recent changed decreased timeout from forever to 1s which is not enough on some platforms
Increase timeout to forever for posting 65k tasks.
Also increase timeout for eventual destruction of the tasks to reduce change it would flake.
Bug: chromium:972917
Change-Id: I4948d49c1514833ab190856fdd25a47a5bad91eb
Reviewed-on: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/141410
Commit-Queue: Danil Chapovalov <danilchap@webrtc.org>
Reviewed-by: Karl Wiberg <kwiberg@webrtc.org>
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#28235}
It's easy to make small errors when building field trial strings, and
those errors can cause all sorts of weird problems. This CL checks if
the FT string has an odd number of delimiters, duplicate
names or any trailing chars.
If so we'll log a error message. On debug builds we'll also crash.
Bug: webrtc:10729
Change-Id: Iebf7155d9b117a02d1e9cfe7f64408e11df2aec5
Reviewed-on: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/140866
Reviewed-by: Sebastian Jansson <srte@webrtc.org>
Reviewed-by: Karl Wiberg <kwiberg@webrtc.org>
Commit-Queue: Jonas Olsson <jonasolsson@webrtc.org>
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#28234}
These are replaced with the methods SendPictureLossIndication and
SendFullIntraRequest, added in cl
https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/140043.
Also delete the corresponding state variable
RtpRtcpImpl::key_frame_req_method_, the enum KeyFrameRequestMethod,
and the nearby unused enum RtpRtcpPacketType.
Bug: None
Change-Id: I1ac2e4ce6dbe20d1d1cbb3d5b2256ea55b341a57
Reviewed-on: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/141403
Reviewed-by: Danil Chapovalov <danilchap@webrtc.org>
Commit-Queue: Niels Moller <nisse@webrtc.org>
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#28221}
This is a reland of 890bc3069cbababa19b40ec02684253d60e051b2
Zero bitrate caused division by zero in DCHECK for max bitrate.
Added unit tests to ensure that setting zero bitrate does not crash.
> Original change's description:
> > Cleanup of video packet overhead calculation.
> >
> > This CL updates the video packet overhead calculation to make it more
> > clear. This prepares for future work on improving the accuracy of the
> > calculation.
> >
> > Bug: webrtc:9883
> > Change-Id: I1d623a3e0de45be7b6e4a1f9e3cbe54fd2b8a45a
> > Reviewed-on: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/138077
> > Commit-Queue: Sebastian Jansson <srte@webrtc.org>
> > Reviewed-by: Erik Språng <sprang@webrtc.org>
> > Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#28040}
Bug: webrtc:10674
Change-Id: I156d1ee5546ede7e43ae1d9a298dcaba6071230f
Reviewed-on: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/140890
Reviewed-by: Niels Moller <nisse@webrtc.org>
Reviewed-by: Erik Språng <sprang@webrtc.org>
Commit-Queue: Sebastian Jansson <srte@webrtc.org>
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#28212}
This change is part of a change to break the dependency between "api:rtp_headers" and "api/video:video_frame". It does so by first creating an empty "api/video:video_rtp_headers" build rule so that downstream projects can be fixed before moving the source files.
Bug: webrtc:10668
Change-Id: I81aa6edfef3639b457a40aa93de048e62cbfd8ef
Reviewed-on: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/140291
Commit-Queue: Chen Xing <chxg@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Karl Wiberg <kwiberg@webrtc.org>
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#28209}
avoid waiting while executing a Task to discourage blocking.
fix accessing tasks_clean_up counter since after TaskQueue is destroyed,
it doesn't guarantee sequential execution of the destructors, nor
that all pending tasks are destroyed at that moment.
Instead verify that all posted tasks will be destroyed eventually.
Bug: None
Change-Id: I4cfc97ac0787fe2d0b9d2f0d712a37ae0ca9e1aa
Reviewed-on: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/140288
Reviewed-by: Karl Wiberg <kwiberg@webrtc.org>
Reviewed-by: Niels Moller <nisse@webrtc.org>
Commit-Queue: Danil Chapovalov <danilchap@webrtc.org>
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#28208}
It isn't actively maintained to be up to date but depends on internals
increasing maintenance burden. There's now better tools available to
evaluate congestion controller performance that should be used if we
want to start maintaining this functionality again.
Bug: webrtc:9883
Change-Id: I097747e6f31a3d1522ef8dfda84f995e33f3a697
Reviewed-on: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/140887
Commit-Queue: Sebastian Jansson <srte@webrtc.org>
Reviewed-by: Björn Terelius <terelius@webrtc.org>
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#28205}
Use an explicit list and don't add X11 dependency to rtc_base.
Allow skipping code that depends on rarer extensions such as Xdamage, Xfixes.
Bug: None
Change-Id: Icb8d20a267358f5cd3f1ff2af31a669e0670d2f6
Reviewed-on: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/140865
Reviewed-by: Mirko Bonadei <mbonadei@webrtc.org>
Reviewed-by: Guido Urdaneta <guidou@webrtc.org>
Reviewed-by: Henrik Andreassson <henrika@webrtc.org>
Commit-Queue: Oleh Prypin <oprypin@webrtc.org>
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#28204}
While reading inpùt files until their end, the assert should be
ASSERT_TRUE.
Change-Id: Ib60b68173b58b77d9789c544c7cb647a752a24d1
Bug: webrtc:10690
Reviewed-on: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/140280
Commit-Queue: Pablo Barrera González <barrerap@webrtc.org>
Reviewed-by: Minyue Li <minyue@webrtc.org>
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#28202}
In short, the caller places a x-opaque line in SDP for each m= section that
uses datagram transport. If the answerer supports datagram transport, it will
parse this line and create a datagram transport. It will then echo the x-opaque
line into the answer (to indicate that it accepted use of datagram transport).
If the offer and answer contain exactly the same x-opaque line, both peers will
use datagram transport. If the x-opaque line is omitted from the answer (or is
different in the answer) they will fall back to RTP.
Note that a different x-opaque line in the answer means the answerer did not
understand something in the negotiation proto. Since WebRTC cannot know what
was misunderstood, or whether it's still possible to use the datagram transport,
it must fall back to RTP. This may change in the future, possibly by passing
the answer to the datagram transport, but it's good enough for now.
Negotiation consists of four parts:
1. DatagramTransport exposes transport parameters for both client and server
perspectives. The client just echoes what it received from the server (modulo
any fields it might not have understood).
2. SDP adds a x-opaque line for opaque transport parameters. Identical to
x-mt, but this is specific to datagram transport and goes in each m= section,
and appears in the answer as well as the offer.
- This is propagated to Jsep as part of the TransportDescription.
- SDP files: transport_description.h,cc, transport_description_factory.h,cc,
media_session.cc, webrtc_sdp.cc
3. JsepTransport/Controller:
- Exposes opaque parameters for each mid (m= section). On offerer, this means
pre-allocating a datagram transport and getting its parameters. On the
answerer, this means echoing the offerer's parameters.
- Uses a composite RTP transport to receive from either default RTP or
datagram transport until both offer and answer arrive.
- If a provisional answer arrives, sets the composite to send on the
provisionally selected transport.
- Once both offer and answer are set, deletes the unneeded transports and
keeps whichever transport is selected.
4. PeerConnection pulls transport parameters out of Jsep and adds them to SDP.
Bug: webrtc:9719
Change-Id: Ifcc428c8d76fb77dcc8abaa79507c620bcfb31b9
Reviewed-on: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/140920
Reviewed-by: Steve Anton <steveanton@webrtc.org>
Commit-Queue: Bjorn Mellem <mellem@webrtc.org>
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#28198}
This reverts commit 35d4e43f169e7cb237bce9501db29ea4b69820cd.
Reason for revert: Breaks downstream.
Original change's description:
> Reland "Cleanup of video packet overhead calculation."
>
> This is a reland of 890bc3069cbababa19b40ec02684253d60e051b2
>
> The calculation was rewritten using the new Frequency type to
> avoid the division by zero error introduced by the previous CL.
>
> Original change's description:
> > Cleanup of video packet overhead calculation.
> >
> > This CL updates the video packet overhead calculation to make it more
> > clear. This prepares for future work on improving the accuracy of the
> > calculation.
> >
> > Bug: webrtc:9883
> > Change-Id: I1d623a3e0de45be7b6e4a1f9e3cbe54fd2b8a45a
> > Reviewed-on: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/138077
> > Commit-Queue: Sebastian Jansson <srte@webrtc.org>
> > Reviewed-by: Erik Språng <sprang@webrtc.org>
> > Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#28040}
>
> Bug: webrtc:10674
> Change-Id: Ib5cb6f05cfa7d097f89ac6fdcf198f2fc1b26b58
> Reviewed-on: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/138219
> Commit-Queue: Sebastian Jansson <srte@webrtc.org>
> Reviewed-by: Niels Moller <nisse@webrtc.org>
> Reviewed-by: Erik Språng <sprang@webrtc.org>
> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#28194}
TBR=nisse@webrtc.org,sprang@webrtc.org,srte@webrtc.org
Change-Id: Ib6c3c123590b815c4be12966cdae02f91c61ab34
No-Presubmit: true
No-Tree-Checks: true
No-Try: true
Bug: webrtc:10674
Reviewed-on: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/140889
Reviewed-by: Sebastian Jansson <srte@webrtc.org>
Commit-Queue: Sebastian Jansson <srte@webrtc.org>
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#28195}
This is a reland of 890bc3069cbababa19b40ec02684253d60e051b2
The calculation was rewritten using the new Frequency type to
avoid the division by zero error introduced by the previous CL.
Original change's description:
> Cleanup of video packet overhead calculation.
>
> This CL updates the video packet overhead calculation to make it more
> clear. This prepares for future work on improving the accuracy of the
> calculation.
>
> Bug: webrtc:9883
> Change-Id: I1d623a3e0de45be7b6e4a1f9e3cbe54fd2b8a45a
> Reviewed-on: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/138077
> Commit-Queue: Sebastian Jansson <srte@webrtc.org>
> Reviewed-by: Erik Språng <sprang@webrtc.org>
> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#28040}
Bug: webrtc:10674
Change-Id: Ib5cb6f05cfa7d097f89ac6fdcf198f2fc1b26b58
Reviewed-on: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/138219
Commit-Queue: Sebastian Jansson <srte@webrtc.org>
Reviewed-by: Niels Moller <nisse@webrtc.org>
Reviewed-by: Erik Språng <sprang@webrtc.org>
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#28194}
All usages compare the budget usage to ratios, so we can skip a few
multiplications.
Bug: webrtc:10719
Change-Id: I0205d74762043d972c087c152915e4fdd9510057
Reviewed-on: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/140289
Commit-Queue: Jonas Olsson <jonasolsson@webrtc.org>
Reviewed-by: Sebastian Jansson <srte@webrtc.org>
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#28190}
This reverts commit 71c6482baf0ff17141c635e6a7639493db68a65c.
Reason for revert: Lands too much at once and breaks downstream tests that need to implement new interfaces first.
Original change's description:
> Implement true negotiation for DatagramTransport with fallback to RTP.
>
> In short, the caller places a x-opaque line in SDP for each m= section that
> uses datagram transport. If the answerer supports datagram transport, it will
> parse this line and create a datagram transport. It will then echo the x-opaque
> line into the answer (to indicate that it accepted use of datagram transport).
>
> If the offer and answer contain exactly the same x-opaque line, both peers will
> use datagram transport. If the x-opaque line is omitted from the answer (or is
> different in the answer) they will fall back to RTP.
>
> Note that a different x-opaque line in the answer means the answerer did not
> understand something in the negotiation proto. Since WebRTC cannot know what
> was misunderstood, or whether it's still possible to use the datagram transport,
> it must fall back to RTP. This may change in the future, possibly by passing
> the answer to the datagram transport, but it's good enough for now.
>
> Negotiation consists of four parts:
> 1. DatagramTransport exposes transport parameters for both client and server
> perspectives. The client just echoes what it received from the server (modulo
> any fields it might not have understood).
>
> 2. SDP adds a x-opaque line for opaque transport parameters. Identical to
> x-mt, but this is specific to datagram transport and goes in each m= section,
> and appears in the answer as well as the offer.
> - This is propagated to Jsep as part of the TransportDescription.
> - SDP files: transport_description.h,cc, transport_description_factory.h,cc,
> media_session.cc, webrtc_sdp.cc
>
> 3. JsepTransport/Controller:
> - Exposes opaque parameters for each mid (m= section). On offerer, this means
> pre-allocating a datagram transport and getting its parameters. On the
> answerer, this means echoing the offerer's parameters.
> - Uses a composite RTP transport to receive from either default RTP or
> datagram transport until both offer and answer arrive.
> - If a provisional answer arrives, sets the composite to send on the
> provisionally selected transport.
> - Once both offer and answer are set, deletes the unneeded transports and
> keeps whichever transport is selected.
>
> 4. PeerConnection pulls transport parameters out of Jsep and adds them to SDP.
>
> Bug: webrtc:9719
> Change-Id: Id8996eb1871e79d93b7923a5d7eb3431548c798d
> Reviewed-on: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/140700
> Commit-Queue: Bjorn Mellem <mellem@webrtc.org>
> Reviewed-by: Steve Anton <steveanton@webrtc.org>
> Reviewed-by: Anton Sukhanov <sukhanov@webrtc.org>
> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#28182}
TBR=steveanton@webrtc.org,mellem@webrtc.org,sukhanov@webrtc.org
Change-Id: I0d502c4a6d27516c35ed85154f3fa5869f88b3b7
No-Presubmit: true
No-Tree-Checks: true
No-Try: true
Bug: webrtc:9719
Reviewed-on: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/140822
Commit-Queue: Bjorn Mellem <mellem@webrtc.org>
Reviewed-by: Bjorn Mellem <mellem@webrtc.org>
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#28188}
