Index: cc/trees/tree_synchronizer_unittest.cc |
diff --git a/cc/trees/tree_synchronizer_unittest.cc b/cc/trees/tree_synchronizer_unittest.cc |
index f06a4ad22d78cfef8ab75523c5f5319a1e85ec54..bd39e74dfff848880d372cd2887078313009d771 100644 |
--- a/cc/trees/tree_synchronizer_unittest.cc |
+++ b/cc/trees/tree_synchronizer_unittest.cc |
@@ -505,7 +505,7 @@ TEST_F(TreeSynchronizerTest, SynchronizeCurrentlyScrollingNode) { |
transient_scroll_layer->AddChild(scroll_clip_layer); |
scroll_clip_layer->AddChild(scroll_layer); |
- ElementId scroll_element_id = ElementId(5, 4); |
+ ElementId scroll_element_id = ElementId(5); |
suzyh_UTC10 (ex-contributor)
2017/05/05 04:27:30
Does the behaviour of this test change at all, giv
chrishtr
2017/05/05 05:34:52
It shouldn't, because cc doesn't understand second
|
scroll_layer->SetElementId(scroll_element_id); |
transient_scroll_layer->SetScrollClipLayerId( |
@@ -552,7 +552,7 @@ TEST_F(TreeSynchronizerTest, SynchronizeScrollTreeScrollOffsetMap) { |
scoped_refptr<Layer> transient_scroll_clip_layer = Layer::Create(); |
scoped_refptr<Layer> transient_scroll_layer = Layer::Create(); |
- ElementId scroll_element_id = ElementId(5, 4); |
+ ElementId scroll_element_id = ElementId(5); |
scroll_layer->SetElementId(scroll_element_id); |
layer_tree_root->AddChild(transient_scroll_clip_layer); |