Merge "releasetools: Use "ota-downgrade=yes" for --override_timestamp."
diff --git a/tools/releasetools/ota_from_target_files.py b/tools/releasetools/ota_from_target_files.py
index e8ec50e..968fd77 100755
--- a/tools/releasetools/ota_from_target_files.py
+++ b/tools/releasetools/ota_from_target_files.py
@@ -24,12 +24,12 @@
--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 @@
--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.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 @@
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 @@
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 @@
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 @@
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 @@
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).
diff --git a/tools/releasetools/test_ota_from_target_files.py b/tools/releasetools/test_ota_from_target_files.py
index 213e830..e472363 100644
--- a/tools/releasetools/test_ota_from_target_files.py
+++ b/tools/releasetools/test_ota_from_target_files.py
@@ -532,31 +532,7 @@
'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',