Chromium Code Reviews| Index: webrtc/media/base/videoframe_unittest.h |
| diff --git a/webrtc/media/base/videoframe_unittest.h b/webrtc/media/base/videoframe_unittest.h |
| index 06afd0eb4c707b672332282dac3f6f1d23434186..f19d0325d6a103b5e2f87d68fbcc21ac1ab0b10f 100644 |
| --- a/webrtc/media/base/videoframe_unittest.h |
| +++ b/webrtc/media/base/videoframe_unittest.h |
| @@ -1216,10 +1216,7 @@ |
| EXPECT_FALSE(expected_result); // NULL is okay if failure was expected. |
| return; |
| } |
| - // TODO(pbos): Remove kPad once http://llvm.org/PR28348 is fixed and the fix |
| - // is rolled in. |
| - volatile const int kPad = 4095; |
| - data_ptr += kPadToHeapSized + (-(static_cast<int>(data_size)) & kPad); |
| + data_ptr += kPadToHeapSized + (-(static_cast<int>(data_size)) & 4095); |
|
tommi
2016/06/30 10:39:18
instead of 4095, can we use 0xfff? I find it a lo
pbos-webrtc
2016/06/30 12:16:54
I agree, but I find this hard to read overall, I'm
|
| memcpy(data_ptr, sample, std::min(data_size, sample_size)); |
| for (int i = 0; i < repeat_; ++i) { |
| EXPECT_EQ(expected_result, frame.Validate(fourcc, kWidth, kHeight, |