Visualize events related to probing in the total bitrate graph.

webrtc/tools/event_log_visualizer/plot_python.cc

Index: webrtc/tools/event_log_visualizer/plot_python.cc
diff --git a/webrtc/tools/event_log_visualizer/plot_python.cc b/webrtc/tools/event_log_visualizer/plot_python.cc
index c91efe32c70dc2a5cbd13515c647ca43fe7181e6..2b37280a422a1d1fa5d0f7ea5d5065375476461d 100644
--- a/webrtc/tools/event_log_visualizer/plot_python.cc
+++ b/webrtc/tools/event_log_visualizer/plot_python.cc
@@ -75,6 +75,11 @@ void PythonPlot::Draw() {
             "plt.plot(x%zu[1:], y%zu[:-1], color=rgb_colors[%zu], "
             "label=\'%s\')\n",
             i, i, i, series_list_[i].label.c_str());
+      } else if (series_list_[i].style == DOT_GRAPH) {
+        printf(
+            "plt.plot(x%zu, y%zu, color=rgb_colors[%zu], label=\'%s\', "
+            "marker='o', ls=' ')\n",

[terelius, 2017/03/28 15:02:56]

Is there a reason for using marker='o' instead of marker='.'? For protobuf
output, there will only be one type of marker/highlight for points.

[philipel, 2017/03/29 09:54:57]

Changed to '.'.

+            i, i, i, series_list_[i].label.c_str());
       } else {
         printf("raise Exception(\"Unknown graph type\")\n");
       }