Improve probing by ignoring small packets which otherwise break the mechanism.

Improve probing by ignoring small packets which otherwise break the mechanism.

These small packets are common for H.264 where the first packet of an IDR
contains the parameter sets.

BUG=4806
Committed: https://crrev.com/fe0c90501b17ce81bd3ca209ae6109ee781c47f7
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#9639}

[stefan-webrtc, 2015-07-03 09:12:26]

The CQ bit was checked by stefan@webrtc.org to run a CQ dry run

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-07-03 09:12:39]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1221943002/60001

[stefan-webrtc, 2015-07-03 09:13:36]

stefan@webrtc.org changed reviewers:
+ mflodman@webrtc.org

[mflodman, 2015-07-03 10:13:22]

One comment, LGTM.

https://codereview.webrtc.org/1221943002/diff/100001/webrtc/modules/remote_bi...
File
webrtc/modules/remote_bitrate_estimator/remote_bitrate_estimator_abs_send_time.cc
(right):

https://codereview.webrtc.org/1221943002/diff/100001/webrtc/modules/remote_bi...
webrtc/modules/remote_bitrate_estimator/remote_bitrate_estimator_abs_send_time.cc:389:
was_paced = was_paced && payload_size > 200;
Can we use a constant for 200 here and in bitrate_prober.cc?? I know it's a bit
weird now since they're on "different clients", but it will make more sense once
all logic is moved to the send side,

[stefan-webrtc, 2015-07-27 08:05:00]

The CQ bit was checked by stefan@webrtc.org

[stefan-webrtc, 2015-07-27 08:05:00]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from mflodman@webrtc.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.webrtc.org/1221943002/#ps120001 (title:
"Comments addressed.")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-07-27 08:05:08]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1221943002/120001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1221943002/120001

[stefan-webrtc, 2015-07-27 08:05:19]

https://codereview.webrtc.org/1221943002/diff/100001/webrtc/modules/remote_bi...
File
webrtc/modules/remote_bitrate_estimator/remote_bitrate_estimator_abs_send_time.cc
(right):

https://codereview.webrtc.org/1221943002/diff/100001/webrtc/modules/remote_bi...
webrtc/modules/remote_bitrate_estimator/remote_bitrate_estimator_abs_send_time.cc:389:
was_paced = was_paced && payload_size > 200;
On 2015/07/03 10:13:22, mflodman_OOO wrote:
> Can we use a constant for 200 here and in bitrate_prober.cc?? I know it's a
bit
> weird now since they're on "different clients", but it will make more sense
once
> all logic is moved to the send side,

Done.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-07-27 08:14:00]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-07-27 08:14:00]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  linux_rel on tryserver.webrtc (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.webrtc/builders/linux_rel/builds/8579)

[stefan-webrtc, 2015-07-27 08:25:02]

The CQ bit was checked by stefan@webrtc.org

[stefan-webrtc, 2015-07-27 08:25:03]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from mflodman@webrtc.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.webrtc.org/1221943002/#ps140001 (title:
"Fix test.")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-07-27 08:25:09]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1221943002/140001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1221943002/140001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-07-27 10:13:35]

Committed patchset #8 (id:140001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-07-27 10:13:43]

Patchset 8 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/fe0c90501b17ce81bd3ca209ae6109ee781c47f7
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#9639}