Fixed
Status Update
Comments
se...@google.com <se...@google.com> #2
Project: platform/frameworks/support
Branch: androidx-master-dev
commit b55fe68edc02b253b908a1c7c2e98350ba67afe4
Author: Ian Lake <ilake@google.com>
Date: Wed Aug 12 14:21:57 2020
Ignore Animations/Animator when Transitions run
For a given Fragment, a single owner for its
transition from visible to non-visible is needed
to avoid conflicts as different systems try to
influence the same set of properties.
This has two consequences:
- Animations (which work at the parent container level)
will interfere if there are *any* Transitions run.
- Animators will interfere if there are any Transitions
run on that specific Fragment.
By tracking which Transitions were started and using
that information to selectively ignore conflicting
Animations/Animators, we can avoid visual artifacts.
Test: updated tests pass
BUG: 149569323
Change-Id: I9e5169ffd36853c3dfbd7f217837a74674a9508d
M fragment/fragment/src/androidTest/java/androidx/fragment/app/FragmentTransitionAnimTest.kt
M fragment/fragment/src/main/java/androidx/fragment/app/DefaultSpecialEffectsController.java
https://android-review.googlesource.com/1398530
Branch: androidx-master-dev
commit b55fe68edc02b253b908a1c7c2e98350ba67afe4
Author: Ian Lake <ilake@google.com>
Date: Wed Aug 12 14:21:57 2020
Ignore Animations/Animator when Transitions run
For a given Fragment, a single owner for its
transition from visible to non-visible is needed
to avoid conflicts as different systems try to
influence the same set of properties.
This has two consequences:
- Animations (which work at the parent container level)
will interfere if there are *any* Transitions run.
- Animators will interfere if there are any Transitions
run on that specific Fragment.
By tracking which Transitions were started and using
that information to selectively ignore conflicting
Animations/Animators, we can avoid visual artifacts.
Test: updated tests pass
BUG: 149569323
Change-Id: I9e5169ffd36853c3dfbd7f217837a74674a9508d
M fragment/fragment/src/androidTest/java/androidx/fragment/app/FragmentTransitionAnimTest.kt
M fragment/fragment/src/main/java/androidx/fragment/app/DefaultSpecialEffectsController.java
yb...@google.com <yb...@google.com> #3
There are two parallel systems in Android - the Animation
system and the Animator
system (which the Transition
system is built on top of). With this change and Fragment 1.3.0-alpha08, no Animation
will run if there are any Transitions kicked off at the same time and no Animator
will run on Fragments that have Transitions directly associated with them (either via an enter/exit transition or as part of a shared element transition).
yb...@google.com <yb...@google.com> #4
Project: platform/frameworks/support
Branch: androidx-master-dev
commit fa55358f7f2870bf05ef5cce12d2b4e2d86732aa
Author: Ian Lake <ilake@google.com>
Date: Mon Sep 14 11:30:52 2020
Ignore Animations when Animators run
As a continuation of the work in b/149569323 ,
we now prioritize running Animators over running
Animations. This avoids cases where both are
running simultaneously.
As Animations and Animators are now properly
decoupled, we can use animator.cancel() when
our CancelationSignal is triggered instead of
using clearAnimation().
Test: all tests pass, updated FragmentAnimatorTest passes
BUG: 167579557
Change-Id: I7b3f5c1cc1355e02ff770838cb485d659dfb1619
M fragment/fragment/src/androidTest/java/androidx/fragment/app/FragmentAnimatorTest.kt
M fragment/fragment/src/main/java/androidx/fragment/app/DefaultSpecialEffectsController.java
https://android-review.googlesource.com/1427449
Branch: androidx-master-dev
commit fa55358f7f2870bf05ef5cce12d2b4e2d86732aa
Author: Ian Lake <ilake@google.com>
Date: Mon Sep 14 11:30:52 2020
Ignore Animations when Animators run
As a continuation of the work in
we now prioritize running Animators over running
Animations. This avoids cases where both are
running simultaneously.
As Animations and Animators are now properly
decoupled, we can use animator.cancel() when
our CancelationSignal is triggered instead of
using clearAnimation().
Test: all tests pass, updated FragmentAnimatorTest passes
BUG: 167579557
Change-Id: I7b3f5c1cc1355e02ff770838cb485d659dfb1619
M fragment/fragment/src/androidTest/java/androidx/fragment/app/FragmentAnimatorTest.kt
M fragment/fragment/src/main/java/androidx/fragment/app/DefaultSpecialEffectsController.java
yb...@google.com <yb...@google.com> #5
just emitting same live data reproduces the issue.
@Test
fun raceTest() {
val subLiveData = MutableLiveData(1)
val subject = liveData(testScope.coroutineContext) {
emitSource(subLiveData)
emitSource(subLiveData) //crashes
}
subject.addObserver().apply {
testScope.advanceUntilIdle()
}
}
@Test
fun raceTest() {
val subLiveData = MutableLiveData(1)
val subject = liveData(testScope.coroutineContext) {
emitSource(subLiveData)
emitSource(subLiveData) //crashes
}
subject.addObserver().apply {
testScope.advanceUntilIdle()
}
}
da...@gmail.com <da...@gmail.com> #6
With 2.2.0-alpha04 (that use Main.immediate), the issue seems to be still there (I tested it by calling emitSource() twice, like your test case)
yb...@google.com <yb...@google.com> #7
yea sorry immediate does not fix it.
I actually have a WIP fix for it:
https://android-review.googlesource.com/c/platform/frameworks/support/+/1112186
if your case is the one i found (emitting same LiveData multiple times, as shown in #5) you can work around it by adding a dummy transformation.
val subLiveData = MutableLiveData(1)
val subject = liveData(testScope.coroutineContext) {
emitSource(subLiveData.map {it })
emitSource(subLiveData.map {it} )
}
I actually have a WIP fix for it:
if your case is the one i found (emitting same LiveData multiple times, as shown in #5) you can work around it by adding a dummy transformation.
val subLiveData = MutableLiveData(1)
val subject = liveData(testScope.coroutineContext) {
emitSource(subLiveData.map {it })
emitSource(subLiveData.map {it} )
}
ap...@google.com <ap...@google.com> #8
Project: platform/frameworks/support
Branch: androidx-master-dev
commit af12e75e6b4110f48e44ca121466943909de8f06
Author: Yigit Boyar <yboyar@google.com>
Date: Tue Sep 03 12:58:11 2019
Fix coroutine livedata race condition
This CL fixes a bug in liveData builder where emitting same
LiveData source twice would make it crash because the second
emission registry could possibly happen before first one is
removed as source.
We fix it by using a suspending dispose function. It does feel
a bit hacky but we cannot make DisposableHandle.dispose async
and we do not want to block there. This does not mean that there
is a problem if developer disposes it manually since our emit
functions take care of making sure it disposes (and there is
no other way to add source to the underlying MediatorLiveData)
Bug: 140249349
Test: BuildLiveDataTest#raceTest_*
Change-Id: I0b464c242a583da4669af195cf2504e2adc4de40
M lifecycle/lifecycle-livedata-ktx/api/2.2.0-alpha05.txt
M lifecycle/lifecycle-livedata-ktx/api/current.txt
M lifecycle/lifecycle-livedata-ktx/api/public_plus_experimental_2.2.0-alpha05.txt
M lifecycle/lifecycle-livedata-ktx/api/public_plus_experimental_current.txt
M lifecycle/lifecycle-livedata-ktx/api/restricted_2.2.0-alpha05.txt
M lifecycle/lifecycle-livedata-ktx/api/restricted_current.txt
M lifecycle/lifecycle-livedata-ktx/src/main/java/androidx/lifecycle/CoroutineLiveData.kt
M lifecycle/lifecycle-livedata-ktx/src/test/java/androidx/lifecycle/BuildLiveDataTest.kt
https://android-review.googlesource.com/1112186
https://goto.google.com/android-sha1/af12e75e6b4110f48e44ca121466943909de8f06
Branch: androidx-master-dev
commit af12e75e6b4110f48e44ca121466943909de8f06
Author: Yigit Boyar <yboyar@google.com>
Date: Tue Sep 03 12:58:11 2019
Fix coroutine livedata race condition
This CL fixes a bug in liveData builder where emitting same
LiveData source twice would make it crash because the second
emission registry could possibly happen before first one is
removed as source.
We fix it by using a suspending dispose function. It does feel
a bit hacky but we cannot make DisposableHandle.dispose async
and we do not want to block there. This does not mean that there
is a problem if developer disposes it manually since our emit
functions take care of making sure it disposes (and there is
no other way to add source to the underlying MediatorLiveData)
Bug: 140249349
Test: BuildLiveDataTest#raceTest_*
Change-Id: I0b464c242a583da4669af195cf2504e2adc4de40
M lifecycle/lifecycle-livedata-ktx/api/2.2.0-alpha05.txt
M lifecycle/lifecycle-livedata-ktx/api/current.txt
M lifecycle/lifecycle-livedata-ktx/api/public_plus_experimental_2.2.0-alpha05.txt
M lifecycle/lifecycle-livedata-ktx/api/public_plus_experimental_current.txt
M lifecycle/lifecycle-livedata-ktx/api/restricted_2.2.0-alpha05.txt
M lifecycle/lifecycle-livedata-ktx/api/restricted_current.txt
M lifecycle/lifecycle-livedata-ktx/src/main/java/androidx/lifecycle/CoroutineLiveData.kt
M lifecycle/lifecycle-livedata-ktx/src/test/java/androidx/lifecycle/BuildLiveDataTest.kt
Description
Version used: 2.2.0-alpha01
Devices/Android versions reproduced on: Android 9
I'm having some random crashes due to CoroutineLiveData
```
Fatal Exception: java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: This source was already added with the different observer
at androidx.lifecycle.MediatorLiveData.addSource + 89(MediatorLiveData.java:89)
at androidx.lifecycle.CoroutineLiveDataKt.addDisposableSource + 102(CoroutineLiveDataKt.java:102)
at androidx.lifecycle.CoroutineLiveData.emitSource$lifecycle_livedata_ktx_release + 200(CoroutineLiveData.java:200)
at androidx.lifecycle.LiveDataScopeImpl$emitSource$2.invokeSuspend + 89(LiveDataScopeImpl.java:89)
at androidx.lifecycle.LiveDataScopeImpl$emitSource$2.invoke(LiveDataScopeImpl.java:11)
at kotlinx.coroutines.intrinsics.UndispatchedKt.startUndispatchedOrReturn + 91(UndispatchedKt.java:91)
at kotlinx.coroutines.BuildersKt__Builders_commonKt.withContext + 156(BuildersKt__Builders_commonKt.java:156)
at kotlinx.coroutines.BuildersKt.withContext + 1(BuildersKt.java:1)
at androidx.lifecycle.LiveDataScopeImpl.emitSource + 88(LiveDataScopeImpl.java:88)
at com.geekorum.ttrss.articles_list.FeedsViewModel$refreshed$1.invokeSuspend + 90(FeedsViewModel.java:90)
at com.geekorum.ttrss.articles_list.FeedsViewModel$refreshed$1.invoke(FeedsViewModel.java:8)
at androidx.lifecycle.BlockRunner$maybeRun$1.invokeSuspend + 147(BlockRunner.java:147)
at kotlin.coroutines.jvm.internal.BaseContinuationImpl.resumeWith + 33(BaseContinuationImpl.java:33)
at kotlinx.coroutines.DispatchedTask.run + 241(DispatchedTask.java:241)
at android.os.Handler.handleCallback + 873(Handler.java:873)
at android.os.Handler.dispatchMessage + 99(Handler.java:99)
at android.os.Looper.loop + 193(Looper.java:193)
at android.app.ActivityThread.main + 6898(ActivityThread.java:6898)
at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java)
at com.android.internal.os.RuntimeInit$MethodAndArgsCaller.run + 537(RuntimeInit.java:537)
at com.android.internal.os.ZygoteInit.main + 858(ZygoteInit.java:858)
```
From what I understand of CoroutineLiveData source code, when calling `LiveDataScope.emitSource()` the previous source is removed before adding the new one on MediatorLiveData.
```
@MainThread
internal fun emitSource(source: LiveData<T>): DisposableHandle {
clearSource()
val newSource = addDisposableSource(source)
emittedSource = newSource
return newSource
}
```
However the removing is done by launching a new coroutine
```
internal fun <T> MediatorLiveData<T>.addDisposableSource(
source: LiveData<T>
): DisposableHandle {
val disposed = AtomicBoolean(false)
addSource(source) {
if (!disposed.get()) {
value = it
} else {
removeSource(source)
}
}
return object : DisposableHandle {
override fun dispose() {
if (disposed.compareAndSet(false, true)) {
CoroutineScope(Dispatchers.Main).launch {
removeSource(source)
}
}
}
}
}
```
So there is no guarantee that `MediatorLiveData.addSource()` will be called after the removing coroutine is executed. This leads to the IllegalArgumentException in `MediatorLiveData.addSource()`
```
@MainThread
public <S> void addSource(@NonNull LiveData<S> source, @NonNull Observer<? super S> onChanged) {
Source<S> e = new Source<>(source, onChanged);
Source<?> existing = mSources.putIfAbsent(source, e);
if (existing != null && existing.mObserver != onChanged) {
throw new IllegalArgumentException(
"This source was already added with the different observer");
}
if (existing != null) {
return;
}
if (hasActiveObservers()) {
e.plug();
}
}
```