As general background, OWNERS files expedite code reviews by helping
code authors quickly find relevant reviewers, and they also ensure
that stakeholders are involved in code changes in their areas.
Some teams under frameworks/base/ have been using OWNERS files
successfully for many years, and we're ready to expand them to cover
more areas. Here's the historical coverage statistics for the last
two years of changes before these new OWNERS changes land:
-- 56% of changes are fully covered by OWNERS
-- 17% of changes are partially covered by OWNERS
-- 25% of changes have no OWNERS coverage
Working closely with team leads, we've now identified clear OWNERS on
a per-package basis, and we're using "include" directives whenever
possible to to simplify future maintenance. With this extensive
effort, we've now improved our coverage as follows:
-- 98% of changes are fully covered by OWNERS
-- 1% of changes are partially covered by OWNERS
-- 1% of changes have no OWNERS coverage
This specific change is automatically generated by a script that
identifies relevant "include" directives.
Bug: 174932174
Test: manual
Exempt-From-Owner-Approval: refactoring with team leads buy-in
Merged-In: I3480ddf2fe7ba3dfb922b459d4da01fa17a2c813
Change-Id: I3480ddf2fe7ba3dfb922b459d4da01fa17a2c813
As general background, OWNERS files expedite code reviews by helping
code authors quickly find relevant reviewers, and they also ensure
that stakeholders are involved in code changes in their areas.
Some teams under frameworks/base/ have been using OWNERS files
successfully for many years, and we're ready to expand them to cover
more areas. Here's the historical coverage statistics for the last
two years of changes before these new OWNERS changes land:
-- 56% of changes are fully covered by OWNERS
-- 17% of changes are partially covered by OWNERS
-- 25% of changes have no OWNERS coverage
Working closely with team leads, we've now identified clear OWNERS on
a per-package basis, and we're using "include" directives whenever
possible to to simplify future maintenance. With this extensive
effort, we've now improved our coverage as follows:
-- 98% of changes are fully covered by OWNERS
-- 1% of changes are partially covered by OWNERS
-- 1% of changes have no OWNERS coverage
This specific change is automatically generated by a script from
detailed ownership information confirmed by team leads.
Bug: 174932174
Test: manual
Exempt-From-Owner-Approval: refactoring with team leads buy-in
Merged-In: I9789c97c1de8e5d962b48c29c57d82fe83729eba
Change-Id: I9789c97c1de8e5d962b48c29c57d82fe83729eba
This makes sure the write operation (NativeInputApplicationHandle
::updateInfo) is always called from window manager side once when
calling SurfaceControl.Transaction#setInputWindowInfo or
InputManagerService#setFocusedApplication. If the info of input
application handle is changed, a new instance will be created.
That avoids the race condition of reading the fields of the same
InputApplicationInfo instance from input dispatcher.
Bug: 171857140
Bug: 161334769
Test: WindowInputTests
Change-Id: I70de9835c7699fe6f56fc3655b0fee5c317ecc3a
Having a hidden abstract method for a class that can be extended
means that public implementors cannot implement these hidden methods
posing a risk that custom implementations will not have required
abstract methods resulting in an exception.
Bug: 151134792
Test: make update-api
Change-Id: I758d12465fabc671be19bedeeceb16885de23c87
Merged-In: I758d12465fabc671be19bedeeceb16885de23c87
Exempt-From-Owner-Approval: large scale suppression of existing issues,
no-op in terms of behavior
These are APIs that have @UnsupportedAppUsage but for which we don't
have any evidence of them currently being used, so should be safe to
remove from the unsupported list.
Bug: 170729553
Test: Treehugger
Merged-In: I626caf7c1fe46c5ab1f39c2895b42a34319f771a
Change-Id: I54e5ecd11e76ca1de3c5893e3a98b0108e735413
Resolve SearchViewTest and InputMethodServiceTest failure when
landing CL[1] in QPR branch.
Also, CL[1] mentioned window focus behavior changes from R,
ignoring STATE_VISIBLE or STATE_ALWAYS_VISIBLE request doesn't enough
to fix unexpected keyboard visible issue when same window focused with
the above softInput flag without editor focus, since there is no
additional unspecified window focus to hide the current soft-input
as prior to R's behavior.
To fix that, we introduced new SoftInputShowHideReason to hide
soft-input when the same window focused without valid editor focus
after screen unlock, in order to align with the behavior prior to R.
[1]: I37ae6e30d1de581ba15131c2a90396b3a522a4d6
Bug: 161506356
Test: atest CtsInputMethodTestCases
Change-Id: Id51863a5b67d5d79d903adf43f19b52bd139e03f
The TODO was in a Javadoc comment so it was exposed in public docs.
It looks like the TODO was removed from master, and per SME, it's
okay to remove it from RVC too.
Test: make ds-docs-java
Exempt-from-owner-approval: Docs-only change
Bug: 169103613
Change-Id: I7694bbc8fde0e7366db57770ff1792a1d2f3e6c1
Merged-In: I129f96f6ed716e25c476bacbdb38799675919b9a
Forcing client to show system bars would clear system UI flags at the
client side. SYSTEM_UI_FLAG_LOW_PROFILE would be cleared as well in
previous Android versions. This CL makes the behavior compatible.
Fix: 167892531
Test: Steps in the bug
Change-Id: I466a05120a08ac95b619eadd8291fc546d3bb450
The application may get Resources instance from Resources.getSystem()
and context.getApplicationContext().getResources(). Since fixed
rotation is introduced that allows an activity to start in a different
rotation than the current display, when using getConfiguration() and
getDisplayMetrics() of these Resources instances, the orientation
and metrics need to be the same as current display is rotated.
Otherwise the app may show unexpected UI layout.
Although it is not recommended to use global resources/config for
activity. One of the goal of fixed rotation transform is to simulate
the app is started in a rotated environment, so this CL makes the
configuration and display metrics of system resources are consistent
with application and activity for compatibility.
About WindowProcessController and ActivityStackSupervisor:
The process configuration passed to LaunchActivityItem may be
associated from activity. if the sequence number of configuration
is overridden by activity, the configuration may be ignored when
launching the activity because the sequence number isn't larger
than the previous process configuration. Although there will be a
ConfigurationChangeItem later to update correct state, the app may
get the intermediate state with old configuration and metrics.
About ResourcesManager and DisplayAdjustments:
There are 2 new fields appWidth and appHeight added to
DisplayAdjustments#FixedRotationAdjustments because the display
metrics from Resources.getSystem() is independent from activity
configuration. Only window manager knows the rotated size, so
the values need to send to client and then ResourcesManager takes
the adjustment to change the global display metrics.
About WindowToken:
When fixed rotation is applied on the token, send the
FixedRotationAdjustmentsItem first so the later configuration
change can pick the adjustment at ActivityThread. And because the
registration of activity configuration only occurs on add/remove
activity, if it is only switching to another existing activity in
different orientation, the process configuration still needs to
be updated.
About ActivityThread:
The code flow for a rotated activity (DA = display adjustments):
- Launch new activity
handleLaunchActivity: override app DA
handleConfigurationChanged: adjust global display metrics by DA
performLaunchActivity
createBaseContextForActivity: override activity DA
- Resume existing activity
handleFixedRotationAdjustments: override app and activity DA
handleConfigurationChanged: adjust global display metrics by DA
handleResumeActivity
Also some minor corrections:
- Fix wrong display metrics adjustment that xdpi and ydpi should
not be swapped because they are physical attributes.
Bug: 167564038
Test: atest DisplayAdjustmentsTests
AppConfigurationTests#testRotatedInfoWithFixedRotationTransform
WindowProcessControllerTests#testProcessLevelConfiguration
DisplayContentTests#testApplyTopFixedRotationTransform
Change-Id: I60bedc7e09f54683d5e857ccc51402d5d144cd9e
Merged-In: I60bedc7e09f54683d5e857ccc51402d5d144cd9e
Bug: 165267251
Test: manual -- ensured that the time needed to hold is 0ms if the
screenshot_keychord_delay debug value is not set, and that the
delay can still be changed using
adb shell device_config put systemui screenshot_keychord_delay <ms>
Change-Id: Iab989ecf14ef379658130adbced241e084554e63
Merged-In: Iab989ecf14ef379658130adbced241e084554e63
(cherry picked from commit bf82822698)
When there is an insets animation, we will stop updating insets source
frames until the animation is done. The previous logic didn't update the
frames within the requested state while the animation is done. And the
frames was relied by InsetsPolicy while playing transient bar animation.
If the frames don't match the display, the insets would be wrong, and
the animation wouldn't be played correctly.
Fix: 161134197
Test: atest InsetsControllerTest
Merged-In: Id8f3c1956fbfe3ad16f167ff76297dde6c634e81
Change-Id: Id8f3c1956fbfe3ad16f167ff76297dde6c634e81
(cherry picked from commit 23c75281ef)
(cherry picked from commit dfc8abb1ff)
Bug: 166149440
Test: manual (flash automotive device with all system bars and show/hide
insets using WindowInsetsController), atest InsetsStateTest
InsetsStateControllerTest
Change-Id: I500b2fb0129739c6fc609561377d90cca6e45f7e
