Remove SkLayerRasterizer legacy code.

Remove SkLayerRasterizer legacy code.

All uses of the legacy API for LayerRasterizer have been removed from Chrome and
Android. Cleaning up the Skia side.

BUG=skia:2187

[Dominik Grewe, 2014-05-12 14:28:07]

I thought we can remove the legacy API now that Android has been cleaned up.
There's another define in the gyp file though, so I'm not sure. Ptal.

https://codereview.chromium.org/285443002/diff/20001/gyp/common_conditions.gypi
File gyp/common_conditions.gypi (left):

https://codereview.chromium.org/285443002/diff/20001/gyp/common_conditions.gy...
gyp/common_conditions.gypi:637: 'SK_SUPPORT_LEGACY_LAYERRASTERIZER_API=1',
Can we remove this?

[reed1, 2014-05-12 14:56:53]

Certainly when we know we have cherry-picked the rasterizer android change into
master, then we can delete all of this. Derek, can we do it now?

lgtm assuming Derek/Leon are ok

[djsollen, 2014-05-12 15:31:15]

On 2014/05/12 14:56:53, reed1 wrote:
> Certainly when we know we have cherry-picked the rasterizer android change
into
> master, then we can delete all of this. Derek, can we do it now?
> 
> lgtm assuming Derek/Leon are ok

I think this should be good to land.  If it ends up breaking anything in Android
I'll revert, but I don't think that will be necessary.

[Dominik Grewe, 2014-05-12 16:09:37]

On 2014/05/12 15:31:15, djsollen wrote:
> On 2014/05/12 14:56:53, reed1 wrote:
> > Certainly when we know we have cherry-picked the rasterizer android change
> into
> > master, then we can delete all of this. Derek, can we do it now?
> > 
> > lgtm assuming Derek/Leon are ok
> 
> I think this should be good to land.  If it ends up breaking anything in
Android
> I'll revert, but I don't think that will be necessary.

What about the moz2d target? Has the SK_SUPPORT_LEGACY_LAYERRASTERIZER_API flag
been added on purpose?

[reed1, 2014-05-12 17:15:56]

What is the Moz status on not relying on this flag George?

[gw280, 2014-05-12 19:15:45]

On 2014/05/12 17:15:56, reed1 wrote:
> What is the Moz status on not relying on this flag George?

If you want to remove it then I can prioritise removing our usage of it. We have
a bug filed: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1004374

I was hoping to give it to one of our incoming interns as a mentor bug.

[Dominik Grewe, 2014-05-12 20:54:43]

On 2014/05/12 19:15:45, george1 wrote:
> On 2014/05/12 17:15:56, reed1 wrote:
> > What is the Moz status on not relying on this flag George?
> 
> If you want to remove it then I can prioritise removing our usage of it. We
have
> a bug filed: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1004374
> 
> I was hoping to give it to one of our incoming interns as a mentor bug.

It's not that critical imo. I'd just like to get it cleaned up at some point.
When were you thinking of working on it?

[Dominik Grewe, 2014-05-13 09:20:39]

On 2014/05/12 20:54:43, Dominik Grewe wrote:
> On 2014/05/12 19:15:45, george1 wrote:
> > On 2014/05/12 17:15:56, reed1 wrote:
> > > What is the Moz status on not relying on this flag George?
> > 
> > If you want to remove it then I can prioritise removing our usage of it. We
> have
> > a bug filed: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1004374
> > 
> > I was hoping to give it to one of our incoming interns as a mentor bug.
> 
> It's not that critical imo. I'd just like to get it cleaned up at some point.
> When were you thinking of working on it?

Let's just remove the flag for Android then and wait until Moz2D has been
cleaned up. CL: https://codereview.chromium.org/279383006

George, if you could let us know when you're done that would be great.

[gw280, 2014-05-13 14:52:27]

On 2014/05/13 09:20:39, Dominik Grewe wrote:
> Let's just remove the flag for Android then and wait until Moz2D has been
> cleaned up. CL: https://codereview.chromium.org/279383006
> 
> George, if you could let us know when you're done that would be great.

I think our interns start in the next week or two. I will double check with my
manager and confirm. If it's more than a week out I'll do it myself. I just
think it's a good starter bug to get our guys familiar with Moz2D code and the
way it interacts with other libraries like Skia.

[scroggo, 2014-06-18 19:55:00]

George, what's your current status. Okay to submit this yet?

[gw280, 2014-06-18 19:55:59]

On 2014/06/18 19:55:00, scroggo wrote:
> George, what's your current status. Okay to submit this yet?

Yep, go ahead. We've got a bug open on our end to fix it and there's a patch
that exists.

[scroggo, 2014-06-18 20:04:19]

On 2014/06/18 19:55:59, gw280 wrote:
> On 2014/06/18 19:55:00, scroggo wrote:
> > George, what's your current status. Okay to submit this yet?
> 
> Yep, go ahead. We've got a bug open on our end to fix it and there's a patch
> that exists.

lgtm (validating reed1's assumption, above).

I doubt this will land without being rebased, but I'll hit the commit button
anyway. Dominik, can you rebase if this fails?

[scroggo, 2014-06-18 20:04:22]

The CQ bit was checked by scroggo@google.com

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-06-18 20:04:40]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://skia-tree-status.appspot.com/cq/dominikg@chromium.org/285443002/20001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-06-18 20:04:42]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-06-18 20:04:43]

Failed to apply patch for gyp/common_conditions.gypi:
While running git apply --index -p1;
  error: patch failed: gyp/common_conditions.gypi:299
  error: gyp/common_conditions.gypi: patch does not apply

Patch:       gyp/common_conditions.gypi
Index: gyp/common_conditions.gypi
diff --git a/gyp/common_conditions.gypi b/gyp/common_conditions.gypi
index
0d4bc59e1bbd617a656690e446f9d8381aafe9fa..6c7b45f6aab06e161f7395c38a4915a2a3fb7f29
100644
--- a/gyp/common_conditions.gypi
+++ b/gyp/common_conditions.gypi
@@ -299,8 +299,6 @@
         'SK_DEFAULT_FONT_CACHE_LIMIT   (768 * 1024)',
         'SK_ATOMICS_PLATFORM_H "../../src/ports/SkAtomics_android.h"',
         'SK_MUTEX_PLATFORM_H "../../src/ports/SkMutex_pthread.h"',
-        # FIXME: b/13729784: Need to rework LayerRasterizer.cpp
-        'SK_SUPPORT_LEGACY_LAYERRASTERIZER_API',
         # Still need to switch Android to the new name for N32.
         'kNative_8888_SkColorType kN32_SkColorType',
         'SK_SUPPORT_LEGACY_PICTURE_CAN_RECORD',
@@ -634,7 +632,6 @@
 
     [ 'skia_moz2d', {
       'defines': [
-        'SK_SUPPORT_LEGACY_LAYERRASTERIZER_API=1',
         'SK_SUPPORT_LEGACY_COMPATIBLEDEVICE_CONFIG=1',
         'SK_SUPPORT_LEGACY_GETTOTALCLIP=1',
       ],

[scroggo, 2014-06-18 21:24:59]

On 2014/06/18 20:04:19, scroggo wrote:
> On 2014/06/18 19:55:59, gw280 wrote:
> > On 2014/06/18 19:55:00, scroggo wrote:
> > > George, what's your current status. Okay to submit this yet?
> > 
> > Yep, go ahead. We've got a bug open on our end to fix it and there's a patch
> > that exists.
> 
> lgtm (validating reed1's assumption, above).
> 
> I doubt this will land without being rebased, but I'll hit the commit button
> anyway. Dominik, can you rebase if this fails?

Nvm, Mike is redoing with https://codereview.chromium.org/343783002/