Merge "Ensure that DepIsInSameApex is not called for ExcludeFromApexContentsTag"
diff --git a/android/apex.go b/android/apex.go
index 0d5cac8..a5ff442 100644
--- a/android/apex.go
+++ b/android/apex.go
@@ -140,9 +140,24 @@
// DepIsInSameApex tests if the other module 'dep' is considered as part of the same APEX as
// this module. For example, a static lib dependency usually returns true here, while a
// shared lib dependency to a stub library returns false.
+ //
+ // This method must not be called directly without first ignoring dependencies whose tags
+ // implement ExcludeFromApexContentsTag. Calls from within the func passed to WalkPayloadDeps()
+ // are fine as WalkPayloadDeps() will ignore those dependencies automatically. Otherwise, use
+ // IsDepInSameApex instead.
DepIsInSameApex(ctx BaseModuleContext, dep Module) bool
}
+func IsDepInSameApex(ctx BaseModuleContext, module, dep Module) bool {
+ depTag := ctx.OtherModuleDependencyTag(dep)
+ if _, ok := depTag.(ExcludeFromApexContentsTag); ok {
+ // The tag defines a dependency that never requires the child module to be part of the same
+ // apex as the parent.
+ return false
+ }
+ return module.(DepIsInSameApex).DepIsInSameApex(ctx, dep)
+}
+
// ApexModule is the interface that a module type is expected to implement if the module has to be
// built differently depending on whether the module is destined for an APEX or not (i.e., installed
// to one of the regular partitions).
@@ -260,6 +275,10 @@
//
// Unless the tag also implements the AlwaysRequireApexVariantTag this will prevent an apex variant
// from being created for the module.
+//
+// At the moment the sdk.sdkRequirementsMutator relies on the fact that the existing tags which
+// implement this interface do not define dependencies onto members of an sdk_snapshot. If that
+// changes then sdk.sdkRequirementsMutator will need fixing.
type ExcludeFromApexContentsTag interface {
blueprint.DependencyTag
diff --git a/apex/apex.go b/apex/apex.go
index a12f3d2..a67fe1f 100644
--- a/apex/apex.go
+++ b/apex/apex.go
@@ -854,12 +854,7 @@
if required, ok := depTag.(android.AlwaysRequireApexVariantTag); ok && required.AlwaysRequireApexVariant() {
return true
}
- if _, ok := depTag.(android.ExcludeFromApexContentsTag); ok {
- // The tag defines a dependency that never requires the child module to be part of the same
- // apex as the parent so it does not need an apex variant created.
- return false
- }
- if !parent.(android.DepIsInSameApex).DepIsInSameApex(mctx, child) {
+ if !android.IsDepInSameApex(mctx, parent, child) {
return false
}
if excludeVndkLibs {
@@ -1003,11 +998,7 @@
// If any of the dep is not available to platform, this module is also considered as being
// not available to platform even if it has "//apex_available:platform"
mctx.VisitDirectDeps(func(child android.Module) {
- depTag := mctx.OtherModuleDependencyTag(child)
- if _, ok := depTag.(android.ExcludeFromApexContentsTag); ok {
- return
- }
- if !am.DepIsInSameApex(mctx, child) {
+ if !android.IsDepInSameApex(mctx, am, child) {
// if the dependency crosses apex boundary, don't consider it
return
}
@@ -1872,7 +1863,10 @@
// like to record requiredNativeLibs even when
// DepIsInSameAPex is false. We also shouldn't do
// this for host.
- if !am.DepIsInSameApex(ctx, am) {
+ //
+ // TODO(jiyong): explain why the same module is passed in twice.
+ // Switching the first am to parent breaks lots of tests.
+ if !android.IsDepInSameApex(ctx, am, am) {
return false
}
@@ -2195,6 +2189,8 @@
// If `to` is not actually in the same APEX as `from` then it does not need
// apex_available and neither do any of its dependencies.
+ //
+ // It is ok to call DepIsInSameApex() directly from within WalkPayloadDeps().
if am, ok := from.(android.DepIsInSameApex); ok && !am.DepIsInSameApex(ctx, to) {
// As soon as the dependency graph crosses the APEX boundary, don't go further.
return false
@@ -2278,6 +2274,8 @@
// If `to` is not actually in the same APEX as `from` then it does not need
// apex_available and neither do any of its dependencies.
+ //
+ // It is ok to call DepIsInSameApex() directly from within WalkPayloadDeps().
if am, ok := from.(android.DepIsInSameApex); ok && !am.DepIsInSameApex(ctx, to) {
// As soon as the dependency graph crosses the APEX boundary, don't go
// further.
diff --git a/sdk/sdk.go b/sdk/sdk.go
index 6ca8512..e561529 100644
--- a/sdk/sdk.go
+++ b/sdk/sdk.go
@@ -445,20 +445,26 @@
}
}
+// An interface that encapsulates all the functionality needed to manage the sdk dependencies.
+//
+// It is a mixture of apex and sdk module functionality.
+type sdkAndApexModule interface {
+ android.Module
+ android.DepIsInSameApex
+ android.RequiredSdks
+}
+
// Step 4: transitively ripple down the SDK requirements from the root modules like APEX to its
// descendants
func sdkDepsMutator(mctx android.TopDownMutatorContext) {
- if parent, ok := mctx.Module().(interface {
- android.DepIsInSameApex
- android.RequiredSdks
- }); ok {
+ if parent, ok := mctx.Module().(sdkAndApexModule); ok {
// Module types for Mainline modules (e.g. APEX) are expected to implement RequiredSdks()
// by reading its own properties like `uses_sdks`.
requiredSdks := parent.RequiredSdks()
if len(requiredSdks) > 0 {
mctx.VisitDirectDeps(func(m android.Module) {
// Only propagate required sdks from the apex onto its contents.
- if dep, ok := m.(android.SdkAware); ok && parent.DepIsInSameApex(mctx, dep) {
+ if dep, ok := m.(android.SdkAware); ok && android.IsDepInSameApex(mctx, parent, dep) {
dep.BuildWithSdks(requiredSdks)
}
})
@@ -497,10 +503,7 @@
// Step 6: ensure that the dependencies outside of the APEX are all from the required SDKs
func sdkRequirementsMutator(mctx android.TopDownMutatorContext) {
- if m, ok := mctx.Module().(interface {
- android.DepIsInSameApex
- android.RequiredSdks
- }); ok {
+ if m, ok := mctx.Module().(sdkAndApexModule); ok {
requiredSdks := m.RequiredSdks()
if len(requiredSdks) == 0 {
return
@@ -519,9 +522,18 @@
return
}
- // If the dep is outside of the APEX, but is not in any of the
- // required SDKs, we know that the dep is a violation.
+ // If the dep is outside of the APEX, but is not in any of the required SDKs, we know that the
+ // dep is a violation.
if sa, ok := dep.(android.SdkAware); ok {
+ // It is not an error if a dependency that is excluded from the apex due to the tag is not
+ // in one of the required SDKs. That is because all of the existing tags that implement it
+ // do not depend on modules which can or should belong to an sdk_snapshot.
+ if _, ok := tag.(android.ExcludeFromApexContentsTag); ok {
+ // The tag defines a dependency that never requires the child module to be part of the
+ // same apex.
+ return
+ }
+
if !m.DepIsInSameApex(mctx, dep) && !requiredSdks.Contains(sa.ContainingSdk()) {
mctx.ModuleErrorf("depends on %q (in SDK %q) that isn't part of the required SDKs: %v",
sa.Name(), sa.ContainingSdk(), requiredSdks)