Enable Ozone software implementation in GYP

Enable Ozone software implementation in GYP

Depends on:
 - SoftwareSurfaceFactoryOzone
   - [closed] https://codereview.chromium.org/26849004/
   - [closed] https://codereview.chromium.org/27217009/
 - HardwareDisplayControllerOzone
   - [closed] https://codereview.chromium.org/26538005/
   - [closed] https://codereview.chromium.org/27038004/
 - SoftwareSurfaceOzone
   - [closed] https://codereview.chromium.org/26866006/
   - [closed] https://codereview.chromium.org/26179005/
 - DrmSkBitmapOzone
   - [closed] https://codereview.chromium.org/26290006/

BUG=

Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=230000

[dnicoara, 2013-10-17 20:50:48]

Is it OK to set the Software implementation as the default in this CL or should
it be done in a later one?

[rjkroege, 2013-10-18 14:54:05]

https://codereview.chromium.org/27764002/diff/1/ui/gfx/gfx.gyp
File ui/gfx/gfx.gyp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/27764002/diff/1/ui/gfx/gfx.gyp#newcode370
ui/gfx/gfx.gyp:370: ['use_ozone==1', {
it would be nicer if you make this block look like the use_pang=1 block above
and move the bulk of this to system.gyp.

to avoid perplexity with the dual meaning of drm, I'd suggest not using drm by
itself as the target.

https://codereview.chromium.org/27764002/diff/1/ui/gfx/ozone/surface_factory_...
File ui/gfx/ozone/surface_factory_ozone.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/27764002/diff/1/ui/gfx/ozone/surface_factory_...
ui/gfx/ozone/surface_factory_ozone.cc:47: if (!impl_) {
i had a discussion with spang about how this logic should work in the general
for multiple ozone backends so this will need to change in a subsequent CL.
(This comment is for your information, not a request to do anything about it in
this CL.)

https://codereview.chromium.org/27764002/diff/1/ui/ui_unittests.gypi
File ui/ui_unittests.gypi (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/27764002/diff/1/ui/ui_unittests.gypi#newcode184
ui/ui_unittests.gypi:184:
'gfx/ozone/impl/hardware_display_controller_ozone_unittest.cc',
these are exercised with ui_unittests correct?

[dnicoara, 2013-10-18 16:00:50]

https://codereview.chromium.org/27764002/diff/1/ui/gfx/gfx.gyp
File ui/gfx/gfx.gyp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/27764002/diff/1/ui/gfx/gfx.gyp#newcode370
ui/gfx/gfx.gyp:370: ['use_ozone==1', {
On 2013/10/18 14:54:05, rjkroege wrote:
> it would be nicer if you make this block look like the use_pang=1 block above
> and move the bulk of this to system.gyp.
> 
> to avoid perplexity with the dual meaning of drm, I'd suggest not using drm by
> itself as the target.
> 
> 

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/27764002/diff/1/ui/gfx/ozone/surface_factory_...
File ui/gfx/ozone/surface_factory_ozone.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/27764002/diff/1/ui/gfx/ozone/surface_factory_...
ui/gfx/ozone/surface_factory_ozone.cc:47: if (!impl_) {
On 2013/10/18 14:54:05, rjkroege wrote:
> i had a discussion with spang about how this logic should work in the general
> for multiple ozone backends so this will need to change in a subsequent CL.
> (This comment is for your information, not a request to do anything about it
in
> this CL.)

OK, thank you. I remember us talking about this at some point. I know it is just
a temporary solution.

https://codereview.chromium.org/27764002/diff/1/ui/ui_unittests.gypi
File ui/ui_unittests.gypi (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/27764002/diff/1/ui/ui_unittests.gypi#newcode184
ui/ui_unittests.gypi:184:
'gfx/ozone/impl/hardware_display_controller_ozone_unittest.cc',
On 2013/10/18 14:54:05, rjkroege wrote:
> these are exercised with ui_unittests correct?

Yes.

[rjkroege, 2013-10-18 17:59:14]

lgtm

[dnicoara, 2013-10-18 19:16:23]

Adding ben@ for OWNERS review (GYP files). Ben, please ping me if you'd like
more detail on the Ozone implementation.

[Ben Goodger (Google), 2013-10-18 22:14:05]

lgtm

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-10-21 15:21:17]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/dnicoara@chromium.org/27764002/33001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-10-22 01:44:09]

Change committed as 230000

[Torne, 2013-10-22 09:48:23]

On 2013/10/22 01:44:09, I haz the power (commit-bot) wrote:
> Change committed as 230000

Just FYI, if you add new entries to build/linux/system.gyp that invoke
pkg-config for new packages, you need to also update the list in
build/install-build-deps.sh. It happens that the bots already have libdrm-dev
installed for whatever reason, but not all machines do. I've landed a fix for
this (https://codereview.chromium.org/34843002/).