description:
> Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test.
>
> Retrite the WebRTC video quality test to use the MediaRecorder API
> instead of recording from a canvas.

BUG=631458
==========

to

==========
Reland of Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test. (patchset #1 id:1
of https://codereview.chromium.org/2183873002/ )

The original CL caused a big regression after landing, as can be seen for
example in 
https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fu...

I now tell ffmpeg the desired resolution for the output file, which should
prevent
causing such a big regression.

Also removed unused Firefox case in getStreamFromElement_ function.

Original issue's description:
> Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test.
>
> Retrite the WebRTC video quality test to use the MediaRecorder API
> instead of recording from a canvas.

BUG=631458
TBR=phoglund@chromium.org
==========

[ehmaldonado_chromium, 2016-08-04 08:12:06]

The CQ bit was checked by ehmaldonado@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-08-04 08:12:33]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[tommi (sloooow) - chröme, 2016-08-04 08:50:07]

lgtm after running git cl format.

https://codereview.chromium.org/2199373002/diff/120001/chrome/browser/media/w...
File chrome/browser/media/webrtc_video_quality_browsertest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2199373002/diff/120001/chrome/browser/media/w...
chrome/browser/media/webrtc_video_quality_browsertest.cc:132: const
base::FilePath& webm_video_filename) {
please run |git cl format|

https://codereview.chromium.org/2199373002/diff/120001/chrome/test/data/webrt...
File chrome/test/data/webrtc/video_extraction.js (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/2199373002/diff/120001/chrome/test/data/webrt...
chrome/test/data/webrtc/video_extraction.js:95: if (typeof element.srcObject !==
'undefined') {
nit: typeof always returns a string so there's no need to use !==.  I personally
find it misleading since it indicates that you're using the !== operator to
check the type of srcObject, but that's not what's going on.

If you want to use either the !== or === operator in this case, it would be more
appropriate in my opinion to do:

if (element.srcObject !=== undefined) {


Note the absence of quotes.  Since |undefined| is an undefined variable,
srcObject would be checked if it is also undefined (and equal in value).

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-08-04 08:51:15]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-08-04 08:51:16]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  linux_android_rel_ng on master.tryserver.chromium.android (JOB_FAILED,
https://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.android/builders/linux_androi...)

[ehmaldonado_chromium, 2016-08-04 09:29:49]

The CQ bit was checked by ehmaldonado@chromium.org

[ehmaldonado_chromium, 2016-08-04 09:29:50]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from
kjellander@chromium.org, mcasas@chromium.org, tommi@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/2199373002/#ps140001
(title: "Ran 'git cl format.'")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-08-04 09:30:06]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-08-04 10:54:44]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-08-04 10:54:46]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  linux_chromium_asan_rel_ng on master.tryserver.chromium.linux (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/linux_chromium_...)

[kjellander_chromium, 2016-08-04 11:38:29]

On 2016/08/04 10:54:46, commit-bot: I haz the power wrote:
> Try jobs failed on following builders:
>   linux_chromium_asan_rel_ng on master.tryserver.chromium.linux (JOB_FAILED,
>
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/linux_chromium_...)

It seems unlikely that this failure is affected by your changes. I suggest you
just send it to the CQ again now, that an hour has passed.

[ehmaldonado_chromium, 2016-08-04 11:39:35]

The CQ bit was checked by ehmaldonado@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-08-04 11:39:52]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-08-04 12:08:42]

Description was changed from

==========
Reland of Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test. (patchset #1 id:1
of https://codereview.chromium.org/2183873002/ )

The original CL caused a big regression after landing, as can be seen for
example in 
https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fu...

I now tell ffmpeg the desired resolution for the output file, which should
prevent
causing such a big regression.

Also removed unused Firefox case in getStreamFromElement_ function.

Original issue's description:
> Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test.
>
> Retrite the WebRTC video quality test to use the MediaRecorder API
> instead of recording from a canvas.

BUG=631458
TBR=phoglund@chromium.org
==========

to

==========
Reland of Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test. (patchset #1 id:1
of https://codereview.chromium.org/2183873002/ )

The original CL caused a big regression after landing, as can be seen for
example in 
https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fu...

I now tell ffmpeg the desired resolution for the output file, which should
prevent
causing such a big regression.

Also removed unused Firefox case in getStreamFromElement_ function.

Original issue's description:
> Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test.
>
> Retrite the WebRTC video quality test to use the MediaRecorder API
> instead of recording from a canvas.

BUG=631458
TBR=phoglund@chromium.org
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-08-04 12:08:45]

Committed patchset #3 (id:140001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-08-04 12:10:11]

Description was changed from

==========
Reland of Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test. (patchset #1 id:1
of https://codereview.chromium.org/2183873002/ )

The original CL caused a big regression after landing, as can be seen for
example in 
https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fu...

I now tell ffmpeg the desired resolution for the output file, which should
prevent
causing such a big regression.

Also removed unused Firefox case in getStreamFromElement_ function.

Original issue's description:
> Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test.
>
> Retrite the WebRTC video quality test to use the MediaRecorder API
> instead of recording from a canvas.

BUG=631458
TBR=phoglund@chromium.org
==========

to

==========
Reland of Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test. (patchset #1 id:1
of https://codereview.chromium.org/2183873002/ )

The original CL caused a big regression after landing, as can be seen for
example in
https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fu...

I now tell ffmpeg the desired resolution for the output file, which should
prevent
causing such a big regression.

Also removed unused Firefox case in getStreamFromElement_ function.

Original issue's description:
> Use MediaRecorder to capture video for quality test.
>
> Retrite the WebRTC video quality test to use the MediaRecorder API
> instead of recording from a canvas.

BUG=631458
TBR=phoglund@chromium.org

Committed: https://crrev.com/62aca783c8e834c40bbade6e2076c583e9b51d61
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#409765}
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-08-04 12:10:13]

Patchset 3 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/62aca783c8e834c40bbade6e2076c583e9b51d61
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#409765}