Adding synthetic touch/mouse drag [Part2]

Adding synthetic touch/mouse drag [Part2]

This CL adds GPU benchmarking API for drag function as next step in
adding synthetic drag feature for telemetry tests.

The part 1 of the CL can be found at crrev.com/929333002

BUG=457148
Committed: https://crrev.com/f18aa928c7815edb807e6ca2d4aa0ae356157c22
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#318687}

[ssid, 2015-02-20 17:33:20]

ssid@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ petrcermak@chromium.org, picksi@chromium.org, skyostil@chromium.org

[ssid, 2015-02-20 17:33:21]

The second part of the CL. PTAL

[petrcermak, 2015-02-20 18:00:32]

Just one nit :-)

https://codereview.chromium.org/942133002/diff/1/content/common/input/input_p...
File content/common/input/input_param_traits.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/942133002/diff/1/content/common/input/input_p...
content/common/input/input_param_traits.cc:68: p.gesture_params()));
This line shouldn't be indented so much (look at the other cases below).

[Sami, 2015-02-20 18:02:45]

lgtm assuming this is the API we end up with :)

[ssid, 2015-02-25 16:29:28]

Patchset #2 (id:20001) has been deleted

[ssid, 2015-02-25 16:33:55]

ssid@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ jdduke@chromium.org

[ssid, 2015-02-25 16:33:55]

jdduke@chromium.org: Please review changes in CL.

This is second part of adding drag gesture.

[ssid, 2015-02-25 17:44:23]

ssid@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ dcheng@chromium.org, sievers@chromium.org

[ssid, 2015-02-25 17:44:24]

dcheng@chromium.org: Please review changes in content/common/input_messages.h

sievers@chromium.org: Please review changes in 
content/renderer/gpu/gpu_benchmarking_extension* and
content/common/input/input_param_traits.cc

[dcheng, 2015-02-26 17:56:51]

(I'm still tracing through p1 of this patch, since it contains the rest of the
IPC bits, so it might take me a bit of time.)

https://codereview.chromium.org/942133002/diff/40001/content/common/input_mes...
File content/common/input_messages.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/942133002/diff/40001/content/common/input_mes...
content/common/input_messages.h:82:
IPC_STRUCT_TRAITS_PARENT(content::SyntheticGestureParams)
clang-format gets confused about this. Indent?

https://codereview.chromium.org/942133002/diff/40001/content/renderer/gpu/gpu...
File content/renderer/gpu/gpu_benchmarking_extension.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/942133002/diff/40001/content/renderer/gpu/gpu...
content/renderer/gpu/gpu_benchmarking_extension.cc:419: // somehow.
Why do we leak this? It looks like RenderWidget has a list of pending callback
and contexts. Is destroying the RenderView/RenderWidget not sufficient to
release this?

https://codereview.chromium.org/942133002/diff/40001/tools/ipc_fuzzer/mutate/...
File tools/ipc_fuzzer/mutate/generate.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/942133002/diff/40001/tools/ipc_fuzzer/mutate/...
tools/ipc_fuzzer/mutate/generate.cc:995: switch (RandInRange(4)) {
This doesn't seem very future proof =)

[ssid, 2015-02-26 20:02:34]

Sorry, but I had to split the patch for the size was too big.
Please find it at crrev.com/929333002 .

Addressed all comments. PTAL.

https://codereview.chromium.org/942133002/diff/40001/content/common/input_mes...
File content/common/input_messages.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/942133002/diff/40001/content/common/input_mes...
content/common/input_messages.h:82:
IPC_STRUCT_TRAITS_PARENT(content::SyntheticGestureParams)
On 2015/02/26 17:56:51, dcheng wrote:
> clang-format gets confused about this. Indent?

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/942133002/diff/40001/content/renderer/gpu/gpu...
File content/renderer/gpu/gpu_benchmarking_extension.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/942133002/diff/40001/content/renderer/gpu/gpu...
content/renderer/gpu/gpu_benchmarking_extension.cc:419: // somehow.
On 2015/02/26 17:56:51, dcheng wrote:
> Why do we leak this? It looks like RenderWidget has a list of pending callback
> and contexts. Is destroying the RenderView/RenderWidget not sufficient to
> release this?

I am not really sure about this, but this is the same case as previous function.
Please see 'BeginSmoothScroll'. Do you suggest to remove the TODO there too?

https://codereview.chromium.org/942133002/diff/40001/tools/ipc_fuzzer/mutate/...
File tools/ipc_fuzzer/mutate/generate.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/942133002/diff/40001/tools/ipc_fuzzer/mutate/...
tools/ipc_fuzzer/mutate/generate.cc:995: switch (RandInRange(4)) {
On 2015/02/26 17:56:51, dcheng wrote:
> This doesn't seem very future proof =)

Changed.

[ssid, 2015-02-26 20:05:47]

Patchset #3 (id:60001) has been deleted

[dcheng, 2015-02-27 15:47:32]

IPC changes lgtm

SyntheticSmoothMoveGesture is pretty complicated, since it's basically a huge
state machine. I wonder if tracking current_move_segment_ with an iterator would
help simplify some of the logic.

[dcheng, 2015-02-27 15:48:39]

https://codereview.chromium.org/942133002/diff/80001/tools/ipc_fuzzer/mutate/...
File tools/ipc_fuzzer/mutate/generate.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/942133002/diff/80001/tools/ipc_fuzzer/mutate/...
tools/ipc_fuzzer/mutate/generate.cc:996:
content::SyntheticGestureParams::SYNTHETIC_GESTURE_TYPE_MAX)) {
Actually, doesn't this come out to 3, rather than 4?

[ssid, 2015-02-27 15:50:46]

On 2015/02/27 15:47:32, dcheng wrote:
> IPC changes lgtm
> 
> SyntheticSmoothMoveGesture is pretty complicated, since it's basically a huge
> state machine. I wonder if tracking current_move_segment_ with an iterator
would
> help simplify some of the logic.

Thanks, I will be doing a clean up of the gesture implementations. I will add 
this point to the discussion.

[no sievers, 2015-02-28 00:27:44]

lgtm

[ssid, 2015-03-02 11:57:01]

https://codereview.chromium.org/942133002/diff/80001/tools/ipc_fuzzer/mutate/...
File tools/ipc_fuzzer/mutate/generate.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/942133002/diff/80001/tools/ipc_fuzzer/mutate/...
tools/ipc_fuzzer/mutate/generate.cc:996:
content::SyntheticGestureParams::SYNTHETIC_GESTURE_TYPE_MAX)) {
On 2015/02/27 15:48:39, dcheng wrote:
> Actually, doesn't this come out to 3, rather than 4?

Yes, thanks for pointing out. Changed.

[Sami, 2015-03-02 12:30:28]

Thanks, still lgtm.

[ssid, 2015-03-02 12:31:04]

The CQ bit was checked by ssid@chromium.org

[ssid, 2015-03-02 12:31:04]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from dcheng@chromium.org,
sievers@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/942133002/#ps100001
(title: "Fixed nit.")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-03-02 12:31:49]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/942133002/100001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-03-02 13:53:27]

Committed patchset #4 (id:100001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-03-02 13:54:26]

Patchset 4 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/f18aa928c7815edb807e6ca2d4aa0ae356157c22
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#318687}