Merge "releasetools: Use "ota-downgrade=yes" for --override_timestamp." into pi-dev (5c959195) · Commits · e / os / android_build

tools/releasetools/ota_from_target_files.py

+34 −43

Original line number	Diff line number	Diff line
		@@ -65,24 +65,29 @@ Usage: ota_from_target_files [flags] input_target_files output_ota_package
		when installed.

		--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.
		Intentionally generate an incremental OTA that updates from a newer build
		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.

		--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.
		Intentionally generate an incremental OTA that updates from a newer build
		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.

		-e (--extra_script) <file>
		Insert the contents of file at the end of the update script.
		@@ -180,7 +185,6 @@ 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:
		@@ -898,23 +902,16 @@ 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):
		@@ -922,7 +919,7 @@ 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.
		@@ -963,11 +960,12 @@ 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

		@@ -1791,7 +1789,7 @@ 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":
		@@ -1869,19 +1867,12 @@ 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
		@@ -524,31 +524,7 @@ 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',