Delete IsMutable and IsExclusive methods.

webrtc/media/base/videoframefactory.cc

Index: webrtc/media/base/videoframefactory.cc
diff --git a/webrtc/media/base/videoframefactory.cc b/webrtc/media/base/videoframefactory.cc
index 23925bda56abefb096d71250f0531878478fc532..0e8bc7a86b66c07c51db369579c9f81c6e43f345 100644
--- a/webrtc/media/base/videoframefactory.cc
+++ b/webrtc/media/base/videoframefactory.cc
@@ -39,23 +39,14 @@ VideoFrame* VideoFrameFactory::CreateAliasedFrame(
     std::swap(output_width, output_height);
   }
 
-  // Create and stretch the output frame if it has not been created yet, is
-  // still in use by others, or its size is not same as the expected.
-  if (!output_frame_ || !output_frame_->IsExclusive() ||
-      output_frame_->width() != output_width ||
-      output_frame_->height() != output_height) {
-    output_frame_.reset(
-        cropped_input_frame->Stretch(output_width, output_height, true, true));
-    if (!output_frame_) {
-      LOG(LS_WARNING) << "Failed to stretch frame to " << output_width << "x"
-                      << output_height;
-      return NULL;
-    }
-  } else {
-    cropped_input_frame->StretchToFrame(output_frame_.get(), true, true);
-    output_frame_->SetTimeStamp(cropped_input_frame->GetTimeStamp());
-  }
-  return output_frame_->Copy();
+  std::unique_ptr<VideoFrame> output_frame(

[magjed_webrtc, 2016/05/25 13:17:01]

Why CreateWithBuffer? Why not just:
new WebRtcVideoFrame(pool_.CreateBuffer(output_width, output_height),
cropped_input_frame->rotation(), cropped_input_frame->timestamp_us());

[nisse-webrtc, 2016/05/25 13:39:47]

My understanding is that this code is supposed to not know what type of frames
it really is handling, but nevertheless produce a new frame of the same class as
cropped_input_frame, which was produced by a subclass's implementation of
CreateAliasedFrame(3 args).

So using the WebRtcVideoFrame constructor doesn't seem right.

It uses a pool (previously a single frame and IsExclusive) for the scaled frame,
but WebRtcVideoFrameFactory doesn't use any pool for the unscaled, likely
larger, frame. So it makes little sense.

The factory-less android code in my other cl uses two pools, used before and
after scaling. Which  looks more like the right thing, if we don't want large
allocations for each incoming frame.

[magjed_webrtc, 2016/05/25 14:56:07]

It's not supposed to know anything about the type of frame except the interface,
but it's not required to return a frame of the same class. That's a strange
requirement, why would that be needed?

[nisse-webrtc, 2016/05/26 07:44:42]

I thought chrome might be picky. But it doesn't matter, it overrides both
CreateAliasedFrame, both 3-args and 5-args.

I'll drop CreateWithBuffer.

+      cropped_input_frame->CreateWithBuffer(
+          pool_.CreateBuffer(output_width, output_height),
+          cropped_input_frame->rotation(),
+          cropped_input_frame->timestamp_us()));
+
+  cropped_input_frame->StretchToFrame(output_frame.get(), true, true);
+  return output_frame.release();
 }
 
 }  // namespace cricket