The modem assign the simSlotMapping like UiccSlotMapping[
(mPortIndex=0, mPhysicalSlotIndex=0, mLogicalSlotIndex=1),
UiccSlotMapping (mPortIndex=1, mPhysicalSlotIndex=0,
mLogicalSlotIndex=0)]. The settings replace the first one
UiccSlotMapping when user insert psim and the both of esim
profile are not enabled. It is not correct. The root cause is that
the settings did not sort the simSlotMapping by logcal slot id.
Bug: 223662007
Test: atest UiccSlotUtilTest (PASS)
Change-Id: I6871db6c2d8d7b9f3cb334bb5cd2c7978b5b3b85
Merged-In: I6871db6c2d8d7b9f3cb334bb5cd2c7978b5b3b85
In the E+E and there is the empty slot, the user can't enable PSIM.
Since the settings can't set the correct simSlotMapping.
Bug: 222231991
Test: atest UiccSlotUtilTest (All passes) and Build pass
Change-Id: Ia261e3b41c6c4a43a5429815d93ae9f6ff16f0ec
Merged-In: Ia261e3b41c6c4a43a5429815d93ae9f6ff16f0ec
psim's logical slot index is 0, so changing the API and adding test
cases.
Bug: 221839363
Test: atest UiccSlotUtilTest
Change-Id: I1588bd4a2f552a6b41844883b6ad50f1bfec95de
(cherry picked from commit b162438b5d)
Merged-In: I1588bd4a2f552a6b41844883b6ad50f1bfec95de
The condition of "null point check" is wrong at the
SimSlotChangeHandler.
Bug: 222035986
Test: Build pass. maunal test.
Change-Id: I1b81faf082163643c1d17eae2f66d75b450288fe
(cherry picked from commit f64b2c09c0)
Merged-In: I1b81faf082163643c1d17eae2f66d75b450288fe
The PreferredSimDialogFragment did updateDialog after SimDialogActivity
was finished. It caused the settings crash. This is similar to b/184899699
Bug: 220803944
Test: build pass
Change-Id: I9a5964400a63053e362632944b9e7aa8ec1bbea8
(cherry picked from commit 70bf76a436)
Merged-In: I9a5964400a63053e362632944b9e7aa8ec1bbea8
1. The subscriptionInfo's getSimSlotIndex is logical slotId. The code
should compare it with uiccSlotMapping.getLogicalSlotIndex()
2. Rename the parameters for the readability.
3. The mobile network selection dialog did not be closed after user clicked.
Bug: 219951253
Test: manual test.
Change-Id: I7fef78547f4e6283791cd15a03275eaefeb50e3c
Merged-In: I7fef78547f4e6283791cd15a03275eaefeb50e3c
- Hide the edges of text appearing as a quick fix suggested by the UX
team.
- See the result screenshot in b/218307103#comment18
Bug: 218307103
Test: manual test by pixel device
Change-Id: I11bfdf57ff4d57786e40f49ad747a35efe2bb207
The function uses wrong information to get the portId.
Bug: 218907001
Test: manual test.
Change-Id: I70a02299c40ada4c2a700fc035034e8db24b6f03
Merged-In: I70a02299c40ada4c2a700fc035034e8db24b6f03
Inserting a pSIM while user has 2 esims already active,
the UI shows MEP dialog
Bug: 218451733
Test: manual test. To fake the MEP condition, and then checking the UI
Change-Id: I48fa3d483873315d7e05b39369085c48af779522
Merged-In: I48fa3d483873315d7e05b39369085c48af779522
remove the SlotSidecar's run() and using new run() with port id
information.
Bug: 218439715
Test: manual test for UI
Change-Id: I81479a0c514f2b8f58b9167b31d357f017732482
Merged-In: I81479a0c514f2b8f58b9167b31d357f017732482
Using the getUiccSlotInfo API to get the PhysicalSlotIndex of esim
Bug: 215302360
Test: atest UiccSlotUtilTest
Change-Id: Ic43d6c4a3209d24673769b71b9a148e780ee81ab
Merged-In: Ic43d6c4a3209d24673769b71b9a148e780ee81ab
the ag/16710087 lost the code.
Bug: 216233391
Test: manual test: check the UI
make RunSettingsRoboTests ROBOTEST_FILTER=SimListDialogFragmentTest (PASS)
Change-Id: If6ad5422a820627873e58b144e7b65a8b0130def
Merged-In: If6ad5422a820627873e58b144e7b65a8b0130def
Please refer the comment#1 at bug and there are change below
- the divider is 4dp
- the item's radius is different in the list.
Bug: 216233391
Test: manual test: check the UI
make RunSettingsRoboTests ROBOTEST_FILTER=SimListDialogFragmentTest (PASS)
Change-Id: I758d60202fcf477aeb49014e60b949e7ad08c082
Merged-In: I758d60202fcf477aeb49014e60b949e7ad08c082
The condition is wrong, should use the subId.
Bug: 212195309
Test: build pass. manual test the dialog.
Change-Id: I894c78fccab511f26bf779638cac1f18a07a86c4
Merged-In: I894c78fccab511f26bf779638cac1f18a07a86c4
-Adding the margin for bottom at dialog
-Modify the text color of summay in the list at dialog when device is
dark mode.
Bug: 212396431
Test: build pass and check the dialog UI.
Change-Id: I1ec587fd9d64ad67bbf3479c7931c0a901f572cf
Merged-In: I1ec587fd9d64ad67bbf3479c7931c0a901f572cf
1. Add the device config key
2. Hide the Contact sharing toggle for LE audio mode
Bug: 228415214
Test: manual test and take the screenshots at bug.
Change-Id: I07674d0edbcd642814ed61ccd13cb4e1e42caec3
mobile_network_settings.xml to avoid the preference can not
be indexed.
Fix: 222021677
Test: manually test and review the UI
Change-Id: I53b1637e845489bc1df2e7b4216c56400fd28659
Bug: 214348333
Test: m Settings
Test: manually verify that device can access the Internet via Ethernet
Test: manually verify that device can share the Internet via Ethernet
tethering
Test: make RunSettingsRoboTests ROBOTEST_FILTER=TetherEnablerTest
Change-Id: I822ff60ee8be63ff0c518d2972ad8b30dfacadcd
- Add low battery warning ack check to onSwitchChanged(), reset the
switch to off once it's 1st time launch, the switch should be enable
by battery saver change event at 1st instead of enable directly, will
not check this state anymore after 1st launch
Bug: 227725656
Test: make RunSettingsRoboTests
Change-Id: I79f502f567fae5dd10166d8b24fd50d59c261001
If the intent's package equals to the app's package, this intent
will be allowed to startActivityForResult.
But this check is unsafe, because if the component of this intent
is set, the package field will just be ignored. So if we set the
component to any activity we like and set package to the app's
package, it will pass the assertSafeToStartCustomActivity check
and now we can launch anywhere.
Bug: 223578534
Test: robotest and manual verify
Change-Id: I40496105bae313fe5cff2a36dfe329c1e2b5bbe4
(cherry picked from commit 90e095dbe3)
If the intent's package equals to the app's package, this intent
will be allowed to startActivityForResult.
But this check is unsafe, because if the component of this intent
is set, the package field will just be ignored. So if we set the
component to any activity we like and set package to the app's
package, it will pass the assertSafeToStartCustomActivity check
and now we can launch anywhere.
Bug: 223578534
Test: robotest and manual verify
Change-Id: I40496105bae313fe5cff2a36dfe329c1e2b5bbe4
(cherry picked from commit 90e095dbe3)
If the intent's package equals to the app's package, this intent
will be allowed to startActivityForResult.
But this check is unsafe, because if the component of this intent
is set, the package field will just be ignored. So if we set the
component to any activity we like and set package to the app's
package, it will pass the assertSafeToStartCustomActivity check
and now we can launch anywhere.
Bug: 223578534
Test: robotest and manual verify
Change-Id: I40496105bae313fe5cff2a36dfe329c1e2b5bbe4
(cherry picked from commit 90e095dbe3)
If the intent's package equals to the app's package, this intent
will be allowed to startActivityForResult.
But this check is unsafe, because if the component of this intent
is set, the package field will just be ignored. So if we set the
component to any activity we like and set package to the app's
package, it will pass the assertSafeToStartCustomActivity check
and now we can launch anywhere.
Bug: 223578534
Test: robotest and manual verify
Change-Id: I40496105bae313fe5cff2a36dfe329c1e2b5bbe4
(cherry picked from commit 90e095dbe3)
If the intent's package equals to the app's package, this intent
will be allowed to startActivityForResult.
But this check is unsafe, because if the component of this intent
is set, the package field will just be ignored. So if we set the
component to any activity we like and set package to the app's
package, it will pass the assertSafeToStartCustomActivity check
and now we can launch anywhere.
Bug: 223578534
Test: robotest and manual verify
Change-Id: I40496105bae313fe5cff2a36dfe329c1e2b5bbe4
(cherry picked from commit 90e095dbe3)
If the intent's package equals to the app's package, this intent
will be allowed to startActivityForResult.
But this check is unsafe, because if the component of this intent
is set, the package field will just be ignored. So if we set the
component to any activity we like and set package to the app's
package, it will pass the assertSafeToStartCustomActivity check
and now we can launch anywhere.
Bug: 223578534
Test: robotest and manual verify
Change-Id: I40496105bae313fe5cff2a36dfe329c1e2b5bbe4
(cherry picked from commit 90e095dbe3)
Verify the target app "REQUEST_IGNORE_BATTERY_OPTIMIZATIONS" permission first before querying installed apps information to avoid the exposed the installed apps information and improve the performance by applying the early return flow.
Bug: 227753723
Test: make RunSettingsRoboTests
Change-Id: Ib5826b8082f4bf14f93d5ff4d2d332dc395bf9a8
