move VideoCaptureImplManager from singleton to a member of RenderThread.

move VideoCaptureImplManager from singleton to a member of RenderThread.
fix some comments.
BUG=none
TEST=try bots

Committed: http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=90605

[wjia(left Chromium), 2011-06-24 21:45:32]

All usage of singleton in video capture are removed. Will have patch using
VideoCaptureImplManager when MediaStream patches are landed.

[scherkus (not reviewing), 2011-06-24 22:01:37]

http://codereview.chromium.org/7265004/diff/1/content/renderer/media/video_ca...
File content/renderer/media/video_capture_impl_manager.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/7265004/diff/1/content/renderer/media/video_ca...
content/renderer/media/video_capture_impl_manager.cc:11: : thread_("VC manager")
{
jam@ can chime in here but I believe we have a naming pattern for threads

regardless I think "VideoCaptureManager" would be an improvement

http://codereview.chromium.org/7265004/diff/1/content/renderer/media/video_ca...
content/renderer/media/video_capture_impl_manager.cc:26: base::AutoLock
auto_lock(lock_);
if you have to be on the RenderThread to grab the VideoCaptureImplManager
pointer, then do we need to use locks?

what other threads are interacting w/ this object?

http://codereview.chromium.org/7265004/diff/1/content/renderer/media/video_ca...
content/renderer/media/video_capture_impl_manager.cc:31: devices_[id] =
Device(vc, handler);
hmm.. doesn't this mean we're doing a lot of copying of the std::list<> object
inside of Device by storing it inside of a std::map<> ?

http://codereview.chromium.org/7265004/diff/1/content/renderer/media/video_ca...
content/renderer/media/video_capture_impl_manager.cc:75: 
nit: blank line

http://codereview.chromium.org/7265004/diff/1/content/renderer/media/video_ca...
File content/renderer/media/video_capture_impl_manager.h (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/7265004/diff/1/content/renderer/media/video_ca...
content/renderer/media/video_capture_impl_manager.h:24: class
VideoCaptureImplManager
if this isn't implementing an interface... why is an Impl and not just
VideoCaptureManager?

I see that we already have a VideoCaptureManager under
content/browser/renderer_host/...

What is the difference between the two?

Can we think of some better names?

http://codereview.chromium.org/7265004/diff/1/content/renderer/media/video_ca...
content/renderer/media/video_capture_impl_manager.h:43:
VideoCaptureMessageFilter* GetVideoCaptureMessageFilter() const {
simple accessor should be video_capture_message_filter()

http://codereview.chromium.org/7265004/diff/1/content/renderer/media/video_ca...
content/renderer/media/video_capture_impl_manager.h:49: Device();
looks like you don't need the default ctor -- in which case you should remove it

[wjia(left Chromium), 2011-06-24 23:19:42]

http://codereview.chromium.org/7265004/diff/1/content/renderer/media/video_ca...
File content/renderer/media/video_capture_impl_manager.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/7265004/diff/1/content/renderer/media/video_ca...
content/renderer/media/video_capture_impl_manager.cc:11: : thread_("VC manager")
{
On 2011/06/24 22:01:37, scherkus wrote:
> jam@ can chime in here but I believe we have a naming pattern for threads
> 
> regardless I think "VideoCaptureManager" would be an improvement

VideoCaptureManager has been taken by browser process side code. That one should
be called VideoCaptureDeviceManager.

http://codereview.chromium.org/7265004/diff/1/content/renderer/media/video_ca...
content/renderer/media/video_capture_impl_manager.cc:26: base::AutoLock
auto_lock(lock_);
On 2011/06/24 22:01:37, scherkus wrote:
> if you have to be on the RenderThread to grab the VideoCaptureImplManager
> pointer, then do we need to use locks?
> 
> what other threads are interacting w/ this object?

For rtc encoding channel, VideoCaptureImplManager is sent to MediaStream as a
pointer. Later on, when MediaStream needs a video capture, it will call
AddDevice to get one. It might be on webkit thread (i.e., main thread). Adding
lock here allows it to be called from other thread as well.

http://codereview.chromium.org/7265004/diff/1/content/renderer/media/video_ca...
content/renderer/media/video_capture_impl_manager.cc:31: devices_[id] =
Device(vc, handler);
On 2011/06/24 22:01:37, scherkus wrote:
> hmm.. doesn't this mean we're doing a lot of copying of the std::list<> object
> inside of Device by storing it inside of a std::map<> ?

A device is created only once. Later on, it's accessed via reference as code
below. Furthermore, there are typically at most 2 handlers for each device.

Anyway, it's changed to use pointer.

http://codereview.chromium.org/7265004/diff/1/content/renderer/media/video_ca...
content/renderer/media/video_capture_impl_manager.cc:75: 
On 2011/06/24 22:01:37, scherkus wrote:
> nit: blank line

Done.

http://codereview.chromium.org/7265004/diff/1/content/renderer/media/video_ca...
File content/renderer/media/video_capture_impl_manager.h (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/7265004/diff/1/content/renderer/media/video_ca...
content/renderer/media/video_capture_impl_manager.h:24: class
VideoCaptureImplManager
On 2011/06/24 22:01:37, scherkus wrote:
> if this isn't implementing an interface... why is an Impl and not just
> VideoCaptureManager?
> 
> I see that we already have a VideoCaptureManager under
> content/browser/renderer_host/...
> 
> What is the difference between the two?
> 
> Can we think of some better names?

media::VideoCapture is the interface, VideoCaptureImpl is the implementation,
VideoCaptureImplManager manages the device sharing. The browser process one
should be called VideoCaptureDeviceManager.

http://codereview.chromium.org/7265004/diff/1/content/renderer/media/video_ca...
content/renderer/media/video_capture_impl_manager.h:43:
VideoCaptureMessageFilter* GetVideoCaptureMessageFilter() const {
On 2011/06/24 22:01:37, scherkus wrote:
> simple accessor should be video_capture_message_filter()

Done.

http://codereview.chromium.org/7265004/diff/1/content/renderer/media/video_ca...
content/renderer/media/video_capture_impl_manager.h:49: Device();
On 2011/06/24 22:01:37, scherkus wrote:
> looks like you don't need the default ctor -- in which case you should remove
it

Done.

[jam, 2011-06-27 16:30:38]

lgtm, thanks

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2011-06-27 17:42:12]

Change committed as 90605