Issue #17394151: WallpaperService / Engines need to get notified
of WindowInsets
Issue #17394203 Wallpapers need a system API to be shifted in order
to support burn in protection
Adds a new API on WallpaperManager to set additional offsets to
make wallpapers extend beyond the display size.
Insets are now reported to wallpapers, to use as they may. This
includes information about the above offsets, so they can place
their content within the visible area. And to help with this, also
expose the stable offsets APIs in WindowInsets which is also very
useful information for the wallpaper.
Another new API on WallpaperManager to set a raw offset to apply
to the wallpaper window, forcing it to move on the screen regardless
of what the wallpaper is drawing.
Fix wallpapers when used with overscan enabled, so they still extend
out across the entire screen. Conveniently, the above new window
insets information is very useful for this case as well!
And a new wallpaper test app for all this stuff.
Change-Id: I287ee36581283dd34607609fcd3170d99d120d8e
For restore use-case, session creation needs to complete quickly, so
delay ASEC allocation until session is opened. When preflighting
size checks, only consider external when we have a known size for the
container. Also relax size checks when using MODE_INHERIT_EXISTING
on external, since we don't know how much of existing app will be
copied over.
Consider session as "active" while commit is ongoing, until we're
either finished or pending user interaction.
Always publish first client needle movement away from 0. Use 25% of
internal progress to reflect ASEC allocation.
Avoid CloseGuard messages about leaking PFDs.
Bug: 17405741, 17402982
Change-Id: I6247a1d335d26621549c701c4c4575a8d16ef8c2
When the top activity is finishing we don't want to be comparing
it for matches to launching activities. This was keeping curTop
from matching itself when launching a lower task.
Fixes bug 17383648.
Change-Id: I837ac087ef965d99d12c98ab1c779de46716e204
The requirement that the top app be resumed in order to request
background visibility was too strict. In particular when the
background app is pausing the top app will be stopped waiting for
pause to complete. This is an appropriate time for the background
app to request visibility but we were rejecting that request.
Also, there is no need for the top app to have an active thread
except to notify it of the changed state.
Fixes bug 17383876.
Change-Id: I52f910baf6c109565694e053445516e1e5fd1c48
* commit '3004eee618c3fad547768210f9252bad5abb0f69':
Removing unnecessary delays, ensuring transition thumbnail is the size of the header. (Bug. 16987565)
Surfaces were being modified after destroy(). The check for mSurface
being null was not done while holding window the window manager lock.
This change adds locking to the surface modification methods.
Fixes bug 17383628.
Change-Id: I12ebbddc0f2cd7b43659370fac2c4fb053999bb5
When lingering completes ConnectivityService would log an error message
saying the Network still had NetworkRequests. Fixed by ignoring
listening NetworkRequests which aren't a problem.
Change-Id: Ie78a1f91c47b012eae28a377dd77bee2cfcbde3b
Add a new activity attribute, resumeWhilePausing, that allows an
activity specifying it to immediately start running without waiting
for the previous activity to pause. The recents activity is updated
to use this.
The implementation of this is ultimately fairly simple -- if we are
in the path of resuming such an activity, and find that we first need
to pause the existing activity, then within the activity manager we
do the regular pause flow but act like it has immediately finished
pausing right then so that we can immediately go on to the resume.
To make this clean, we tell the activity when asking it to pause that
it should not come back and tell us it is done, because we aren't in
any way waiting for it.
One potentially important change I needed to make here is the pause
callback no longer provides the saved persistent state, because we
now can't count on that callback happening. I don't think there was
really any utility in this anyway -- all modern apps will have their
save state flow happen as part of stopping, not pausing, so we'll
only capture that saved state when the stop is reported back anyway.
And since we do send the saved state back when stopping, it would
always blow away whatever we had gotten at the pause.
Finally, update the documentation for AppTask.startActivity(), and
fix the implementation handling that to be cleaner -- we need to
deal with inTask first before getting in to "oh noes add NEW_TASK
if this isn't coming from a calling activity" flow.
Change-Id: Ia1da0fac90d7bdbaafdda2e34850d795ce17a39f
Don't restore it too soon, because the rarely-needed fallback path
will need to be executed as system, too.
Bug 17394246
Change-Id: Ic5e662d4eae331b016fc91ffd08647bd8d4d6ff3
