Disable extended desktop.

Disable extended desktop.
Instead, cycle through primary, secondary and mirror mode.
This CL consists of following changes and is designed to minimize conflict with m23 branch.

* Add back original display switching (primary->secondary->mirror).
* Display_change_observer_x11 to ignore displays other than primary
* Do not distinguish internal display (as internal display can be blank)
* Disable display configuration UI

I'll revert this change once this is merged to m23 branch.

BUG=152003
TEST=tested on devices with m23 and tot

Committed: http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=158546

[oshima, 2012-09-24 23:59:25]

josh -> output_configurator
sky -> chrome/ ui/aura

[Josh Horwich, 2012-09-25 00:06:52]

http://codereview.chromium.org/10974014/diff/9003/chromeos/display/output_con...
File chromeos/display/output_configurator.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/10974014/diff/9003/chromeos/display/output_con...
chromeos/display/output_configurator.cc:844: return false;
Will the fact that we will now always have IsProjecting return false (and
forwarded via SetIsProjecting) be a problem? I'm not familiar with the purpose
of knowing if we're projecting or not, or if saying "not projecting" is
appropriate for all three STATE_DUAL_ modes

[oshima, 2012-09-25 00:18:50]

On 2012/09/25 00:06:52, Josh Horwich wrote:
>
http://codereview.chromium.org/10974014/diff/9003/chromeos/display/output_con...
> File chromeos/display/output_configurator.cc (right):
> 
>
http://codereview.chromium.org/10974014/diff/9003/chromeos/display/output_con...
> chromeos/display/output_configurator.cc:844: return false;
> Will the fact that we will now always have IsProjecting return false (and
> forwarded via SetIsProjecting) be a problem? I'm not familiar with the purpose
> of knowing if we're projecting or not, or if saying "not projecting" is
> appropriate for all three STATE_DUAL_ modes

good point. I changed OutputConfigurator to check internal display only within
OutputConfigurator. Other place that uses is_internal is ScreenPowerSet and this
looks
ok.

[sky, 2012-09-25 00:21:05]

LGTM

[Josh Horwich, 2012-09-25 00:25:34]

output_configurator LGTM w/nit

http://codereview.chromium.org/10974014/diff/10006/chromeos/display/output_co...
File chromeos/display/output_configurator.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/10974014/diff/10006/chromeos/display/output_co...
chromeos/display/output_configurator.cc:260: name.find(kInternal_LVDS) == 0 ||
name.find(kInternal_eDP) == 0;
nit: Should we add a TODO(oshima) comment here to switch back to
IsInternalOutputName when we undo this patch?

[oshima, 2012-09-25 01:43:18]

http://codereview.chromium.org/10974014/diff/10006/chromeos/display/output_co...
File chromeos/display/output_configurator.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/10974014/diff/10006/chromeos/display/output_co...
chromeos/display/output_configurator.cc:260: name.find(kInternal_LVDS) == 0 ||
name.find(kInternal_eDP) == 0;
On 2012/09/25 00:25:35, Josh Horwich wrote:
> nit: Should we add a TODO(oshima) comment here to switch back to
> IsInternalOutputName when we undo this patch?

Done.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-09-25 01:48:15]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/oshima@chromium.org/10974014/10007

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-09-25 12:46:00]

Change committed as 158546