Fix failing (flaky) LayerTreeHostTestLCDNotification test.

Fix failing (flaky) LayerTreeHostTestLCDNotification test.

This test failed with impl-side painting because PictureLayer did not
skip commits caused by invalidating the layer during Update.

Meanwhile, this CL has some changes that changed the flaky failures
into always-failures. The change is to make the
ThreadProxy::CommitPendingForTesting check not only if a main frame is
in progress, but also if one will happen in the future. The failure was
flaky because the commit would be requested but not happen immediately
when impl-side painting was on due to activation (if the machine was
suitably loaded at the time). I renamed CommitPendingForTesting to
MainFrameWillHappenForTesting because "CommitPending" is a specific
notion in the public API of the scheduler and I didn't want to confuse
these two.

R=ajuma, brianderson, enne
BUG=402449, 397120
Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=289165

[danakj, 2014-08-11 18:57:19]

The continuous commit/animate tests that I removed are flaky tests that got more
flaky after these changes to make the tests wait for commits that will come. I
believe they are both covered by the better-suited
SchedulerTest.RequestCommitAfterBeginMainFrameSent which checks that if we
SetNeedsCommit after sending one frame, we don't commit it before drawing the
previous frame.

[danakj, 2014-08-11 18:58:29]

I'm not super fond of the name MainFrameWillHappenForTesting.. soliciting
suggestions.

[enne (OOO), 2014-08-11 19:50:12]

lgtm

https://codereview.chromium.org/462803002/diff/1/cc/scheduler/scheduler.h
File cc/scheduler/scheduler.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/462803002/diff/1/cc/scheduler/scheduler.h#new...
cc/scheduler/scheduler.h:103: bool MainFrameForTestingWillHappen() const {
bikeshed: Will => Could?

https://codereview.chromium.org/462803002/diff/1/cc/trees/layer_tree_host_uni...
File cc/trees/layer_tree_host_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/462803002/diff/1/cc/trees/layer_tree_host_uni...
cc/trees/layer_tree_host_unittest.cc:4888: 1000 /
layer_tree_host()->settings().refresh_rate;
1000.0

[danakj, 2014-08-11 20:01:07]

https://codereview.chromium.org/462803002/diff/1/cc/scheduler/scheduler.h
File cc/scheduler/scheduler.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/462803002/diff/1/cc/scheduler/scheduler.h#new...
cc/scheduler/scheduler.h:103: bool MainFrameForTestingWillHappen() const {
On 2014/08/11 19:50:12, enne wrote:
> bikeshed: Will => Could?

I had that at first, but it definitely will come, just maybe not right *now*,
cuz needs_commit_ is true so it'll come next vsync or something. So.. idk, I
slightly prefer Will over Could for this.

[danakj, 2014-08-11 20:03:03]

https://codereview.chromium.org/462803002/diff/1/cc/trees/layer_tree_host_uni...
File cc/trees/layer_tree_host_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/462803002/diff/1/cc/trees/layer_tree_host_uni...
cc/trees/layer_tree_host_unittest.cc:4888: 1000 /
layer_tree_host()->settings().refresh_rate;
On 2014/08/11 19:50:12, enne wrote:
> 1000.0

Thanks, done.

[enne (OOO), 2014-08-11 20:05:02]

https://codereview.chromium.org/462803002/diff/1/cc/scheduler/scheduler.h
File cc/scheduler/scheduler.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/462803002/diff/1/cc/scheduler/scheduler.h#new...
cc/scheduler/scheduler.h:103: bool MainFrameForTestingWillHappen() const {
On 2014/08/11 20:01:06, danakj wrote:
> On 2014/08/11 19:50:12, enne wrote:
> > bikeshed: Will => Could?
> 
> I had that at first, but it definitely will come, just maybe not right *now*,
> cuz needs_commit_ is true so it'll come next vsync or something. So.. idk, I
> slightly prefer Will over Could for this.

Ok, sure.  :)

[ajuma, 2014-08-11 20:13:26]

lgtm too.

[danakj, 2014-08-12 14:10:35]

The CQ bit was checked by danakj@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-08-12 14:13:23]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/danakj@chromium.org/462803002/20001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-08-12 14:23:49]

FYI, CQ is re-trying this CL (attempt #1).
The failing builders are:
  chromium_presubmit on tryserver.chromium.linux
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/chromium_presub...)
  linux_chromium_rel_swarming on tryserver.chromium.linux
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/linux_chromium_...)
  ios_rel_device_ninja on tryserver.chromium.mac
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.mac/builders/ios_rel_device_ni...)
  mac_chromium_rel_swarming on tryserver.chromium.mac
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.mac/builders/mac_chromium_rel_...)
  win8_chromium_rel on tryserver.chromium.win
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.win/builders/win8_chromium_rel...)
  win_chromium_rel on tryserver.chromium.win
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.win/builders/win_chromium_rel/...)
  win_chromium_x64_rel on tryserver.chromium.win
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.win/builders/win_chromium_x64_...)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-08-12 14:25:27]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-08-12 14:25:28]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  ios_rel_device_ninja on tryserver.chromium.mac
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.mac/builders/ios_rel_device_ni...)
  mac_chromium_rel_swarming on tryserver.chromium.mac
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.mac/builders/mac_chromium_rel_...)

[danakj, 2014-08-12 14:33:02]

The CQ bit was checked by danakj@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-08-12 14:33:39]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/danakj@chromium.org/462803002/40001

[danakj, 2014-08-12 16:09:54]

enne: PTAL at the delta for PS4, I had to fix a new test.

[enne (OOO), 2014-08-12 17:49:56]

https://codereview.chromium.org/462803002/diff/80001/cc/trees/layer_tree_host...
File cc/trees/layer_tree_host_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/462803002/diff/80001/cc/trees/layer_tree_host...
cc/trees/layer_tree_host_unittest.cc:4583: scoped_ptr<SwapPromise> swap_promise(
Can you put this swap promise before the SetDeferCommits(false) call? I realize
this is my fault, but I think it's in the wrong place.  I think it could be
possible for the FindOutputSurface call to happen with the commit that this swap
promise got queued on, and it could succeed (and the test would fail, flakily?)

[danakj, 2014-08-12 18:05:43]

https://codereview.chromium.org/462803002/diff/80001/cc/trees/layer_tree_host...
File cc/trees/layer_tree_host_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/462803002/diff/80001/cc/trees/layer_tree_host...
cc/trees/layer_tree_host_unittest.cc:4583: scoped_ptr<SwapPromise> swap_promise(
On 2014/08/12 17:49:56, enne wrote:
> Can you put this swap promise before the SetDeferCommits(false) call? I
realize
> this is my fault, but I think it's in the wrong place.  I think it could be
> possible for the FindOutputSurface call to happen with the commit that this
swap
> promise got queued on, and it could succeed (and the test would fail,
flakily?)

Sure, tho I don' think it can flake because the FindOutputSurface happens after
BeginMainFrameAbortedOnThread at which point the swap promise has already been
aborted on the main thread. And the aborted commit is the one that was deferred.

[danakj, 2014-08-12 18:08:47]

The CQ bit was checked by danakj@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-08-12 18:11:42]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/danakj@chromium.org/462803002/100001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-08-12 23:57:35]

FYI, CQ is re-trying this CL (attempt #1).
The failing builders are:
  win_chromium_x64_rel on tryserver.chromium.win
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.win/builders/win_chromium_x64_...)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-08-13 03:03:23]

Change committed as 289165