 Chromium Code Reviews
 Chromium Code Reviews Issue 2908303003:
  media: Create Mojo StructTraits for VideoFrame  (Closed)
    
  
    Issue 2908303003:
  media: Create Mojo StructTraits for VideoFrame  (Closed) 
  | Index: media/mojo/interfaces/video_frame_struct_traits.cc | 
| diff --git a/media/mojo/interfaces/video_frame_struct_traits.cc b/media/mojo/interfaces/video_frame_struct_traits.cc | 
| new file mode 100644 | 
| index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..2d0103349ae0f3d293283c6d185f8edda7836b46 | 
| --- /dev/null | 
| +++ b/media/mojo/interfaces/video_frame_struct_traits.cc | 
| @@ -0,0 +1,129 @@ | 
| +// Copyright 2017 The Chromium Authors. All rights reserved. | 
| +// Use of this source code is governed by a BSD-style license that can be | 
| +// found in the LICENSE file. | 
| + | 
| +#include "media/mojo/interfaces/video_frame_struct_traits.h" | 
| + | 
| +#include "base/logging.h" | 
| +#include "media/mojo/common/mojo_shared_buffer_video_frame.h" | 
| + | 
| +namespace mojo { | 
| + | 
| +// static | 
| +template <> | 
| +media::mojom::VideoFrameDataPtr StructTraits<media::mojom::VideoFrameDataView, | 
| + scoped_refptr<media::VideoFrame>>:: | 
| + data(const scoped_refptr<media::VideoFrame>& input) { | 
| 
dcheng
2017/06/05 20:33:01
I think we'll need to use a context object for thi
 
sandersd (OOO until July 31)
2017/06/05 20:46:13
Ack :-(
 
sandersd (OOO until July 31)
2017/06/06 01:05:47
I was unable to make this work because a SharedBuf
 
dcheng
2017/06/08 09:41:08
Hmm... so I guess this is tricky. Out of curiosity
 
yzshen1
2017/06/08 17:45:14
Daniel is right that we should probably put this i
 
sandersd (OOO until July 31)
2017/06/08 20:10:09
Done.
 | 
| + // EOS frames contain no data. | 
| + if (input->metadata()->IsTrue(media::VideoFrameMetadata::END_OF_STREAM)) | 
| + return nullptr; | 
| + | 
| + if (input->storage_type() == media::VideoFrame::STORAGE_MOJO_SHARED_BUFFER) { | 
| + media::MojoSharedBufferVideoFrame* mojo_frame = | 
| + static_cast<media::MojoSharedBufferVideoFrame*>(input.get()); | 
| + | 
| + // TODO(jrummell): Should this really be a writable clone? | 
| + mojo::ScopedSharedBufferHandle duplicated_handle = | 
| + mojo_frame->Handle().Clone(); | 
| + DCHECK(duplicated_handle.is_valid()); | 
| + | 
| + return media::mojom::VideoFrameData::NewSharedBufferData( | 
| + media::mojom::SharedBufferVideoFrameData::New( | 
| + std::move(duplicated_handle), mojo_frame->MappedSize(), | 
| + mojo_frame->stride(media::VideoFrame::kYPlane), | 
| + mojo_frame->stride(media::VideoFrame::kUPlane), | 
| + mojo_frame->stride(media::VideoFrame::kVPlane), | 
| + mojo_frame->PlaneOffset(media::VideoFrame::kYPlane), | 
| + mojo_frame->PlaneOffset(media::VideoFrame::kUPlane), | 
| + mojo_frame->PlaneOffset(media::VideoFrame::kVPlane))); | 
| + } | 
| + | 
| + if (input->HasTextures()) { | 
| + // TODO(sandersd): Friend VideoFrame so that we can access the array? | 
| + std::vector<gpu::MailboxHolder> mailbox_holder( | 
| + media::VideoFrame::kMaxPlanes); | 
| + for (size_t i = 0; i < media::VideoFrame::kMaxPlanes; i++) | 
| + mailbox_holder.push_back(input->mailbox_holder(i)); | 
| + return media::mojom::VideoFrameData::NewMailboxData( | 
| + media::mojom::MailboxVideoFrameData::New(std::move(mailbox_holder))); | 
| + } | 
| + | 
| + NOTREACHED() << "Unsupported VideoFrame conversion"; | 
| + return nullptr; | 
| +} | 
| + | 
| +// static | 
| +template <> | 
| +bool StructTraits<media::mojom::VideoFrameDataView, | 
| + scoped_refptr<media::VideoFrame>>:: | 
| + Read(media::mojom::VideoFrameDataView input, | 
| + scoped_refptr<media::VideoFrame>* output) { | 
| + // View of the |data| member of the input media::mojom::VideoFrame. | 
| + media::mojom::VideoFrameDataDataView data; | 
| + input.GetDataDataView(&data); | 
| + | 
| + DCHECK_EQ(input.end_of_stream(), data.is_null()); | 
| + if (input.end_of_stream()) { | 
| + *output = media::VideoFrame::CreateEOSFrame(); | 
| + return true; | 
| + } | 
| + | 
| + media::VideoPixelFormat format; | 
| + if (!input.ReadFormat(&format)) | 
| + return false; | 
| + | 
| + gfx::Size coded_size; | 
| + if (!input.ReadCodedSize(&coded_size)) | 
| + return false; | 
| + | 
| + gfx::Rect visible_rect; | 
| + if (!input.ReadVisibleRect(&visible_rect)) | 
| + return false; | 
| + | 
| + gfx::Size natural_size; | 
| + if (!input.ReadNaturalSize(&natural_size)) | 
| + return false; | 
| + | 
| + base::TimeDelta timestamp; | 
| + if (!input.ReadTimestamp(×tamp)) | 
| + return false; | 
| + | 
| + if (data.is_shared_buffer_data()) { | 
| + media::mojom::SharedBufferVideoFrameDataDataView shared_buffer_data; | 
| + data.GetSharedBufferDataDataView(&shared_buffer_data); | 
| + | 
| + *output = media::MojoSharedBufferVideoFrame::Create( | 
| + format, coded_size, visible_rect, natural_size, | 
| + shared_buffer_data.TakeFrameData(), | 
| + shared_buffer_data.frame_data_size(), shared_buffer_data.y_offset(), | 
| 
dcheng
2017/06/05 20:33:01
Do we need to do any basic range checking here?
 
sandersd (OOO until July 31)
2017/06/06 01:05:47
This should be checked by media::MojoSharedBufferV
 | 
| + shared_buffer_data.u_offset(), shared_buffer_data.v_offset(), | 
| + shared_buffer_data.y_stride(), shared_buffer_data.u_stride(), | 
| + shared_buffer_data.v_stride(), timestamp); | 
| + return true; | 
| + } | 
| + | 
| + if (data.is_mailbox_data()) { | 
| + media::mojom::MailboxVideoFrameDataDataView mailbox_data; | 
| + data.GetMailboxDataDataView(&mailbox_data); | 
| + | 
| + std::vector<gpu::MailboxHolder> mailbox_holder; | 
| + if (!mailbox_data.ReadMailboxHolder(&mailbox_holder)) | 
| + return false; | 
| + | 
| + DCHECK_EQ(mailbox_holder.size(), media::VideoFrame::kMaxPlanes); | 
| + gpu::MailboxHolder mailbox_holder_array[media::VideoFrame::kMaxPlanes]; | 
| + for (size_t i = 0; i < media::VideoFrame::kMaxPlanes; i++) | 
| + mailbox_holder_array[i] = mailbox_holder[i]; | 
| + | 
| + *output = media::VideoFrame::WrapNativeTextures( | 
| + format, mailbox_holder_array, media::VideoFrame::ReleaseMailboxCB(), | 
| + coded_size, visible_rect, natural_size, timestamp); | 
| 
dcheng
2017/06/05 20:33:01
Similar question about range checks here--anything
 
sandersd (OOO until July 31)
2017/06/06 01:05:47
This one is fine. I added a check for visible_rect
 | 
| + return true; | 
| + } | 
| + | 
| + // TODO(sandersd): Switch on the union tag to avoid this ugliness? | 
| + NOTREACHED(); | 
| + return false; | 
| +} | 
| + | 
| +} // namespace mojo |