Having dependency tags in the dependency path that shows why a specific
module is considered part of an apex makes it easier to understand why
that is the case and detect possible issues.
Bug: 152762638
Bug: 153306490
Test: m nothing
Merged-In: Iba2a8a5a6abe03dadee456e760aa4373cd00c07b
Change-Id: Iba2a8a5a6abe03dadee456e760aa4373cd00c07b
The DepIsInSameApex() and RequiredSdks() methods were defined in a few
places to avoid having to depend on the whole ApexModule/SdkAware
interfaces directly. However, that has a couple of issues:
1) It duplicates functionality making it difficult to change, changes
to the definitions outside the main interfaces do not cause compile
time failures, instead they result in a runtime change in behavior
which can be difficult to debug.
2) IDE navigation (specifically in Intellij) does not detect that the
duplicate definitions can resolve to the definitions in the main
interface.
This change extracts the methods into their own interfaces and reuses
those interfaces instead of duplicating the methods to fix both of
these issues.
Bug: 152878661
Bug: 153306490
Test: m nothing
Merged-In: I0cfdf342a14eb0bfb82b1bd17e0633d81c7facfb
Change-Id: I0cfdf342a14eb0bfb82b1bd17e0633d81c7facfb
Delegate the responsibility for determining whether the
walkPayloadDeps() should visit a child dependency to its do function.
This is needed to allow the visitor in checkApexAvailability() to avoid
checking the apex_available setting after crossing the APEX boundary.
Bug: 152878661
Bug: 153306490
Test: m droid
Merged-In: If46a2f74b6eca670befc3aeae430650e85542346
Change-Id: If46a2f74b6eca670befc3aeae430650e85542346
The apex available check can traverse quite a long path (5+ steps) to
get from the apex to a module that is missing the apex from its
apex_available property. Understanding where that dependency came from
can often require examining the dependency path which can be difficult.
This change adds the path to the error to simplify that process.
Bug: 153306490
Test: m nothing
Bug: 152762638
Merged-In: Ic4eb169dc2026cd8339d49e23b25d6d1c3879750
Change-Id: Ic4eb169dc2026cd8339d49e23b25d6d1c3879750
Makes sure that the module snapshots do not rely on the white list
of apex available settings so that when those lists are removed it is
not necessary to update any snapshots.
Bug: 142935992
Bug: 153306490
Test: m nothing
Merged-In: Iedcff7dfc2646a4da77258d16e06657dd2f411f9
Change-Id: Iedcff7dfc2646a4da77258d16e06657dd2f411f9
Test apexes no longer check to see whether their contents are available
so the special handling is no longer necessary.
Bug: 142935992
Bug: 153306490
Test: m nothing
Merged-In: Iecae7dcbb87908d19c672f74d3c1ed8810d4485b
Change-Id: Iecae7dcbb87908d19c672f74d3c1ed8810d4485b
The whitelistedApexAvailable used to map references to
com.android.art.debug/release to com.android.art before looking it up
in the white list. This change removed that mapping and simply added
both to the white list.
Bug: 142935992
Bug: 153306490
Test: m nothing
Merged-In: Ibad76fb73988688eb303e056197986ee9a6119ae
Change-Id: Ibad76fb73988688eb303e056197986ee9a6119ae
Coverage build adds extra dependencies for the runtime libs. Marking
them and their transitive dependenciese with apex_available doesn't make
any value; it instead adds noise.
Exempt-From-Owner-Approval: cherry-pick from AOSP
Bug: 150999716
Test: m
Merged-In: I08e51cec1de6ded624ef9d4c41c1e5b2e611ff38
(cherry picked from commit 58d1090032)
Change-Id: I08e51cec1de6ded624ef9d4c41c1e5b2e611ff38
The marked library(ies) were available to the adbd APEX via the
hand-written whitelist in build/soong/apex/apex.go. Trying to remove the
whitelist by adding apex_available property to the Android.bp of the
libraries.
Exempt-From-Owner-Approval: cherry-pick from AOSP
Bug: 150999716
Test: m
Merged-In: I6afbe905dda11056559521b937803dcd85b32fe5
(cherry picked from commit 3a0db5ef4e)
Change-Id: I6afbe905dda11056559521b937803dcd85b32fe5
The NDK prebuilts are implicitly used when building with sdk_version set.
Make the module types be available to any apex so that we don't need to
manually add apex_available property to the module definitions manually.
Exempt-From-Owner-Approval: cherry-pick from AOSP
Bug: 150999716
Test: m
Merged-In: I0870afa4c74b4a06ab1273dff84615778561ecc9
(cherry picked from commit e01e228270)
Change-Id: I0870afa4c74b4a06ab1273dff84615778561ecc9
The marked library(ies) were available to the APEXes via the hand-written
whitelist in build/soong/apex/apex.go. Trying to remove the whitelist
by adding apex_available property to the Android.bp of the libraries.
Exempt-From-Owner-Approval: cherry-pick from AOSP
Bug: 150999716
Test: m
Merged-In: I91d1b1076733a949ca2a959ba640ce34d0233492
(cherry picked from commit 541142ce6b)
Change-Id: I91d1b1076733a949ca2a959ba640ce34d0233492
Apex can use codenames like "Q", "R" for its min_sdk_version property.
Also, cc_library can use codenames for its stubs.versions.
Bug: 152655956
Test: vendor/google/build/build_mainline_modules.sh
Change-Id: I077ad7b2ac5d90b4c8708921e43846206f05ba70
libselinux no longer is included in any APEX. Only the platform variant
of it (/system/lib/libselinux.so) exists and APEXes link to it.
Removing the lib name from the whitelist to make it clear that the
library is not available to any APEX.
Bug: 151053366
Bug: 150999716
Test: m
Exempt-From-Owner-Approval: cherry-pick from aosp
Merged-In: Id4fb933141ad32ff5217a58f1c7d689cc657e9ea
(cherry picked from commit 1731f6ae3f)
Change-Id: Id4fb933141ad32ff5217a58f1c7d689cc657e9ea
min_sdk_version = 29 implies that the module should support Android10.
Bug: 150431944
Test: m
Merged-In: Iad90a239898f59456900ae7816b90379b1b43406
Change-Id: Iad90a239898f59456900ae7816b90379b1b43406
(cherry picked from commit 5417f775e5)
Exempt-From-Owner-Approval: cp from aosp
Native modules within APEX should be linked with proper stub version
according to its min_sdk_version.
For example, when min_sdk_version is set to "29", libfoo in the apex
would be linked to libbar of version 29 from platform, even if it has
a newer version like 30.
Bug: 145796956
Test: m nothing (soong tests)
Merged-In: I4a0b2002587bc24b7deeb5d59b6eeba5e1db5b1f
Change-Id: I4a0b2002587bc24b7deeb5d59b6eeba5e1db5b1f
(cherry picked from commit 03b5185b88)
Exempt-From-Owner-Approval: got ORV already.
Checking apex_available was missing some corner cases.
For example, the deps of share deps of cc_library modules are missed
while those from cc_library_shared are correctly tracked.
This was due to..
* calling DepIsInSameApex in WalkDeps: both work fine separately, but
when they are used together, it fails to work. It's due to how WalkDeps
works. (We might fix this bug too risky since it is used very widely)
* incorrect receiver for DepIsInSameApex in apex_deps mutator: receiver
is supposed to be parent, but child was used before. Interestingly lots
of deps are within the same group of module types(cc to cc, java to
java), it has worked. (note that receiver's DepIsInSameApex
implementation can be different).
This change fixes them by..
* walkPayloadDeps is now relying on ApexVariation, which is calculated
correctly by TopDown apex_deps mutator.
* use correct receiver for DepIsInSameApex in apex_deps mutator, which
requires for java.SdkLibrary to override the method and for
java.Library/Import to use passed dep instead of receiver to check its
membership of sdk.
Exempt-From-Owner-Approval: cherry-pick from aosp/master
Bug: 151071238
Test: build/boot
Merged-In: I0569ef4bb8e79635e4d97a89f421a8d8b7d26456
(cherry picked from commit 5e9013be22)
Change-Id: I0569ef4bb8e79635e4d97a89f421a8d8b7d26456
When the check for apex_available has failed, the build system now shows
the module that brought the unavailable module into the APEX.
Bug: 151051671
Test: m
Change-Id: Id1a3fda67fe56fdc2dc90ec800d10689415de4d6
Add a min_sdk_version property apexes. Currently a noop, but will
be used to enforce that dependencies are compatible with the
specified version.
Test: m checkbuild
Bug: 149591522
Merged-In: I923773c90fe15becbffae3986791aa9edde8f8f6
Change-Id: I923773c90fe15becbffae3986791aa9edde8f8f6
(cherry picked from commit 50317874ff)
If an APEX contains APKs and the manifest package name of the APKs are
overridden (either via override_android_app
orPRODUCT_MANIFEST_PACKAGE_NAME_OVERRIDES), that the path to the APK
(relative in the APEX) and the overridden manifest package name is
recorded in the bundle config file.
Exempt-From-Owner-Approval: cherry-pick from master
Bug: 148002117
Test: m
Merged-In: Ibb90bcefb77fa6b2dad77cb2facc6079de9ab154
(cherry picked from commit cfaa1643e8)
Change-Id: Ibb90bcefb77fa6b2dad77cb2facc6079de9ab154
Symlinking doesn't make sense for host APEXes.
Bug: 150255435
Test: m com.android.art.host and inspect the built APEX; there is
no symlink.
Change-Id: I28492dfaaef471117a430be05255fbef76e557b0
Because APK-in-APEX embeds its jni_libs in it. We don't have to follow
deps of jni_libs.
Bug: 146992436
Test: m com.android.tethering
deapexer extract com.android.tethering.apex apex
ls apex # there should be no /lib dir
Merged-In: Ifa1a6430a420ae7376b155cd59b8ece462cced7e
Change-Id: Ifa1a6430a420ae7376b155cd59b8ece462cced7e
(cherry picked from commit b7bebe2616)
The optimization is confusing syshealth because the modules will use
more memory when they are switched to the prebuilt (unbundled) or
updated via Play.
Let's have a per-module switch to control the behavior and turn it on
only for non-updatable modules like ART.
Bug: 149805758
Test: m
Change-Id: Ieb842c47f31f3b06e403b1e1f9e463c3e5524107
This change fixes a regression that was introduced with
I597bccbb177b6b6320c3a3edeff467243230d384. With the change, the content
of the permissions XML file for a java_sdk_library was determined before
the java_sdk_library is mutated for an APEX. As a result, the file path
to the implementation jar library was always set to
/system/framework/*.jar regardless of whether the java_sdk_library is
part of an APEX or not.
This change fixes the problem, by creating the permissions XML file via
a new module type. The content of the xml file is determined after the
xml file is mutated for APEXes.
Bug: 149600642
Test: m
Change-Id: Id21f8d8285df49b0b3be1daf0f101f2bc978eeb0
Bug: 149075752
Test: tapas com.android.conscrypt com.android.tethering arm64
Test: m out/target/product/generic_arm64/{,symbols/}apex/com.android.{tethering,conscrypt}/lib64/libc++.so
Test: Verified that unwinder was dynamically linked to tethering's
Test: libc++ and statically linked to conscrypt's.
Test: lunch flame-userdebug && m
Test: Verified that unwinder was dynamically linked to /system/lib64/libc++.so
Change-Id: I98eed7cb4316962b19b5c12e150c224c25d0e91d
apex { name: ["myapex"], native_shared_libs: ["libX", "libY"] }
cc_library { name: "libX", shared_libs: ["libY"] }
cc_library { name: "libY", shared_libs: ["libZ"], stubs: {...} }
apexDepsMutator was a bottom up mutator and it uses WalkDeps to traverse
the dependency tree rooted at myapex in a depth-first order. While
traversing the tree, if calls BuildForApex for a module that will be
part of the APEX.
libY is visited twice. Once via libX and once via myapex. If the visit
from libX was before the visit from myapex (since this is a depth-first
traversing), BuildForApex is not called for libY and its dependency
libZ, because libY provides a stub. And then when libY is again visited
via myapex, BuildForApex is correctly called for the module, but not for
its dependencies libZ because the paths from libY to libZ was already
visited.
As a result, the apex variant of libY has a dependency to the non-apex
variant of libZ.
Fixing the problem by changing the mutator a top-down one.
Bug: 148645937
Test: m
Change-Id: Ib2cb28852087c63a568b3fd036504e9261cf0782
Paul Duffin