platform_build_soong/sdk/sdk.go

545 lines
21 KiB
Go
Raw Normal View History

// Copyright (C) 2019 The Android Open Source Project
//
// Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
// you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
// You may obtain a copy of the License at
//
// http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
//
// Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
// distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
// WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
// See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
// limitations under the License.
package sdk
import (
"fmt"
"io"
Decouple addition of new sdk member types from sdk code Previously, adding a new SdkMemberType would require adding a new sdkMemberListProperty instance to the sdkMemberListProperties as well as adding a new property into the sdkProperties struct. They are potential sources of conflict and couple the sdk code with all the packages that add members to it. This change switched to a registration model that allows each package to register its sdk member types decoupling them from the sdk code. Adds an SdkPropertyName() method to SdkMemberType that specifies the name of the property to use in the sdk/sdk_snapshot. Also provides an SdkMemberTypeBase struct to be used by providers of SdkMemberType implementations. SdkMemberType instances are registered using the RegisterSdkMemberType() func which sorts the registered instances by their SdkPropertyName() to ensure the behavior is consistent and not affected by order of registration. When creating a new sdk module a dynamicSdkMemberTypes instance is created that contains the following: * A properties struct is created dynamically that contains a field for each registered SdkMemberType, corresponding to that type's SdkPropertyName(). * A list of sdkMemberListProperty instances is also created, one for each registered SdkMemberType. The dynamicSdkMemberTypes instance is cached using a key that uniquely identifies the set of registered types just in case new types are registered after one has been created, e.g. by tests. Bug: 142918168 Test: m checkbuild Change-Id: I4bf2bf56a2a49025aa41454048bc1e8ccc6baca2
2019-12-13 12:22:16 +01:00
"reflect"
"strconv"
"github.com/google/blueprint"
"github.com/google/blueprint/proptools"
"android/soong/android"
// This package doesn't depend on the apex package, but import it to make its mutators to be
// registered before mutators in this package. See RegisterPostDepsMutators for more details.
_ "android/soong/apex"
)
func init() {
pctx.Import("android/soong/android")
pctx.Import("android/soong/java/config")
registerSdkBuildComponents(android.InitRegistrationContext)
}
func registerSdkBuildComponents(ctx android.RegistrationContext) {
ctx.RegisterModuleType("sdk", SdkModuleFactory)
ctx.RegisterModuleType("sdk_snapshot", SnapshotModuleFactory)
ctx.PreDepsMutators(RegisterPreDepsMutators)
ctx.PostDepsMutators(RegisterPostDepsMutators)
}
type sdk struct {
android.ModuleBase
android.DefaultableModuleBase
Decouple addition of new sdk member types from sdk code Previously, adding a new SdkMemberType would require adding a new sdkMemberListProperty instance to the sdkMemberListProperties as well as adding a new property into the sdkProperties struct. They are potential sources of conflict and couple the sdk code with all the packages that add members to it. This change switched to a registration model that allows each package to register its sdk member types decoupling them from the sdk code. Adds an SdkPropertyName() method to SdkMemberType that specifies the name of the property to use in the sdk/sdk_snapshot. Also provides an SdkMemberTypeBase struct to be used by providers of SdkMemberType implementations. SdkMemberType instances are registered using the RegisterSdkMemberType() func which sorts the registered instances by their SdkPropertyName() to ensure the behavior is consistent and not affected by order of registration. When creating a new sdk module a dynamicSdkMemberTypes instance is created that contains the following: * A properties struct is created dynamically that contains a field for each registered SdkMemberType, corresponding to that type's SdkPropertyName(). * A list of sdkMemberListProperty instances is also created, one for each registered SdkMemberType. The dynamicSdkMemberTypes instance is cached using a key that uniquely identifies the set of registered types just in case new types are registered after one has been created, e.g. by tests. Bug: 142918168 Test: m checkbuild Change-Id: I4bf2bf56a2a49025aa41454048bc1e8ccc6baca2
2019-12-13 12:22:16 +01:00
// The dynamically generated information about the registered SdkMemberType
dynamicSdkMemberTypes *dynamicSdkMemberTypes
// The dynamically created instance of the properties struct containing the sdk member
// list properties, e.g. java_libs.
dynamicMemberTypeListProperties interface{}
// Information about the OsType specific member variants associated with this variant.
//
// Set by OsType specific variants in the collectMembers() method and used by the
// CommonOS variant when building the snapshot. That work is all done on separate
// calls to the sdk.GenerateAndroidBuildActions method which is guaranteed to be
// called for the OsType specific variants before the CommonOS variant (because
// the latter depends on the former).
memberRefs []sdkMemberRef
// The multilib variants that are used by this sdk variant.
multilibUsages multilibUsage
properties sdkProperties
snapshotFile android.OptionalPath
// The builder, preserved for testing.
builderForTests *snapshotBuilder
}
type sdkProperties struct {
Snapshot bool `blueprint:"mutated"`
// True if this is a module_exports (or module_exports_snapshot) module type.
Module_exports bool `blueprint:"mutated"`
// The additional visibility to add to the prebuilt modules to allow them to
// reference each other.
//
// This can only be used to widen the visibility of the members:
//
// * Specifying //visibility:public here will make all members visible and
// essentially ignore their own visibility.
// * Specifying //visibility:private here is an error.
// * Specifying any other rule here will add it to the members visibility and
// be output to the member prebuilt in the snapshot. Duplicates will be
// dropped. Adding a rule to members that have //visibility:private will
// cause the //visibility:private to be discarded.
Prebuilt_visibility []string
}
Parameterize the sdk member processing Extracts the type specific functionality into the SdkMemberType interface which has to be implemented by each module type that can be added as a member of the sdk. It provides functionality to add the required dependencies for the module type, check to see if a resolved module is the correct instance and build the snapshot. The latter was previously part of SdkAware but was moved because it has to be able to process multiple SdkAware variants so delegating it to a single instance did not make sense. The custom code for handling each member type specific property, e.g. java_libs, has been replaced with common code that processes a list of sdkMemberListProperty struct which associates the property (name and getter) with the SdkMemberType and a special DependencyTag which is passed to the SdkMemberType when it has to add dependencies. The DependencyTag contains a reference to the appropriate sdkMemberListProperty which allows the resolved dependencies to be grouped by type. Previously, the dependency collection methods would ignore a module if it was an unsupported type because they did not have a way of determining which property it was initially listed in. That meant it was possible to add say a droidstubs module to the java_libs property (and because they had the same variants) it would work as if it was added to the stubs_sources property. Or alternatively, a module of an unsupported type could be added to any property and it would just be ignored. However, the DependencyTag provides information about which property a resolved module was referenced in and so it can detect when the resolved module is of the wrong type and report an error. That check identified a bug in one of the tests where the sdk referenced a java_import module (which is not allowed in an sdk) instead of a java_library module (which is allowed). That test was fixed as part of this. A list of sdkMemberListProperty structs defines the member properties supported by the sdk and are processed in order to ensure consistent behaviour. The resolved dependencies are grouped by type and each group is then processed in defined order. Within each type dependencies are grouped by name and encapsulated behind an SdkMember interface which includes the name and the list of variants. The Droidstubs and java.Library types can only support one variant and will fail if given more. The processing for the native_shared_libs property has been moved into the cc/library.go file so the sdk package code should now have no type specific information in it apart from what is if the list of sdkMemberListProperty structs. Bug: 143678475 Test: m conscrypt-module-sdk Change-Id: I10203594d33dbf53441f655aff124f9ab3538d87
2019-11-28 15:31:38 +01:00
// Contains information about the sdk properties that list sdk members, e.g.
// Java_header_libs.
Parameterize the sdk member processing Extracts the type specific functionality into the SdkMemberType interface which has to be implemented by each module type that can be added as a member of the sdk. It provides functionality to add the required dependencies for the module type, check to see if a resolved module is the correct instance and build the snapshot. The latter was previously part of SdkAware but was moved because it has to be able to process multiple SdkAware variants so delegating it to a single instance did not make sense. The custom code for handling each member type specific property, e.g. java_libs, has been replaced with common code that processes a list of sdkMemberListProperty struct which associates the property (name and getter) with the SdkMemberType and a special DependencyTag which is passed to the SdkMemberType when it has to add dependencies. The DependencyTag contains a reference to the appropriate sdkMemberListProperty which allows the resolved dependencies to be grouped by type. Previously, the dependency collection methods would ignore a module if it was an unsupported type because they did not have a way of determining which property it was initially listed in. That meant it was possible to add say a droidstubs module to the java_libs property (and because they had the same variants) it would work as if it was added to the stubs_sources property. Or alternatively, a module of an unsupported type could be added to any property and it would just be ignored. However, the DependencyTag provides information about which property a resolved module was referenced in and so it can detect when the resolved module is of the wrong type and report an error. That check identified a bug in one of the tests where the sdk referenced a java_import module (which is not allowed in an sdk) instead of a java_library module (which is allowed). That test was fixed as part of this. A list of sdkMemberListProperty structs defines the member properties supported by the sdk and are processed in order to ensure consistent behaviour. The resolved dependencies are grouped by type and each group is then processed in defined order. Within each type dependencies are grouped by name and encapsulated behind an SdkMember interface which includes the name and the list of variants. The Droidstubs and java.Library types can only support one variant and will fail if given more. The processing for the native_shared_libs property has been moved into the cc/library.go file so the sdk package code should now have no type specific information in it apart from what is if the list of sdkMemberListProperty structs. Bug: 143678475 Test: m conscrypt-module-sdk Change-Id: I10203594d33dbf53441f655aff124f9ab3538d87
2019-11-28 15:31:38 +01:00
type sdkMemberListProperty struct {
// getter for the list of member names
Decouple addition of new sdk member types from sdk code Previously, adding a new SdkMemberType would require adding a new sdkMemberListProperty instance to the sdkMemberListProperties as well as adding a new property into the sdkProperties struct. They are potential sources of conflict and couple the sdk code with all the packages that add members to it. This change switched to a registration model that allows each package to register its sdk member types decoupling them from the sdk code. Adds an SdkPropertyName() method to SdkMemberType that specifies the name of the property to use in the sdk/sdk_snapshot. Also provides an SdkMemberTypeBase struct to be used by providers of SdkMemberType implementations. SdkMemberType instances are registered using the RegisterSdkMemberType() func which sorts the registered instances by their SdkPropertyName() to ensure the behavior is consistent and not affected by order of registration. When creating a new sdk module a dynamicSdkMemberTypes instance is created that contains the following: * A properties struct is created dynamically that contains a field for each registered SdkMemberType, corresponding to that type's SdkPropertyName(). * A list of sdkMemberListProperty instances is also created, one for each registered SdkMemberType. The dynamicSdkMemberTypes instance is cached using a key that uniquely identifies the set of registered types just in case new types are registered after one has been created, e.g. by tests. Bug: 142918168 Test: m checkbuild Change-Id: I4bf2bf56a2a49025aa41454048bc1e8ccc6baca2
2019-12-13 12:22:16 +01:00
getter func(properties interface{}) []string
Parameterize the sdk member processing Extracts the type specific functionality into the SdkMemberType interface which has to be implemented by each module type that can be added as a member of the sdk. It provides functionality to add the required dependencies for the module type, check to see if a resolved module is the correct instance and build the snapshot. The latter was previously part of SdkAware but was moved because it has to be able to process multiple SdkAware variants so delegating it to a single instance did not make sense. The custom code for handling each member type specific property, e.g. java_libs, has been replaced with common code that processes a list of sdkMemberListProperty struct which associates the property (name and getter) with the SdkMemberType and a special DependencyTag which is passed to the SdkMemberType when it has to add dependencies. The DependencyTag contains a reference to the appropriate sdkMemberListProperty which allows the resolved dependencies to be grouped by type. Previously, the dependency collection methods would ignore a module if it was an unsupported type because they did not have a way of determining which property it was initially listed in. That meant it was possible to add say a droidstubs module to the java_libs property (and because they had the same variants) it would work as if it was added to the stubs_sources property. Or alternatively, a module of an unsupported type could be added to any property and it would just be ignored. However, the DependencyTag provides information about which property a resolved module was referenced in and so it can detect when the resolved module is of the wrong type and report an error. That check identified a bug in one of the tests where the sdk referenced a java_import module (which is not allowed in an sdk) instead of a java_library module (which is allowed). That test was fixed as part of this. A list of sdkMemberListProperty structs defines the member properties supported by the sdk and are processed in order to ensure consistent behaviour. The resolved dependencies are grouped by type and each group is then processed in defined order. Within each type dependencies are grouped by name and encapsulated behind an SdkMember interface which includes the name and the list of variants. The Droidstubs and java.Library types can only support one variant and will fail if given more. The processing for the native_shared_libs property has been moved into the cc/library.go file so the sdk package code should now have no type specific information in it apart from what is if the list of sdkMemberListProperty structs. Bug: 143678475 Test: m conscrypt-module-sdk Change-Id: I10203594d33dbf53441f655aff124f9ab3538d87
2019-11-28 15:31:38 +01:00
// the type of member referenced in the list
memberType android.SdkMemberType
Decouple addition of new sdk member types from sdk code Previously, adding a new SdkMemberType would require adding a new sdkMemberListProperty instance to the sdkMemberListProperties as well as adding a new property into the sdkProperties struct. They are potential sources of conflict and couple the sdk code with all the packages that add members to it. This change switched to a registration model that allows each package to register its sdk member types decoupling them from the sdk code. Adds an SdkPropertyName() method to SdkMemberType that specifies the name of the property to use in the sdk/sdk_snapshot. Also provides an SdkMemberTypeBase struct to be used by providers of SdkMemberType implementations. SdkMemberType instances are registered using the RegisterSdkMemberType() func which sorts the registered instances by their SdkPropertyName() to ensure the behavior is consistent and not affected by order of registration. When creating a new sdk module a dynamicSdkMemberTypes instance is created that contains the following: * A properties struct is created dynamically that contains a field for each registered SdkMemberType, corresponding to that type's SdkPropertyName(). * A list of sdkMemberListProperty instances is also created, one for each registered SdkMemberType. The dynamicSdkMemberTypes instance is cached using a key that uniquely identifies the set of registered types just in case new types are registered after one has been created, e.g. by tests. Bug: 142918168 Test: m checkbuild Change-Id: I4bf2bf56a2a49025aa41454048bc1e8ccc6baca2
2019-12-13 12:22:16 +01:00
// the dependency tag used for items in this list that can be used to determine the memberType
// for a resolved dependency.
dependencyTag android.SdkMemberTypeDependencyTag
Parameterize the sdk member processing Extracts the type specific functionality into the SdkMemberType interface which has to be implemented by each module type that can be added as a member of the sdk. It provides functionality to add the required dependencies for the module type, check to see if a resolved module is the correct instance and build the snapshot. The latter was previously part of SdkAware but was moved because it has to be able to process multiple SdkAware variants so delegating it to a single instance did not make sense. The custom code for handling each member type specific property, e.g. java_libs, has been replaced with common code that processes a list of sdkMemberListProperty struct which associates the property (name and getter) with the SdkMemberType and a special DependencyTag which is passed to the SdkMemberType when it has to add dependencies. The DependencyTag contains a reference to the appropriate sdkMemberListProperty which allows the resolved dependencies to be grouped by type. Previously, the dependency collection methods would ignore a module if it was an unsupported type because they did not have a way of determining which property it was initially listed in. That meant it was possible to add say a droidstubs module to the java_libs property (and because they had the same variants) it would work as if it was added to the stubs_sources property. Or alternatively, a module of an unsupported type could be added to any property and it would just be ignored. However, the DependencyTag provides information about which property a resolved module was referenced in and so it can detect when the resolved module is of the wrong type and report an error. That check identified a bug in one of the tests where the sdk referenced a java_import module (which is not allowed in an sdk) instead of a java_library module (which is allowed). That test was fixed as part of this. A list of sdkMemberListProperty structs defines the member properties supported by the sdk and are processed in order to ensure consistent behaviour. The resolved dependencies are grouped by type and each group is then processed in defined order. Within each type dependencies are grouped by name and encapsulated behind an SdkMember interface which includes the name and the list of variants. The Droidstubs and java.Library types can only support one variant and will fail if given more. The processing for the native_shared_libs property has been moved into the cc/library.go file so the sdk package code should now have no type specific information in it apart from what is if the list of sdkMemberListProperty structs. Bug: 143678475 Test: m conscrypt-module-sdk Change-Id: I10203594d33dbf53441f655aff124f9ab3538d87
2019-11-28 15:31:38 +01:00
}
Decouple addition of new sdk member types from sdk code Previously, adding a new SdkMemberType would require adding a new sdkMemberListProperty instance to the sdkMemberListProperties as well as adding a new property into the sdkProperties struct. They are potential sources of conflict and couple the sdk code with all the packages that add members to it. This change switched to a registration model that allows each package to register its sdk member types decoupling them from the sdk code. Adds an SdkPropertyName() method to SdkMemberType that specifies the name of the property to use in the sdk/sdk_snapshot. Also provides an SdkMemberTypeBase struct to be used by providers of SdkMemberType implementations. SdkMemberType instances are registered using the RegisterSdkMemberType() func which sorts the registered instances by their SdkPropertyName() to ensure the behavior is consistent and not affected by order of registration. When creating a new sdk module a dynamicSdkMemberTypes instance is created that contains the following: * A properties struct is created dynamically that contains a field for each registered SdkMemberType, corresponding to that type's SdkPropertyName(). * A list of sdkMemberListProperty instances is also created, one for each registered SdkMemberType. The dynamicSdkMemberTypes instance is cached using a key that uniquely identifies the set of registered types just in case new types are registered after one has been created, e.g. by tests. Bug: 142918168 Test: m checkbuild Change-Id: I4bf2bf56a2a49025aa41454048bc1e8ccc6baca2
2019-12-13 12:22:16 +01:00
func (p *sdkMemberListProperty) propertyName() string {
return p.memberType.SdkPropertyName()
}
// Cache of dynamically generated dynamicSdkMemberTypes objects. The key is the pointer
// to a slice of SdkMemberType instances held in android.SdkMemberTypes.
var dynamicSdkMemberTypesMap android.OncePer
// A dynamically generated set of member list properties and associated structure type.
type dynamicSdkMemberTypes struct {
// The dynamically generated structure type.
//
// Contains one []string exported field for each android.SdkMemberTypes. The name of the field
// is the exported form of the value returned by SdkMemberType.SdkPropertyName().
propertiesStructType reflect.Type
// Information about each of the member type specific list properties.
memberListProperties []*sdkMemberListProperty
}
func (d *dynamicSdkMemberTypes) createMemberListProperties() interface{} {
return reflect.New(d.propertiesStructType).Interface()
}
func getDynamicSdkMemberTypes(registry *android.SdkMemberTypesRegistry) *dynamicSdkMemberTypes {
// Get a key that uniquely identifies the registry contents.
key := registry.UniqueOnceKey()
// Get the registered types.
registeredTypes := registry.RegisteredTypes()
// Get the cached value, creating new instance if necessary.
return dynamicSdkMemberTypesMap.Once(key, func() interface{} {
return createDynamicSdkMemberTypes(registeredTypes)
}).(*dynamicSdkMemberTypes)
}
// Create the dynamicSdkMemberTypes from the list of registered member types.
//
Decouple addition of new sdk member types from sdk code Previously, adding a new SdkMemberType would require adding a new sdkMemberListProperty instance to the sdkMemberListProperties as well as adding a new property into the sdkProperties struct. They are potential sources of conflict and couple the sdk code with all the packages that add members to it. This change switched to a registration model that allows each package to register its sdk member types decoupling them from the sdk code. Adds an SdkPropertyName() method to SdkMemberType that specifies the name of the property to use in the sdk/sdk_snapshot. Also provides an SdkMemberTypeBase struct to be used by providers of SdkMemberType implementations. SdkMemberType instances are registered using the RegisterSdkMemberType() func which sorts the registered instances by their SdkPropertyName() to ensure the behavior is consistent and not affected by order of registration. When creating a new sdk module a dynamicSdkMemberTypes instance is created that contains the following: * A properties struct is created dynamically that contains a field for each registered SdkMemberType, corresponding to that type's SdkPropertyName(). * A list of sdkMemberListProperty instances is also created, one for each registered SdkMemberType. The dynamicSdkMemberTypes instance is cached using a key that uniquely identifies the set of registered types just in case new types are registered after one has been created, e.g. by tests. Bug: 142918168 Test: m checkbuild Change-Id: I4bf2bf56a2a49025aa41454048bc1e8ccc6baca2
2019-12-13 12:22:16 +01:00
// A struct is created which contains one exported field per member type corresponding to
// the SdkMemberType.SdkPropertyName() value.
//
// A list of sdkMemberListProperty instances is created, one per member type that provides:
// * a reference to the member type.
// * a getter for the corresponding field in the properties struct.
// * a dependency tag that identifies the member type of a resolved dependency.
//
func createDynamicSdkMemberTypes(sdkMemberTypes []android.SdkMemberType) *dynamicSdkMemberTypes {
Decouple addition of new sdk member types from sdk code Previously, adding a new SdkMemberType would require adding a new sdkMemberListProperty instance to the sdkMemberListProperties as well as adding a new property into the sdkProperties struct. They are potential sources of conflict and couple the sdk code with all the packages that add members to it. This change switched to a registration model that allows each package to register its sdk member types decoupling them from the sdk code. Adds an SdkPropertyName() method to SdkMemberType that specifies the name of the property to use in the sdk/sdk_snapshot. Also provides an SdkMemberTypeBase struct to be used by providers of SdkMemberType implementations. SdkMemberType instances are registered using the RegisterSdkMemberType() func which sorts the registered instances by their SdkPropertyName() to ensure the behavior is consistent and not affected by order of registration. When creating a new sdk module a dynamicSdkMemberTypes instance is created that contains the following: * A properties struct is created dynamically that contains a field for each registered SdkMemberType, corresponding to that type's SdkPropertyName(). * A list of sdkMemberListProperty instances is also created, one for each registered SdkMemberType. The dynamicSdkMemberTypes instance is cached using a key that uniquely identifies the set of registered types just in case new types are registered after one has been created, e.g. by tests. Bug: 142918168 Test: m checkbuild Change-Id: I4bf2bf56a2a49025aa41454048bc1e8ccc6baca2
2019-12-13 12:22:16 +01:00
var listProperties []*sdkMemberListProperty
var fields []reflect.StructField
// Iterate over the member types creating StructField and sdkMemberListProperty objects.
for f, memberType := range sdkMemberTypes {
p := memberType.SdkPropertyName()
// Create a dynamic exported field for the member type's property.
fields = append(fields, reflect.StructField{
Name: proptools.FieldNameForProperty(p),
Type: reflect.TypeOf([]string{}),
Tag: `android:"arch_variant"`,
Decouple addition of new sdk member types from sdk code Previously, adding a new SdkMemberType would require adding a new sdkMemberListProperty instance to the sdkMemberListProperties as well as adding a new property into the sdkProperties struct. They are potential sources of conflict and couple the sdk code with all the packages that add members to it. This change switched to a registration model that allows each package to register its sdk member types decoupling them from the sdk code. Adds an SdkPropertyName() method to SdkMemberType that specifies the name of the property to use in the sdk/sdk_snapshot. Also provides an SdkMemberTypeBase struct to be used by providers of SdkMemberType implementations. SdkMemberType instances are registered using the RegisterSdkMemberType() func which sorts the registered instances by their SdkPropertyName() to ensure the behavior is consistent and not affected by order of registration. When creating a new sdk module a dynamicSdkMemberTypes instance is created that contains the following: * A properties struct is created dynamically that contains a field for each registered SdkMemberType, corresponding to that type's SdkPropertyName(). * A list of sdkMemberListProperty instances is also created, one for each registered SdkMemberType. The dynamicSdkMemberTypes instance is cached using a key that uniquely identifies the set of registered types just in case new types are registered after one has been created, e.g. by tests. Bug: 142918168 Test: m checkbuild Change-Id: I4bf2bf56a2a49025aa41454048bc1e8ccc6baca2
2019-12-13 12:22:16 +01:00
})
// Copy the field index for use in the getter func as using the loop variable directly will
// cause all funcs to use the last value.
fieldIndex := f
// Create an sdkMemberListProperty for the member type.
memberListProperty := &sdkMemberListProperty{
getter: func(properties interface{}) []string {
// The properties is expected to be of the following form (where
// <Module_types> is the name of an SdkMemberType.SdkPropertyName().
// properties *struct {<Module_types> []string, ....}
//
// Although it accesses the field by index the following reflection code is equivalent to:
// *properties.<Module_types>
//
list := reflect.ValueOf(properties).Elem().Field(fieldIndex).Interface().([]string)
return list
},
memberType: memberType,
dependencyTag: android.DependencyTagForSdkMemberType(memberType),
Decouple addition of new sdk member types from sdk code Previously, adding a new SdkMemberType would require adding a new sdkMemberListProperty instance to the sdkMemberListProperties as well as adding a new property into the sdkProperties struct. They are potential sources of conflict and couple the sdk code with all the packages that add members to it. This change switched to a registration model that allows each package to register its sdk member types decoupling them from the sdk code. Adds an SdkPropertyName() method to SdkMemberType that specifies the name of the property to use in the sdk/sdk_snapshot. Also provides an SdkMemberTypeBase struct to be used by providers of SdkMemberType implementations. SdkMemberType instances are registered using the RegisterSdkMemberType() func which sorts the registered instances by their SdkPropertyName() to ensure the behavior is consistent and not affected by order of registration. When creating a new sdk module a dynamicSdkMemberTypes instance is created that contains the following: * A properties struct is created dynamically that contains a field for each registered SdkMemberType, corresponding to that type's SdkPropertyName(). * A list of sdkMemberListProperty instances is also created, one for each registered SdkMemberType. The dynamicSdkMemberTypes instance is cached using a key that uniquely identifies the set of registered types just in case new types are registered after one has been created, e.g. by tests. Bug: 142918168 Test: m checkbuild Change-Id: I4bf2bf56a2a49025aa41454048bc1e8ccc6baca2
2019-12-13 12:22:16 +01:00
}
listProperties = append(listProperties, memberListProperty)
}
// Create a dynamic struct from the collated fields.
propertiesStructType := reflect.StructOf(fields)
return &dynamicSdkMemberTypes{
memberListProperties: listProperties,
propertiesStructType: propertiesStructType,
}
Parameterize the sdk member processing Extracts the type specific functionality into the SdkMemberType interface which has to be implemented by each module type that can be added as a member of the sdk. It provides functionality to add the required dependencies for the module type, check to see if a resolved module is the correct instance and build the snapshot. The latter was previously part of SdkAware but was moved because it has to be able to process multiple SdkAware variants so delegating it to a single instance did not make sense. The custom code for handling each member type specific property, e.g. java_libs, has been replaced with common code that processes a list of sdkMemberListProperty struct which associates the property (name and getter) with the SdkMemberType and a special DependencyTag which is passed to the SdkMemberType when it has to add dependencies. The DependencyTag contains a reference to the appropriate sdkMemberListProperty which allows the resolved dependencies to be grouped by type. Previously, the dependency collection methods would ignore a module if it was an unsupported type because they did not have a way of determining which property it was initially listed in. That meant it was possible to add say a droidstubs module to the java_libs property (and because they had the same variants) it would work as if it was added to the stubs_sources property. Or alternatively, a module of an unsupported type could be added to any property and it would just be ignored. However, the DependencyTag provides information about which property a resolved module was referenced in and so it can detect when the resolved module is of the wrong type and report an error. That check identified a bug in one of the tests where the sdk referenced a java_import module (which is not allowed in an sdk) instead of a java_library module (which is allowed). That test was fixed as part of this. A list of sdkMemberListProperty structs defines the member properties supported by the sdk and are processed in order to ensure consistent behaviour. The resolved dependencies are grouped by type and each group is then processed in defined order. Within each type dependencies are grouped by name and encapsulated behind an SdkMember interface which includes the name and the list of variants. The Droidstubs and java.Library types can only support one variant and will fail if given more. The processing for the native_shared_libs property has been moved into the cc/library.go file so the sdk package code should now have no type specific information in it apart from what is if the list of sdkMemberListProperty structs. Bug: 143678475 Test: m conscrypt-module-sdk Change-Id: I10203594d33dbf53441f655aff124f9ab3538d87
2019-11-28 15:31:38 +01:00
}
// sdk defines an SDK which is a logical group of modules (e.g. native libs, headers, java libs, etc.)
// which Mainline modules like APEX can choose to build with.
func SdkModuleFactory() android.Module {
return newSdkModule(false)
}
Decouple addition of new sdk member types from sdk code Previously, adding a new SdkMemberType would require adding a new sdkMemberListProperty instance to the sdkMemberListProperties as well as adding a new property into the sdkProperties struct. They are potential sources of conflict and couple the sdk code with all the packages that add members to it. This change switched to a registration model that allows each package to register its sdk member types decoupling them from the sdk code. Adds an SdkPropertyName() method to SdkMemberType that specifies the name of the property to use in the sdk/sdk_snapshot. Also provides an SdkMemberTypeBase struct to be used by providers of SdkMemberType implementations. SdkMemberType instances are registered using the RegisterSdkMemberType() func which sorts the registered instances by their SdkPropertyName() to ensure the behavior is consistent and not affected by order of registration. When creating a new sdk module a dynamicSdkMemberTypes instance is created that contains the following: * A properties struct is created dynamically that contains a field for each registered SdkMemberType, corresponding to that type's SdkPropertyName(). * A list of sdkMemberListProperty instances is also created, one for each registered SdkMemberType. The dynamicSdkMemberTypes instance is cached using a key that uniquely identifies the set of registered types just in case new types are registered after one has been created, e.g. by tests. Bug: 142918168 Test: m checkbuild Change-Id: I4bf2bf56a2a49025aa41454048bc1e8ccc6baca2
2019-12-13 12:22:16 +01:00
func newSdkModule(moduleExports bool) *sdk {
s := &sdk{}
s.properties.Module_exports = moduleExports
Decouple addition of new sdk member types from sdk code Previously, adding a new SdkMemberType would require adding a new sdkMemberListProperty instance to the sdkMemberListProperties as well as adding a new property into the sdkProperties struct. They are potential sources of conflict and couple the sdk code with all the packages that add members to it. This change switched to a registration model that allows each package to register its sdk member types decoupling them from the sdk code. Adds an SdkPropertyName() method to SdkMemberType that specifies the name of the property to use in the sdk/sdk_snapshot. Also provides an SdkMemberTypeBase struct to be used by providers of SdkMemberType implementations. SdkMemberType instances are registered using the RegisterSdkMemberType() func which sorts the registered instances by their SdkPropertyName() to ensure the behavior is consistent and not affected by order of registration. When creating a new sdk module a dynamicSdkMemberTypes instance is created that contains the following: * A properties struct is created dynamically that contains a field for each registered SdkMemberType, corresponding to that type's SdkPropertyName(). * A list of sdkMemberListProperty instances is also created, one for each registered SdkMemberType. The dynamicSdkMemberTypes instance is cached using a key that uniquely identifies the set of registered types just in case new types are registered after one has been created, e.g. by tests. Bug: 142918168 Test: m checkbuild Change-Id: I4bf2bf56a2a49025aa41454048bc1e8ccc6baca2
2019-12-13 12:22:16 +01:00
// Get the dynamic sdk member type data for the currently registered sdk member types.
var registry *android.SdkMemberTypesRegistry
if moduleExports {
registry = android.ModuleExportsMemberTypes
} else {
registry = android.SdkMemberTypes
}
s.dynamicSdkMemberTypes = getDynamicSdkMemberTypes(registry)
Decouple addition of new sdk member types from sdk code Previously, adding a new SdkMemberType would require adding a new sdkMemberListProperty instance to the sdkMemberListProperties as well as adding a new property into the sdkProperties struct. They are potential sources of conflict and couple the sdk code with all the packages that add members to it. This change switched to a registration model that allows each package to register its sdk member types decoupling them from the sdk code. Adds an SdkPropertyName() method to SdkMemberType that specifies the name of the property to use in the sdk/sdk_snapshot. Also provides an SdkMemberTypeBase struct to be used by providers of SdkMemberType implementations. SdkMemberType instances are registered using the RegisterSdkMemberType() func which sorts the registered instances by their SdkPropertyName() to ensure the behavior is consistent and not affected by order of registration. When creating a new sdk module a dynamicSdkMemberTypes instance is created that contains the following: * A properties struct is created dynamically that contains a field for each registered SdkMemberType, corresponding to that type's SdkPropertyName(). * A list of sdkMemberListProperty instances is also created, one for each registered SdkMemberType. The dynamicSdkMemberTypes instance is cached using a key that uniquely identifies the set of registered types just in case new types are registered after one has been created, e.g. by tests. Bug: 142918168 Test: m checkbuild Change-Id: I4bf2bf56a2a49025aa41454048bc1e8ccc6baca2
2019-12-13 12:22:16 +01:00
// Create an instance of the dynamically created struct that contains all the
// properties for the member type specific list properties.
s.dynamicMemberTypeListProperties = s.dynamicSdkMemberTypes.createMemberListProperties()
s.AddProperties(&s.properties, s.dynamicMemberTypeListProperties)
// Make sure that the prebuilt visibility property is verified for errors.
android.AddVisibilityProperty(s, "prebuilt_visibility", &s.properties.Prebuilt_visibility)
android.InitCommonOSAndroidMultiTargetsArchModule(s, android.HostAndDeviceSupported, android.MultilibCommon)
android.InitDefaultableModule(s)
android.AddLoadHook(s, func(ctx android.LoadHookContext) {
type props struct {
Compile_multilib *string
}
p := &props{Compile_multilib: proptools.StringPtr("both")}
ctx.PrependProperties(p)
})
return s
}
// sdk_snapshot is a versioned snapshot of an SDK. This is an auto-generated module.
func SnapshotModuleFactory() android.Module {
s := newSdkModule(false)
s.properties.Snapshot = true
return s
}
func (s *sdk) memberListProperties() []*sdkMemberListProperty {
return s.dynamicSdkMemberTypes.memberListProperties
}
func (s *sdk) getExportedMembers() map[string]struct{} {
// Collect all the exported members.
exportedMembers := make(map[string]struct{})
for _, memberListProperty := range s.memberListProperties() {
names := memberListProperty.getter(s.dynamicMemberTypeListProperties)
// Every member specified explicitly in the properties is exported by the sdk.
for _, name := range names {
exportedMembers[name] = struct{}{}
}
}
return exportedMembers
}
func (s *sdk) snapshot() bool {
return s.properties.Snapshot
}
func (s *sdk) GenerateAndroidBuildActions(ctx android.ModuleContext) {
if s.snapshot() {
// We don't need to create a snapshot out of sdk_snapshot.
// That doesn't make sense. We need a snapshot to create sdk_snapshot.
return
}
// This method is guaranteed to be called on OsType specific variants before it is called
// on their corresponding CommonOS variant.
if !s.IsCommonOSVariant() {
// Update the OsType specific sdk variant with information about its members.
s.collectMembers(ctx)
} else {
// Get the OsType specific variants on which the CommonOS depends.
osSpecificVariants := android.GetOsSpecificVariantsOfCommonOSVariant(ctx)
var sdkVariants []*sdk
for _, m := range osSpecificVariants {
if sdkVariant, ok := m.(*sdk); ok {
sdkVariants = append(sdkVariants, sdkVariant)
}
}
// Generate the snapshot from the member info.
p := s.buildSnapshot(ctx, sdkVariants)
s.snapshotFile = android.OptionalPathForPath(p)
ctx.InstallFile(android.PathForMainlineSdksInstall(ctx), s.Name()+"-current.zip", p)
}
}
func (s *sdk) AndroidMkEntries() []android.AndroidMkEntries {
if !s.snapshotFile.Valid() {
return []android.AndroidMkEntries{}
}
return []android.AndroidMkEntries{android.AndroidMkEntries{
Class: "FAKE",
OutputFile: s.snapshotFile,
DistFiles: android.MakeDefaultDistFiles(s.snapshotFile.Path()),
Include: "$(BUILD_PHONY_PACKAGE)",
ExtraFooters: []android.AndroidMkExtraFootersFunc{
func(w io.Writer, name, prefix, moduleDir string) {
// Allow the sdk to be built by simply passing its name on the command line.
fmt.Fprintln(w, ".PHONY:", s.Name())
fmt.Fprintln(w, s.Name()+":", s.snapshotFile.String())
},
},
}}
}
// RegisterPreDepsMutators registers pre-deps mutators to support modules implementing SdkAware
// interface and the sdk module type. This function has been made public to be called by tests
// outside of the sdk package
func RegisterPreDepsMutators(ctx android.RegisterMutatorsContext) {
ctx.BottomUp("SdkMember", memberMutator).Parallel()
ctx.TopDown("SdkMember_deps", memberDepsMutator).Parallel()
ctx.BottomUp("SdkMemberInterVersion", memberInterVersionMutator).Parallel()
}
// RegisterPostDepsMutators registers post-deps mutators to support modules implementing SdkAware
// interface and the sdk module type. This function has been made public to be called by tests
// outside of the sdk package
func RegisterPostDepsMutators(ctx android.RegisterMutatorsContext) {
// These must run AFTER apexMutator. Note that the apex package is imported even though there is
// no direct dependency to the package here. sdkDepsMutator sets the SDK requirements from an
// APEX to its dependents. Since different versions of the same SDK can be used by different
// APEXes, the apex and its dependents (which includes the dependencies to the sdk members)
// should have been mutated for the apex before the SDK requirements are set.
ctx.TopDown("SdkDepsMutator", sdkDepsMutator).Parallel()
ctx.BottomUp("SdkDepsReplaceMutator", sdkDepsReplaceMutator).Parallel()
ctx.TopDown("SdkRequirementCheck", sdkRequirementsMutator).Parallel()
}
type dependencyTag struct {
blueprint.BaseDependencyTag
}
// Mark this tag so dependencies that use it are excluded from APEX contents.
func (t dependencyTag) ExcludeFromApexContents() {}
var _ android.ExcludeFromApexContentsTag = dependencyTag{}
// For dependencies from an in-development version of an SDK member to frozen versions of the same member
// e.g. libfoo -> libfoo.mysdk.11 and libfoo.mysdk.12
Prevent ApexInfoMutator from creating unnecessary variants Adds the AlwaysRequireApexVariantTag interface to enable ApexInfoMutator to differentiate between a tag that is excluded from apex contents but still requires an apex variant and a tag that is excluded from apex contents and does not require an apex variant. That is needed to support the sdkMemberVersionedDepTag which excludes the target from being added to the APEX but requires an APEX variant. A more detailed explanation is in the comments. The AlwaysRequireApexVariant() method follows the pattern used in ReplaceSourceWithPrebuilt of having a method that returns a bool to trigger the behavior and not say ExcludeFromApexContentsTag that simply relies on the tag implementing an interface to trigger. That is because the former is more flexible and allows a tag type to parameterize the behavior if necessary. The tags that this will exclude from creating an apex variant are: * PrebuiltDepTag - by the time the apex variant has been created any preferred prebuilts will have replaced the sources so there is no need to create an APEX variant if the only dependency path from the APEX to the prebuilt is via this tag. * hiddenApiAnnotationsDependencyTag - the target of which is a purely build time artifect and MUST NEVER end up in the APEX. It will also stop calling DepIsInSameApex for any dependency created by the sdkMemberVersionedDepTag. Which will fix the issue reported in the bug. Bug: 182992071 Test: m nothing Change-Id: I9569e488d6446ca45d3ea8f32a9b74524eb865df
2021-03-17 14:25:29 +01:00
//
// The dependency represented by this tag requires that for every APEX variant created for the
// `from` module that an equivalent APEX variant is created for the 'to' module. This is because an
// APEX that requires a specific version of an sdk (via the `uses_sdks` property will replace
// dependencies on the unversioned sdk member with a dependency on the appropriate versioned sdk
// member. In order for that to work the versioned sdk member needs to have a variant for that APEX.
// As it is not known at the time that the APEX variants are created which specific APEX variants of
// a versioned sdk members will be required it is necessary for the versioned sdk members to have
// variants for any APEX that it could be used within.
//
// If the APEX selects a versioned sdk member then it will not have a dependency on the `from`
// module at all so any dependencies of that module will not affect the APEX. However, if the APEX
// selects the unversioned sdk member then it must exclude all the versioned sdk members. In no
// situation would this dependency cause the `to` module to be added to the APEX hence why this tag
// also excludes the `to` module from being added to the APEX contents.
type sdkMemberVersionedDepTag struct {
dependencyTag
member string
version string
}
Prevent ApexInfoMutator from creating unnecessary variants Adds the AlwaysRequireApexVariantTag interface to enable ApexInfoMutator to differentiate between a tag that is excluded from apex contents but still requires an apex variant and a tag that is excluded from apex contents and does not require an apex variant. That is needed to support the sdkMemberVersionedDepTag which excludes the target from being added to the APEX but requires an APEX variant. A more detailed explanation is in the comments. The AlwaysRequireApexVariant() method follows the pattern used in ReplaceSourceWithPrebuilt of having a method that returns a bool to trigger the behavior and not say ExcludeFromApexContentsTag that simply relies on the tag implementing an interface to trigger. That is because the former is more flexible and allows a tag type to parameterize the behavior if necessary. The tags that this will exclude from creating an apex variant are: * PrebuiltDepTag - by the time the apex variant has been created any preferred prebuilts will have replaced the sources so there is no need to create an APEX variant if the only dependency path from the APEX to the prebuilt is via this tag. * hiddenApiAnnotationsDependencyTag - the target of which is a purely build time artifect and MUST NEVER end up in the APEX. It will also stop calling DepIsInSameApex for any dependency created by the sdkMemberVersionedDepTag. Which will fix the issue reported in the bug. Bug: 182992071 Test: m nothing Change-Id: I9569e488d6446ca45d3ea8f32a9b74524eb865df
2021-03-17 14:25:29 +01:00
func (t sdkMemberVersionedDepTag) AlwaysRequireApexVariant() bool {
return true
}
// Mark this tag so dependencies that use it are excluded from visibility enforcement.
func (t sdkMemberVersionedDepTag) ExcludeFromVisibilityEnforcement() {}
Prevent ApexInfoMutator from creating unnecessary variants Adds the AlwaysRequireApexVariantTag interface to enable ApexInfoMutator to differentiate between a tag that is excluded from apex contents but still requires an apex variant and a tag that is excluded from apex contents and does not require an apex variant. That is needed to support the sdkMemberVersionedDepTag which excludes the target from being added to the APEX but requires an APEX variant. A more detailed explanation is in the comments. The AlwaysRequireApexVariant() method follows the pattern used in ReplaceSourceWithPrebuilt of having a method that returns a bool to trigger the behavior and not say ExcludeFromApexContentsTag that simply relies on the tag implementing an interface to trigger. That is because the former is more flexible and allows a tag type to parameterize the behavior if necessary. The tags that this will exclude from creating an apex variant are: * PrebuiltDepTag - by the time the apex variant has been created any preferred prebuilts will have replaced the sources so there is no need to create an APEX variant if the only dependency path from the APEX to the prebuilt is via this tag. * hiddenApiAnnotationsDependencyTag - the target of which is a purely build time artifect and MUST NEVER end up in the APEX. It will also stop calling DepIsInSameApex for any dependency created by the sdkMemberVersionedDepTag. Which will fix the issue reported in the bug. Bug: 182992071 Test: m nothing Change-Id: I9569e488d6446ca45d3ea8f32a9b74524eb865df
2021-03-17 14:25:29 +01:00
var _ android.AlwaysRequireApexVariantTag = sdkMemberVersionedDepTag{}
// Step 1: create dependencies from an SDK module to its members.
func memberMutator(mctx android.BottomUpMutatorContext) {
Decouple addition of new sdk member types from sdk code Previously, adding a new SdkMemberType would require adding a new sdkMemberListProperty instance to the sdkMemberListProperties as well as adding a new property into the sdkProperties struct. They are potential sources of conflict and couple the sdk code with all the packages that add members to it. This change switched to a registration model that allows each package to register its sdk member types decoupling them from the sdk code. Adds an SdkPropertyName() method to SdkMemberType that specifies the name of the property to use in the sdk/sdk_snapshot. Also provides an SdkMemberTypeBase struct to be used by providers of SdkMemberType implementations. SdkMemberType instances are registered using the RegisterSdkMemberType() func which sorts the registered instances by their SdkPropertyName() to ensure the behavior is consistent and not affected by order of registration. When creating a new sdk module a dynamicSdkMemberTypes instance is created that contains the following: * A properties struct is created dynamically that contains a field for each registered SdkMemberType, corresponding to that type's SdkPropertyName(). * A list of sdkMemberListProperty instances is also created, one for each registered SdkMemberType. The dynamicSdkMemberTypes instance is cached using a key that uniquely identifies the set of registered types just in case new types are registered after one has been created, e.g. by tests. Bug: 142918168 Test: m checkbuild Change-Id: I4bf2bf56a2a49025aa41454048bc1e8ccc6baca2
2019-12-13 12:22:16 +01:00
if s, ok := mctx.Module().(*sdk); ok {
// Add dependencies from enabled and non CommonOS variants to the sdk member variants.
if s.Enabled() && !s.IsCommonOSVariant() {
for _, memberListProperty := range s.memberListProperties() {
names := memberListProperty.getter(s.dynamicMemberTypeListProperties)
if len(names) > 0 {
tag := memberListProperty.dependencyTag
memberListProperty.memberType.AddDependencies(mctx, tag, names)
}
}
}
}
}
// Step 2: record that dependencies of SDK modules are members of the SDK modules
func memberDepsMutator(mctx android.TopDownMutatorContext) {
if s, ok := mctx.Module().(*sdk); ok {
mySdkRef := android.ParseSdkRef(mctx, mctx.ModuleName(), "name")
if s.snapshot() && mySdkRef.Unversioned() {
mctx.PropertyErrorf("name", "sdk_snapshot should be named as <name>@<version>. "+
"Did you manually modify Android.bp?")
}
if !s.snapshot() && !mySdkRef.Unversioned() {
mctx.PropertyErrorf("name", "sdk shouldn't be named as <name>@<version>.")
}
if mySdkRef.Version != "" && mySdkRef.Version != "current" {
if _, err := strconv.Atoi(mySdkRef.Version); err != nil {
mctx.PropertyErrorf("name", "version %q is neither a number nor \"current\"", mySdkRef.Version)
}
}
mctx.VisitDirectDeps(func(child android.Module) {
if member, ok := child.(android.SdkAware); ok {
member.MakeMemberOf(mySdkRef)
}
})
}
}
// Step 3: create dependencies from the unversioned SDK member to snapshot versions
// of the same member. By having these dependencies, they are mutated for multiple Mainline modules
// (apex and apk), each of which might want different sdks to be built with. For example, if both
// apex A and B are referencing libfoo which is a member of sdk 'mysdk', the two APEXes can be
// built with libfoo.mysdk.11 and libfoo.mysdk.12, respectively depending on which sdk they are
// using.
func memberInterVersionMutator(mctx android.BottomUpMutatorContext) {
if m, ok := mctx.Module().(android.SdkAware); ok && m.IsInAnySdk() {
if !m.ContainingSdk().Unversioned() {
memberName := m.MemberName()
tag := sdkMemberVersionedDepTag{member: memberName, version: m.ContainingSdk().Version}
mctx.AddReverseDependency(mctx.Module(), tag, memberName)
}
}
}
// 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().(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 && android.IsDepInSameApex(mctx, parent, dep) {
dep.BuildWithSdks(requiredSdks)
}
})
}
}
}
// Step 5: if libfoo.mysdk.11 is in the context where version 11 of mysdk is requested, the
// versioned module is used instead of the un-versioned (in-development) module libfoo
func sdkDepsReplaceMutator(mctx android.BottomUpMutatorContext) {
if versionedSdkMember, ok := mctx.Module().(android.SdkAware); ok && versionedSdkMember.IsInAnySdk() {
if sdk := versionedSdkMember.ContainingSdk(); !sdk.Unversioned() {
// Only replace dependencies to <sdkmember> with <sdkmember@required-version>
// if the depending module requires it. e.g.
// foo -> sdkmember
// will be transformed to:
// foo -> sdkmember@1
// if and only if foo is a member of an APEX that requires version 1 of the
// sdk containing sdkmember.
memberName := versionedSdkMember.MemberName()
// Replace dependencies on sdkmember with a dependency on the current module which
// is a versioned prebuilt of the sdkmember if required.
mctx.ReplaceDependenciesIf(memberName, func(from blueprint.Module, tag blueprint.DependencyTag, to blueprint.Module) bool {
// from - foo
// to - sdkmember
replace := false
if parent, ok := from.(android.RequiredSdks); ok {
replace = parent.RequiredSdks().Contains(sdk)
}
return replace
})
}
}
}
// 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().(sdkAndApexModule); ok {
requiredSdks := m.RequiredSdks()
if len(requiredSdks) == 0 {
return
}
mctx.VisitDirectDeps(func(dep android.Module) {
tag := mctx.OtherModuleDependencyTag(dep)
if tag == android.DefaultsDepTag {
// dependency to defaults is always okay
return
}
// Ignore the dependency from the unversioned member to any versioned members as an
// apex that depends on the unversioned member will not also be depending on a versioned
// member.
if _, ok := tag.(sdkMemberVersionedDepTag); ok {
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 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)
}
}
})
}
}