[Ozone-Dri] Do not call AddFramebuffer with cursor buffers

[Ozone-Dri] Do not call AddFramebuffer with cursor buffers

Drivers may establish minimum sizes for the modesetting buffers. Since
cursor buffers are treated differently by the DRM API, they do not
require to be registered. Registering them on drivers with tight lower
bounds will fail since cursor buffers tend to be small.

BUG=none

Committed: https://crrev.com/e7c6a45bed64ad12a3cbfa6be18c9f63694a5cd4
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#318150}

[dnicoara, 2015-02-25 21:57:48]

dnicoara@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ spang@chromium.org

[dnicoara, 2015-02-25 21:57:48]

PTAL

[spang, 2015-02-25 22:06:56]

On 2015/02/25 21:57:48, dnicoara wrote:
> PTAL

Why is the cursor a "ScanoutBuffer"?

[dnicoara, 2015-02-25 22:19:50]

On 2015/02/25 22:06:56, spang wrote:
> On 2015/02/25 21:57:48, dnicoara wrote:
> > PTAL
> 
> Why is the cursor a "ScanoutBuffer"?

It's technically still a scanout buffer, though it is treated specially since it
doesn't need a framebuffer ID.

[spang, 2015-02-25 22:29:54]

On 2015/02/25 22:19:50, dnicoara wrote:
> On 2015/02/25 22:06:56, spang wrote:
> > On 2015/02/25 21:57:48, dnicoara wrote:
> > > PTAL
> > 
> > Why is the cursor a "ScanoutBuffer"?
> 
> It's technically still a scanout buffer, though it is treated specially since
it
> doesn't need a framebuffer ID.

Ok, so is_scanout isn't a great choice for the variable in that case. But anyway
I think it should be split out form Initialize() anyway.

[spang, 2015-02-25 22:30:01]

https://codereview.chromium.org/959953002/diff/1/ui/ozone/platform/dri/dri_bu...
File ui/ozone/platform/dri/dri_buffer.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/959953002/diff/1/ui/ozone/platform/dri/dri_bu...
ui/ozone/platform/dri/dri_buffer.cc:66: info.bytesPerPixel() << 3, stride_,
handle_, &framebuffer_)) {
Can you move this to a 2nd function?

[dnicoara, 2015-02-25 22:48:57]

Renamed param.

https://codereview.chromium.org/959953002/diff/1/ui/ozone/platform/dri/dri_bu...
File ui/ozone/platform/dri/dri_buffer.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/959953002/diff/1/ui/ozone/platform/dri/dri_bu...
ui/ozone/platform/dri/dri_buffer.cc:66: info.bytesPerPixel() << 3, stride_,
handle_, &framebuffer_)) {
On 2015/02/25 22:30:01, spang wrote:
> Can you move this to a 2nd function?

Why do you want to split it in another function? It adds no value and makes the
initialization process more complicated.

[spang, 2015-02-25 22:55:32]

On 2015/02/25 22:48:57, dnicoara wrote:
> Renamed param.
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/959953002/diff/1/ui/ozone/platform/dri/dri_bu...
> File ui/ozone/platform/dri/dri_buffer.cc (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/959953002/diff/1/ui/ozone/platform/dri/dri_bu...
> ui/ozone/platform/dri/dri_buffer.cc:66: info.bytesPerPixel() << 3, stride_,
> handle_, &framebuffer_)) {
> On 2015/02/25 22:30:01, spang wrote:
> > Can you move this to a 2nd function?
> 
> Why do you want to split it in another function? It adds no value and makes
the
> initialization process more complicated.

Because framebuffer creation is demonstrably separate from initialization. If
you bundle them arbitrarily you need the boolean.

Whatever, it's not important. lgtm

[spang, 2015-02-25 22:57:25]

https://codereview.chromium.org/959953002/diff/20001/ui/ozone/platform/dri/dr...
File ui/ozone/platform/dri/dri_surface.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/959953002/diff/20001/ui/ozone/platform/dri/dr...
ui/ozone/platform/dri/dri_surface.cc:29: bool initialized =
buffer->Initialize(info, true);
you need a comment here and in both other places for the boolean

[dnicoara, 2015-02-25 23:05:42]

https://codereview.chromium.org/959953002/diff/20001/ui/ozone/platform/dri/dr...
File ui/ozone/platform/dri/dri_surface.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/959953002/diff/20001/ui/ozone/platform/dri/dr...
ui/ozone/platform/dri/dri_surface.cc:29: bool initialized =
buffer->Initialize(info, true);
On 2015/02/25 22:57:25, spang wrote:
> you need a comment here and in both other places for the boolean

Done.

[dnicoara, 2015-02-25 23:05:52]

The CQ bit was checked by dnicoara@chromium.org

[dnicoara, 2015-02-25 23:05:52]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from spang@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/959953002/#ps40001 (title:
".")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-02-25 23:06:53]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/959953002/40001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-02-25 23:47:19]

Committed patchset #3 (id:40001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-02-25 23:47:51]

Patchset 3 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/e7c6a45bed64ad12a3cbfa6be18c9f63694a5cd4
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#318150}