Merge "releasetools: Use "ota-downgrade=yes" for --override_timestamp." (3d840c6b) · Commits · e / os / android_build

tools/releasetools/ota_from_target_files.py

+32 −41

Original line number	Diff line number	Diff line
		@@ -24,12 +24,12 @@ Common options that apply to both of non-A/B and A/B OTAs

		--downgrade
		Intentionally generate an incremental OTA that updates from a newer build
		to an older one (based on timestamp comparison). "post-timestamp" will be
		replaced by "ota-downgrade=yes" in the metadata file. A data wipe will
		always be enforced, so "ota-wipe=yes" will also be included in the
		metadata file. The update-binary in the source build will be used in the
		OTA package, unless --binary flag is specified. Please also check the doc
		for --override_timestamp below.
		to an older one (e.g. downgrading from P preview back to O MR1).
		"ota-downgrade=yes" will be set in the package metadata file. A data wipe
		will always be enforced when using this flag, so "ota-wipe=yes" will also
		be included in the metadata file. The update-binary in the source build
		will be used in the OTA package, unless --binary flag is specified. Please
		also check the comment for --override_timestamp below.

		-i (--incremental_from) <file>
		Generate an incremental OTA using the given target-files zip as the
		@@ -46,14 +46,19 @@ Common options that apply to both of non-A/B and A/B OTAs

		--override_timestamp
		Intentionally generate an incremental OTA that updates from a newer build
		to an older one (based on timestamp comparison), by overriding the
		timestamp in package metadata. This differs from --downgrade flag: we know
		for sure this is NOT an actual downgrade case, but two builds are cut in a
		reverse order. A legit use case is that we cut a new build C (after having
		A and B), but want to enfore an update path of A -> C -> B. Specifying
		--downgrade may not help since that would enforce a data wipe for C -> B
		update. The value of "post-timestamp" will be set to the newer timestamp
		plus one, so that the package can be pushed and applied.
		to an older one (based on timestamp comparison), by setting the downgrade
		flag in the package metadata. This differs from --downgrade flag, as we
		don't enforce a data wipe with this flag. Because we know for sure this is
		NOT an actual downgrade case, but two builds happen to be cut in a reverse
		order (e.g. from two branches). A legit use case is that we cut a new
		build C (after having A and B), but want to enfore an update path of A ->
		C -> B. Specifying --downgrade may not help since that would enforce a
		data wipe for C -> B update.

		We used to set a fake timestamp in the package metadata for this flow. But
		now we consolidate the two cases (i.e. an actual downgrade, or a downgrade
		based on timestamp) with the same "ota-downgrade=yes" flag, with the
		difference being whether "ota-wipe=yes" is set.

		--wipe_user_data
		Generate an OTA package that will wipe the user data partition when
		@@ -184,7 +189,6 @@ OPTIONS.verify = False
		OPTIONS.patch_threshold = 0.95
		OPTIONS.wipe_user_data = False
		OPTIONS.downgrade = False
		OPTIONS.timestamp = False
		OPTIONS.extra_script = None
		OPTIONS.worker_threads = multiprocessing.cpu_count() // 2
		if OPTIONS.worker_threads == 0:
		@@ -902,23 +906,16 @@ def HandleDowngradeMetadata(metadata, target_info, source_info):

		if OPTIONS.downgrade:
		if not is_downgrade:
		raise RuntimeError("--downgrade specified but no downgrade detected: "
		"pre: %s, post: %s" % (pre_timestamp, post_timestamp))
		raise RuntimeError(
		"--downgrade or --override_timestamp specified but no downgrade "
		"detected: pre: %s, post: %s" % (pre_timestamp, post_timestamp))
		metadata["ota-downgrade"] = "yes"
		elif OPTIONS.timestamp:
		if not is_downgrade:
		raise RuntimeError("--override_timestamp specified but no timestamp hack "
		"needed: pre: %s, post: %s" % (pre_timestamp,
		post_timestamp))
		metadata["post-timestamp"] = str(long(pre_timestamp) + 1)
		else:
		if is_downgrade:
		raise RuntimeError("Downgrade detected based on timestamp check: "
		"pre: %s, post: %s. Need to specify "
		"--override_timestamp OR --downgrade to allow "
		"building the incremental." % (pre_timestamp,
		post_timestamp))
		metadata["post-timestamp"] = post_timestamp
		raise RuntimeError(
		"Downgrade detected based on timestamp check: pre: %s, post: %s. "
		"Need to specify --override_timestamp OR --downgrade to allow "
		"building the incremental." % (pre_timestamp, post_timestamp))


		def GetPackageMetadata(target_info, source_info=None):
		@@ -926,7 +923,7 @@ def GetPackageMetadata(target_info, source_info=None):

		It generates a dict() that contains the info to be written into an OTA
		package (META-INF/com/android/metadata). It also handles the detection of
		downgrade / timestamp override / data wipe based on the global options.
		downgrade / data wipe based on the global options.

		Args:
		target_info: The BuildInfo instance that holds the target build info.
		@@ -967,11 +964,12 @@ def GetPackageMetadata(target_info, source_info=None):
		else:
		metadata['pre-device'] = target_info.device

		# Detect downgrades, or fill in the post-timestamp.
		# Use the actual post-timestamp, even for a downgrade case.
		metadata['post-timestamp'] = target_info.GetBuildProp('ro.build.date.utc')

		# Detect downgrades and set up downgrade flags accordingly.
		if is_incremental:
		HandleDowngradeMetadata(metadata, target_info, source_info)
		else:
		metadata['post-timestamp'] = target_info.GetBuildProp('ro.build.date.utc')

		return metadata

		@@ -1796,7 +1794,7 @@ def main(argv):
		OPTIONS.downgrade = True
		OPTIONS.wipe_user_data = True
		elif o == "--override_timestamp":
		OPTIONS.timestamp = True
		OPTIONS.downgrade = True
		elif o in ("-o", "--oem_settings"):
		OPTIONS.oem_source = a.split(',')
		elif o == "--oem_no_mount":
		@@ -1874,19 +1872,12 @@ def main(argv):
		sys.exit(1)

		if OPTIONS.downgrade:
		# Sanity check to enforce a data wipe.
		if not OPTIONS.wipe_user_data:
		raise ValueError("Cannot downgrade without a data wipe")

		# We should only allow downgrading incrementals (as opposed to full).
		# Otherwise the device may go back from arbitrary build with this full
		# OTA package.
		if OPTIONS.incremental_source is None:
		raise ValueError("Cannot generate downgradable full OTAs")

		assert not (OPTIONS.downgrade and OPTIONS.timestamp), \
		"Cannot have --downgrade AND --override_timestamp both"

		# Load the build info dicts from the zip directly or the extracted input
		# directory. We don't need to unzip the entire target-files zips, because they
		# won't be needed for A/B OTAs (brillo_update_payload does that on its own).

tools/releasetools/test_ota_from_target_files.py

+1 −25

Original line number	Diff line number	Diff line
		@@ -532,31 +532,7 @@ class OtaFromTargetFilesTest(unittest.TestCase):
		'post-build-incremental' : 'build-version-incremental-target',
		'post-sdk-level' : '27',
		'post-security-patch-level' : '2017-12-01',
		'pre-device' : 'product-device',
		'pre-build' : 'build-fingerprint-source',
		'pre-build-incremental' : 'build-version-incremental-source',
		},
		metadata)

		def test_GetPackageMetadata_overrideTimestamp(self):
		target_info_dict = copy.deepcopy(self.TEST_TARGET_INFO_DICT)
		source_info_dict = copy.deepcopy(self.TEST_SOURCE_INFO_DICT)
		self._test_GetPackageMetadata_swapBuildTimestamps(
		target_info_dict, source_info_dict)

		target_info = BuildInfo(target_info_dict, None)
		source_info = BuildInfo(source_info_dict, None)
		common.OPTIONS.incremental_source = ''
		common.OPTIONS.timestamp = True
		metadata = GetPackageMetadata(target_info, source_info)
		self.assertDictEqual(
		{
		'ota-type' : 'BLOCK',
		'post-build' : 'build-fingerprint-target',
		'post-build-incremental' : 'build-version-incremental-target',
		'post-sdk-level' : '27',
		'post-security-patch-level' : '2017-12-01',
		'post-timestamp' : '1500000001',
		'post-timestamp' : '1400000000',
		'pre-device' : 'product-device',
		'pre-build' : 'build-fingerprint-source',
		'pre-build-incremental' : 'build-version-incremental-source',