Add --threads to tests binary, to run non-GPU tests on multiple cores.

Add --threads to tests binary, to run non-GPU tests on multiple cores.

On my quad-core laptop I can get about a 3x speedup:
  Debug,   --threads 0  40.99s
  Debug,   --threads 8  14.39s
  Release, --threads 0   8.24s
  Release, --threads 8   2.80s

I also removed some unused Test.{h,cpp} APIs and refactored a little to make
things thread-safer.

BUG=

Committed: http://code.google.com/p/skia/source/detail?r=8763

[borenet, 2013-04-17 16:23:48]

This LGTM but adding more reviewers who might be more familiar with this code.

[scroggo, 2013-04-17 17:34:52]

https://codereview.chromium.org/13855007/diff/8001/tests/Test.cpp
File tests/Test.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/13855007/diff/8001/tests/Test.cpp#newcode82
tests/Test.cpp:82: this->onRun(&local);
Does anyone depend on the ordering between onRun and startTest?

https://codereview.chromium.org/13855007/diff/8001/tests/skia_test.cpp
File tests/skia_test.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/13855007/diff/8001/tests/skia_test.cpp#newcod...
tests/skia_test.cpp:155: int* fFailCount;
Shouldn't this be int32_t since it's passed to sk_atomic_inc?

https://codereview.chromium.org/13855007/diff/8001/tests/skia_test.cpp#newcod...
tests/skia_test.cpp:205: int failCount = 0;
int32_t?

https://codereview.chromium.org/13855007/diff/8001/tests/skia_test.cpp#newcod...
tests/skia_test.cpp:223: SkNEW_ARGS(SkTestRunnable, (unsafeTests[i],
&failCount))->run();
Won't the destructor for SkTArray call the destructor for each unsafeTest, even
though the SkTestRunnable deleted it?

[mtklein, 2013-04-17 18:13:59]

Please take another look?

https://codereview.chromium.org/13855007/diff/8001/tests/Test.cpp
File tests/Test.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/13855007/diff/8001/tests/Test.cpp#newcode82
tests/Test.cpp:82: this->onRun(&local);
On 2013/04/17 17:34:52, scroggo wrote:
> Does anyone depend on the ordering between onRun and startTest?

Nope.  Actually, this is a good point.  Moving the fReporter->startTest(this)
call earlier will make any extra SkDebugf calls the test may make make more
sense.

https://codereview.chromium.org/13855007/diff/8001/tests/skia_test.cpp
File tests/skia_test.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/13855007/diff/8001/tests/skia_test.cpp#newcod...
tests/skia_test.cpp:155: int* fFailCount;
On 2013/04/17 17:34:52, scroggo wrote:
> Shouldn't this be int32_t since it's passed to sk_atomic_inc?

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/13855007/diff/8001/tests/skia_test.cpp#newcod...
tests/skia_test.cpp:205: int failCount = 0;
On 2013/04/17 17:34:52, scroggo wrote:
> int32_t?

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/13855007/diff/8001/tests/skia_test.cpp#newcod...
tests/skia_test.cpp:223: SkNEW_ARGS(SkTestRunnable, (unsafeTests[i],
&failCount))->run();
On 2013/04/17 17:34:52, scroggo wrote:
> Won't the destructor for SkTArray call the destructor for each unsafeTest,
even
> though the SkTestRunnable deleted it?

This is an SkTArray<Test*>.  Does SkTArray delete pointer values?  That'd be
pretty surprising.

[scroggo, 2013-04-17 18:20:28]

On 2013/04/17 18:13:59, mtklein wrote:
> Please take another look?
> 
> https://codereview.chromium.org/13855007/diff/8001/tests/Test.cpp
> File tests/Test.cpp (right):
> 
> https://codereview.chromium.org/13855007/diff/8001/tests/Test.cpp#newcode82
> tests/Test.cpp:82: this->onRun(&local);
> On 2013/04/17 17:34:52, scroggo wrote:
> > Does anyone depend on the ordering between onRun and startTest?
> 
> Nope.  Actually, this is a good point.  Moving the fReporter->startTest(this)
> call earlier will make any extra SkDebugf calls the test may make make more
> sense.
> 
> https://codereview.chromium.org/13855007/diff/8001/tests/skia_test.cpp
> File tests/skia_test.cpp (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/13855007/diff/8001/tests/skia_test.cpp#newcod...
> tests/skia_test.cpp:155: int* fFailCount;
> On 2013/04/17 17:34:52, scroggo wrote:
> > Shouldn't this be int32_t since it's passed to sk_atomic_inc?
> 
> Done.
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/13855007/diff/8001/tests/skia_test.cpp#newcod...
> tests/skia_test.cpp:205: int failCount = 0;
> On 2013/04/17 17:34:52, scroggo wrote:
> > int32_t?
> 
> Done.
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/13855007/diff/8001/tests/skia_test.cpp#newcod...
> tests/skia_test.cpp:223: SkNEW_ARGS(SkTestRunnable, (unsafeTests[i],
> &failCount))->run();
> On 2013/04/17 17:34:52, scroggo wrote:
> > Won't the destructor for SkTArray call the destructor for each unsafeTest,
> even
> > though the SkTestRunnable deleted it?
> 
> This is an SkTArray<Test*>.  Does SkTArray delete pointer values?  That'd be
> pretty surprising.

My mistake. No, that should be fine.

lgtm

[reed1, 2013-04-18 19:39:16]

I bow to the pressure of the mob

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-04-18 19:42:22]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://skia-tree-status.appspot.com/cq/mtklein@google.com/13855007/21001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-04-18 20:15:42]

Retried try job too often on Skia_MacMiniLion_Float_Compile_Release_32_Trybot
for step(s) BuildBench, BuildGM, BuildMost, BuildSkiaBaseLibs, BuildTests,
BuildTools
http://108.170.217.252:10117/buildstatus?builder=Skia_MacMiniLion_Float_Compi...

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-04-18 21:44:41]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://skia-tree-status.appspot.com/cq/mtklein@google.com/13855007/21001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-04-19 01:22:42]

Failed to apply the patch.
svn: Commit failed (details follow):
svn: MKACTIVITY of '/svn/!svn/act/d92c0660-15e5-47a9-890b-4453b135b66c':
authorization failed: Could not authenticate to server: rejected Basic challenge
(https://skia.googlecode.com)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-04-19 02:01:10]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://skia-tree-status.appspot.com/cq/mtklein@google.com/13855007/21001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-04-19 02:01:24]

Failed to apply the patch.
svn: Commit failed (details follow):
svn: MKACTIVITY of '/svn/!svn/act/13df1b98-5c03-482c-8482-def1858207ef':
authorization failed: Could not authenticate to server: rejected Basic challenge
(https://skia.googlecode.com)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-04-19 02:06:46]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://skia-tree-status.appspot.com/cq/mtklein@google.com/13855007/21001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-04-19 02:07:01]

Failed to apply the patch.
svn: Commit failed (details follow):
svn: MKACTIVITY of '/svn/!svn/act/0eef41de-e60f-4042-a72f-5dbbce3cdaa2':
authorization failed: Could not authenticate to server: rejected Basic challenge
(https://skia.googlecode.com)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-04-19 02:11:45]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://skia-tree-status.appspot.com/cq/mtklein@google.com/13855007/21001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-04-19 02:11:58]

Failed to apply the patch.
svn: Commit failed (details follow):
svn: MKACTIVITY of '/svn/!svn/act/91a545c1-a8cc-4aff-a677-25ddb55943b7':
authorization failed: Could not authenticate to server: rejected Basic challenge
(https://skia.googlecode.com)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-04-19 02:14:22]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://skia-tree-status.appspot.com/cq/mtklein@google.com/13855007/21001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-04-19 02:14:36]

Failed to apply the patch.
svn: Commit failed (details follow):
svn: MKACTIVITY of '/svn/!svn/act/b744bcdb-99b0-4c68-9d9a-691d395f731b':
authorization failed: Could not authenticate to server: rejected Basic challenge
(https://skia.googlecode.com)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-04-19 02:19:59]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://skia-tree-status.appspot.com/cq/mtklein@google.com/13855007/21001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-04-19 02:20:13]

Failed to apply the patch.
svn: Commit failed (details follow):
svn: MKACTIVITY of '/svn/!svn/act/f8fa73bb-6962-49db-a77a-24b92ff0fb92':
authorization failed: Could not authenticate to server: rejected Basic challenge
(https://skia.googlecode.com)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-04-19 13:24:11]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://skia-tree-status.appspot.com/cq/mtklein@google.com/13855007/21001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2013-04-19 13:24:30]

Change committed as 8763