When the display state is DOZE or DOZE_SUSPEND, assume this means
that the AP may go to sleep at any time so hold a wake lock for
a little while starting when traversals are scheduled to ensure
that the AP remains awake long enough to draw and post the frame
to the display hardware.
This patch is somewhat approximate but should be good enough for
most devices today.
Note that the implementation uses the window manager to ensure that
the window which wants to draw is actually visible before acquiring
the wake lock. There is a cost to this test (a round-trip) which
should not be significant today since we do not expect apps to draw
more than one frame or two while dozing. However, if we wanted to
support animations in general, we might want to optimize it or
eliminate the check altogether (since we can already account for
the app's use of the wake lock).
Another way to implement this functionality might be for the view
hierarchy to listen for the power manager to report that it has entered
a non-interactive power state before deciding to poke draw locks.
This would be somewhat more accurate than watching the display state.
Also, the draw lock timeout logic could be implemented more directly
instead of using an ordinary timed wake lock.
Bug: 18284212
Change-Id: I84b341c678303e8b7481bd1620e634fe82cc4350
The special logic for clicking on views in accessibility mode should not
prevent event interception and if a view interceptes the gesture we must
clear the special flag and do normal event dispatch. Also once we have a
view handling the touch gesture we do not need the special flag as we
know what will handle the event. This tightly follows standard event
dispatching.
bug:19252492
Change-Id: I0c9764c5050ec73f5f7980f3f0340dd9509a725a
A view that has an accessibility node provider should not have real children
since the provider is responsible to generate the node infos for the subtree
rooted at its hosting view. This is how the APIs are designed to work. However,
it is a common mistake and if this occurs the accessibility services
introspecting the screen get into an infinite loop.
The framework now does not add the real children of a view with a node provider
to the list of accessibility children. If the developer wants them exposed they
have to do that via the provider APIs as per contract.
bug:19297093
Change-Id: I1b01b1e4a85e1c397886fcd2506b434beb063687
The clicking logic was missing the case where a child of the accessibility
focused view reacts to the injected down up events for clicking. This
results of a whole class of views being non-interactive. Now if an event
is targeting accessibility focus and the dispatching view group has this
focus, we clear the flag before dispatching to children, so they can
handle the event rather ignoring it becuase they are not accessibility
focused.
bug:19252492
Change-Id: I6ac25bb7a50b35bb638ca4bfb9fc4198d08c2d4d
We were using an approximation to determine where to send a pair of down
and up events to click on the view that has accessibility focus. We were
doing reverse computation to figuring out which portion of the view is
not covered by interactive views and get a point in this region. However,
determining whether a view is interactive is not feasible in general since
for example may override onTouchEvent. This results in views not being
activated or which is worse wrong views being activated.
This change swithes to a new approach to activate views in accessibility
mode which is guaranteed to always work except the very rare case of a
view that overrides dispatchTouchEvent (which developers shouldn't be
doing). The new approach is to flag the down and up events pair sent
by the touch explorer as targeting the accessibility focused view. Such
events are dispatched such that views predecessors of the accessibility
focus do not handle them guaranteeing that these events reach the accessibiliy
focused view. Once the accessibiliy focused view gets such an event it clears
the flag and the event is dispatched following the normal event dispatch
semantics.
The new approach is semantically equivalent to requesting the view to perform
a click accessiblitiy action but is more generic as it is not affected by
views not implementing click action support correctly.
bug:18986806
bug:18889611
Change-Id: Id4b7b886c9fd34f7eb11e606636d8e3bab122869
