diff options
| author | Philip P. Moltmann <moltmann@google.com> | 2019-09-13 15:12:34 -0700 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Harrison Lingren <hlingren@google.com> | 2019-10-24 16:02:01 +0000 |
| commit | f3ff750f2998f43124ab59a3c0926b37b2a50dbd (patch) | |
| tree | d49087388ddbe1a3a7b30d513bd0776263a2d226 /tests/Codegen/src/com/android/codegentest/SampleWithNestedDataClasses.java | |
| parent | 0823f1b5088bc53259415a2bd6bb93549ee1c8fe (diff) | |
[DO NOT MERGE] Split access-media-storage from read-external-storage
And also pre-grant it to all apps that currently get any storage
permission pre-granted
Test: atest SplitPermissionTest
m -j gts && gts-tradefed run commandAndExit gts-dev -m GtsPermissionTestCases --test=com.google.android.permission.gts.DefaultPermissionGrantPolicyTest#testDefaultGrantsWithRemoteExceptions
Manual testing:
All combinations of
- App targetSdk = 28 and 29 (and 22 for extra credit)
- App having the <uses-permission> tag for
ACCESS_MEDIA_LOCATION or not
- Upgrade from P->Q-QPR and from vanilla Q->Q-QPR
Further upgrade of targetSdk from 28->29 while on Q-QPR
==> All permission behavior should make sense. Sometimes there
are weird, but expected behaviors. Hence we need to
collect the results and then look at the unexpected ones.
See SplitPermissionTest for some tests I added for the
location-background permission which was split from
the fine/coarse-location permissions
Fixes: 141048840,140961754
Change-Id: Ib9f50d25c002036f13cf2d42fc4d1b214f20920c
(cherry picked from commit ac7b10c135bb148edcad1aad8e19c733d333f769)
Diffstat (limited to 'tests/Codegen/src/com/android/codegentest/SampleWithNestedDataClasses.java')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions