This target keeps track of .h the files under webrtc/modules/include/
that are not part of any target.
If a .h file is not part of a target the 'gn check' utility is not
able to spot if a target is missing a dependency because even if
it parses '#include' directives it is not able to find a target that
contains these headers.
BUG=webrtc:7513
NOTRY=True
Review-Url: https://codereview.webrtc.org/2838873002
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#17880}
This target keeps track of .h the files under webrtc/ that are not part
of any target.
If a .h file is not part of a target the 'gn check' utility is not
able to spot if a target is missing a dependency because even if
it parses '#include' directives it is not able to find a target that
contains these headers.
BUG=webrtc:7512
NOTRY=True
Review-Url: https://codereview.webrtc.org/2841873002
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#17874}
Make all rtc_source_test target that contains tests that
are included in a test executable only be visible to the
rtc_test target. Doing this exposed a couple of errors and
dependency problems that were resolved. Having this could
have prevented duplicated execution of tests like the case that
was recently fixed by deadbeef@ in
https://codereview.webrtc.org/2820263004
New targets:
* //webrtc/modules/rtp_rtcp:fec_test_helper
* //webrtc/modules/rtp_rtcp:mock_rtp_rtcp
* //webrtc/modules/remote_bitrate_estimator:mock_remote_bitrate_observer
The mock files and targets should probably be moved into webrtc/test in
the future, but that's out of the scope of this CL.
BUG=webrtc:5716
NOTRY=True
Review-Url: https://codereview.webrtc.org/2828793003
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#17863}
Reason for revert:
I will try to reland next week because it is causing some problems.
Original issue's description:
> To accommodate some downstream WebRTC users we need to loosen
> the coupling between our code and the //third_party/protobuf.
>
> This includes using typedefs to define strings instead of
> assuming std::string.
>
> After this refactoring it will be possible to link with other
> protobuf implementations than the current one.
>
> We moved the PRESUBMIT check to another CL [1]. The goal of this
> presubmit is to avoid the direct usage of google::protobuf outside
> of the webrtc/base/protobuf_utils.h header file.
>
> [1] - https://codereview.webrtc.org/2753823003/
>
> BUG=webrtc:7340
> NOTRY=True
>
> Review-Url: https://codereview.webrtc.org/2747863003
> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#17466}
> Committed: 16ab93b952TBR=kjellander@webrtc.org,henrik.lundin@webrtc.org,kwiberg@webrtc.org,michaelt@webrtc.org,peah@webrtc.org
# Not skipping CQ checks because original CL landed more than 1 days ago.
BUG=webrtc:7340
Review-Url: https://codereview.webrtc.org/2786363002
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#17483}
the coupling between our code and the //third_party/protobuf.
This includes using typedefs to define strings instead of
assuming std::string.
After this refactoring it will be possible to link with other
protobuf implementations than the current one.
We moved the PRESUBMIT check to another CL [1]. The goal of this
presubmit is to avoid the direct usage of google::protobuf outside
of the webrtc/base/protobuf_utils.h header file.
[1] - https://codereview.webrtc.org/2753823003/
BUG=webrtc:7340
NOTRY=True
Review-Url: https://codereview.webrtc.org/2747863003
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#17466}
This CL is one in a series. To finish the work, the following CLs will be added:
1. CL for connecting RPLR as well
2. CL for RPLR-based FecController
3. CL for allowing experiment-driven configuration of the above (through both field-trials and protobuf)
BUG=webrtc:7058
Review-Url: https://codereview.webrtc.org/2638083002
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#17365}
1. GetTransportFeedbackVector will now return a vector which also explicitly states lost packets.
2. The returned vector is unsorted (uses default order - by sequence number). It's up to the users to sort otherwise, if they need a different order.
BUG=None
Review-Url: https://codereview.webrtc.org/2707383006
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#17114}
In this CL:
- Add message BweProbeCluster and BweProbeResult to rtc_event_log.proto.
- Add corresponding log functions to RtcEventLog.
- Add optional field |probe_cluster_id| to RtpPacket message and added
an overload function to log with this information.
- Propagate the probe_cluster_id to where RTP packets are logged.
BUG=webrtc:6984
Review-Url: https://codereview.webrtc.org/2666533002
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#16857}
In order to not make this CL too large I have broken it down into at least two
steps. Previous CL: https://codereview.chromium.org/2628563003/
webrtc::PacedSender::Process <--- previous CL start here
webrtc::PacedSender::SendPacket
webrtc::PacketRouter::TimeToSendPacket
webrtc::ModuleRtpRtcpImpl::TimeToSendPacket <--- previous CL end here, this Cl start here
webrtc::RTPSender::TimeToSendPacket
webrtc::RTPSender::PrepareAndSendPacket
webrtc::RTPSender::AddPacketToTransportFeedback
webrtc::TransportFeedbackAdapter::AddPacket
webrtc::SendTimeHistory::AddAndRemoveOld <--- this CL end here
BUG=webrtc:6822
Review-Url: https://codereview.webrtc.org/2708873003
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#16796}
Rename loss based and delay based bwe updates in proto (and correspondingly in the C++ code).
BUG=webrtc:6423
Review-Url: https://codereview.webrtc.org/2705613002
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#16719}
In order to not make this CL too large I have broken it down into at least two steps. In this CL we only propagate the pacing information part of the way:
webrtc::PacedSender::Process <--- propagate from here
webrtc::PacedSender::SendPacket
webrtc::PacketRouter::TimeToSendPacket
webrtc::ModuleRtpRtcpImpl::TimeToSendPacket <--- to here
webrtc::RTPSender::TimeToSendPacket
webrtc::RTPSender::PrepareAndSendPacket
webrtc::RTPSender::AddPacketToTransportFeedback
webrtc::TransportFeedbackAdapter::AddPacket
webrtc::SendTimeHistory::AddAndRemoveOld <--- goal is to propagte it here
BUG=webrtc:6822
Review-Url: https://codereview.webrtc.org/2628563003
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#16664}
The frame_analyzer which is used by compare_videos.py needs to handle
barcode errors. As before the reference and the test video can contain
repeated frames. When there are barcode decode errors in the test video,
then we should not let that contribute to the skipped frames score. When
there are barcode decode errors in the reference video, then we need to
take proper care to still calculate skipped barcodes when the
corresponding frames are not present in the test video and the test
video does not have a frame with a barcode decode error that could have
been the same frame as the one in the reference.
A new metric total number of skipped frames and for number of decode
errors is introduced. Barcodes that appears in the test video, but not
in the reference video are also listed.
BUG=webrtc:6967
Review-Url: https://codereview.webrtc.org/2666333003
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#16638}
It makes sense it's closer to the source code of the actual test.
Fix a bug that caused --help to fail.
BUG=webrtc:7034
NOTRY=True
Review-Url: https://codereview.webrtc.org/2681833007
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#16505}
