summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/java/bootclasspath_fragment.go
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorPaul Duffin <paulduffin@google.com>2019-11-19 19:44:10 +0000
committerPaul Duffin <paulduffin@google.com>2021-04-26 21:21:58 +0100
commitba6afd0dbab19efedc5a849ab2bc6f7923ec6ce3 (patch)
treea947daee1a62726324990d118cf6613b6b291708 /java/bootclasspath_fragment.go
parent2da0424b191af82d91e28e46440f43927bde8827 (diff)
Allow contents and image_name to be specified together
Previously, only one of the contents or image_name properties could be specified at once which meant that there was no way to create a prebuilt which lists its fixed contents while at the same time allowing it to check that that the contents matched what the build configuration required. e.g. a prebuilt_bootclasspath_fragment that had image_name: "art", could not list its contents and also check that those contents matched the ART_APEX_JARS which the build configuration required. This change allows contents and image_name to be specified together and adds a check to make sure that the contents are consistent with the configuration appropriate to the image_name. The check is only performed for modules that are active so that a prebuilt_bootclasspath_fragment which was created without coverage enabled (the default) would not cause a build failure in a coverage build unless it was preferred. Bug: 177892522 Test: m nothing Change-Id: Ie601f29f707b3f6030fa7d252afa2c4826cc9f8e
Diffstat (limited to 'java/bootclasspath_fragment.go')
-rw-r--r--java/bootclasspath_fragment.go58
1 files changed, 53 insertions, 5 deletions
diff --git a/java/bootclasspath_fragment.go b/java/bootclasspath_fragment.go
index 8bb5cb18e..d0570b413 100644
--- a/java/bootclasspath_fragment.go
+++ b/java/bootclasspath_fragment.go
@@ -17,6 +17,7 @@ package java
import (
"fmt"
"path/filepath"
+ "reflect"
"strings"
"android/soong/android"
@@ -128,8 +129,10 @@ func bootclasspathFragmentInitContentsFromImage(ctx android.EarlyModuleContext,
if m.properties.Image_name == nil && len(contents) == 0 {
ctx.ModuleErrorf(`neither of the "image_name" and "contents" properties have been supplied, please supply exactly one`)
}
- if m.properties.Image_name != nil && len(contents) != 0 {
- ctx.ModuleErrorf(`both of the "image_name" and "contents" properties have been supplied, please supply exactly one`)
+
+ if len(contents) != 0 {
+ // Nothing to do.
+ return
}
imageName := proptools.String(m.properties.Image_name)
@@ -154,7 +157,6 @@ func bootclasspathFragmentInitContentsFromImage(ctx android.EarlyModuleContext,
// Make sure that the apex specified in the configuration is consistent and is one for which
// this boot image is available.
- jars := []string{}
commonApex := ""
for i := 0; i < modules.Len(); i++ {
apex := modules.Apex(i)
@@ -174,11 +176,50 @@ func bootclasspathFragmentInitContentsFromImage(ctx android.EarlyModuleContext,
ctx.ModuleErrorf("ArtApexJars configuration is inconsistent, expected all jars to be in the same apex but it specifies apex %q and %q",
commonApex, apex)
}
- jars = append(jars, jar)
}
// Store the jars in the Contents property so that they can be used to add dependencies.
- m.properties.Contents = jars
+ m.properties.Contents = modules.CopyOfJars()
+ }
+}
+
+// bootclasspathImageNameContentsConsistencyCheck checks that the configuration that applies to this
+// module (if any) matches the contents.
+//
+// This should be a noop as if image_name="art" then the contents will be set from the ArtApexJars
+// config by bootclasspathFragmentInitContentsFromImage so it will be guaranteed to match. However,
+// in future this will not be the case.
+func (b *BootclasspathFragmentModule) bootclasspathImageNameContentsConsistencyCheck(ctx android.BaseModuleContext) {
+ imageName := proptools.String(b.properties.Image_name)
+ if imageName == "art" {
+ // TODO(b/177892522): Prebuilts (versioned or not) should not use the image_name property.
+ if b.MemberName() != "" {
+ // The module is a versioned prebuilt so ignore it. This is done for a couple of reasons:
+ // 1. There is no way to use this at the moment so ignoring it is safe.
+ // 2. Attempting to initialize the contents property from the configuration will end up having
+ // the versioned prebuilt depending on the unversioned prebuilt. That will cause problems
+ // as the unversioned prebuilt could end up with an APEX variant created for the source
+ // APEX which will prevent it from having an APEX variant for the prebuilt APEX which in
+ // turn will prevent it from accessing the dex implementation jar from that which will
+ // break hidden API processing, amongst others.
+ return
+ }
+
+ // Get the configuration for the art apex jars.
+ modules := b.getImageConfig(ctx).modules
+ configuredJars := modules.CopyOfJars()
+
+ // Skip the check if the configured jars list is empty as that is a common configuration when
+ // building targets that do not result in a system image.
+ if len(configuredJars) == 0 {
+ return
+ }
+
+ contents := b.properties.Contents
+ if !reflect.DeepEqual(configuredJars, contents) {
+ ctx.ModuleErrorf("inconsistency in specification of contents. ArtApexJars configuration specifies %#v, contents property specifies %#v",
+ configuredJars, contents)
+ }
}
}
@@ -274,6 +315,13 @@ func (b *BootclasspathFragmentModule) DepsMutator(ctx android.BottomUpMutatorCon
}
func (b *BootclasspathFragmentModule) GenerateAndroidBuildActions(ctx android.ModuleContext) {
+ // Only perform a consistency check if this module is the active module. That will prevent an
+ // unused prebuilt that was created without instrumentation from breaking an instrumentation
+ // build.
+ if isActiveModule(ctx.Module()) {
+ b.bootclasspathImageNameContentsConsistencyCheck(ctx)
+ }
+
// Perform hidden API processing.
b.generateHiddenAPIBuildActions(ctx)