Fix toolchain deps for --noimplicit_deps cquery.

Toolchain deps were not being caught by implicit deps filtering because there's no way to tell them apart from regular deps. Thus, we add (back) logic to do it during ruleContext building. This was caught by a user in unknown commit when they fixed our test for us. The test fix in included in this CL. Fixing the test triggered the bug.

Fixes #11993

PiperOrigin-RevId: 333367049

src/main/java/com/google/devtools/build/lib/analysis/DependencyResolver.java

@@ -80,6 +80,17 @@ public abstract class DependencyResolver {
  // TODO(#10523): Remove this when the migration period for toolchain transitions has ended.
  public static boolean shouldUseToolchainTransition(
  @Nullable BuildConfiguration configuration, Target target) {
+ return shouldUseToolchainTransition(
+ configuration, target instanceof Rule ? (Rule) target : null);
+ }
+
+ /**
+ * Returns whether or not to use the new toolchain transition. Checks the global incompatible
+ * change flag and the rule's toolchain transition readiness attribute.
+ */
+ // TODO(#10523): Remove this when the migration period for toolchain transitions has ended.
+ public static boolean shouldUseToolchainTransition(
+ @Nullable BuildConfiguration configuration, @Nullable Rule rule) {
  // Check whether the global incompatible change flag is set.
  if (configuration != null) {
  PlatformOptions platformOptions = configuration.getOptions().get(PlatformOptions.class);
@@ -89,7 +100,7 @@ public static boolean shouldUseToolchainTransition(
  }
 
  // Check the rule definition to see if it is ready.
- if (target instanceof Rule && ((Rule) target).getRuleClassObject().useToolchainTransition()) {
+ if (rule != null && rule.getRuleClassObject().useToolchainTransition()) {
  return true;
  }
 
@@ -313,6 +324,8 @@ public final OrderedSetMultimap<DependencyKind, DependencyKey> dependentNodeMap(
  // a missing toolchain a bit better.
  // TODO(lberki): This special-casing is weird. Find a better way to depend on toolchains.
  // TODO(#10523): Remove check when this is fully released.
+ // This logic needs to stay in sync with the dep finding logic in
+ // //third_party/bazel/src/main/java/com/google/devtools/build/lib/analysis/Util.java#findImplicitDeps.
  if (useToolchainTransition) {
  ToolchainDependencyKind tdk = (ToolchainDependencyKind) entry.getKey();
  ToolchainContext toolchainContext =

src/main/java/com/google/devtools/build/lib/analysis/Util.java

@@ -17,6 +17,7 @@
 import com.google.common.collect.ImmutableSet;
 import com.google.common.collect.ListMultimap;
 import com.google.common.collect.Sets;
+import com.google.devtools.build.lib.analysis.config.BuildConfiguration;
 import com.google.devtools.build.lib.cmdline.Label;
 import com.google.devtools.build.lib.collect.compacthashset.CompactHashSet;
 import com.google.devtools.build.lib.packages.AttributeMap;
@@ -80,6 +81,7 @@ public static boolean containsHyphen(PathFragment path) {
  public static ImmutableSet<ConfiguredTargetKey> findImplicitDeps(RuleContext ruleContext) {
  Set<ConfiguredTargetKey> maybeImplicitDeps = CompactHashSet.create();
  Set<ConfiguredTargetKey> explicitDeps = CompactHashSet.create();
+ // Consider rule attribute dependencies.
  AttributeMap attributes = ruleContext.attributes();
  ListMultimap<String, ConfiguredTargetAndData> targetMap =
  ruleContext.getConfiguredTargetAndDataMap();
@@ -93,6 +95,31 @@ public static ImmutableSet<ConfiguredTargetKey> findImplicitDeps(RuleContext rul
  }
  }
  }
+ // Consider toolchain dependencies.
+ ToolchainContext toolchainContext = ruleContext.getToolchainContext();
+ if (toolchainContext != null) {
+ // This logic should stay up to date with the dep creation logic in
+ // DependencyResolver#partiallyResolveDependencies.
+ BuildConfiguration targetConfiguration = ruleContext.getConfiguration();
+ BuildConfiguration hostConfiguration = ruleContext.getHostConfiguration();
+ for (Label toolchain : toolchainContext.resolvedToolchainLabels()) {
+ if (DependencyResolver.shouldUseToolchainTransition(
+ targetConfiguration, ruleContext.getRule())) {
+ maybeImplicitDeps.add(
+ ConfiguredTargetKey.builder()
+ .setLabel(toolchain)
+ .setConfiguration(targetConfiguration)
+ .setToolchainContextKey(toolchainContext.key())
+ .build());
+ } else {
+ maybeImplicitDeps.add(
+ ConfiguredTargetKey.builder()
+ .setLabel(toolchain)
+ .setConfiguration(hostConfiguration)
+ .build());
+ }
+ }
+ }
  return ImmutableSet.copyOf(Sets.difference(maybeImplicitDeps, explicitDeps));
  }
 

src/test/java/com/google/devtools/build/lib/query2/testutil/PostAnalysisQueryTest.java

@@ -215,11 +215,9 @@ public void testNoImplicitDeps() throws Exception {
  assertThat(evalToListOfStrings("deps(//test:my_rule)"))
  .containsAtLeastElementsIn(evalToListOfStrings(explicits));
  assertThat(evalToListOfStrings("deps(//test:my_rule)"))
- .doesNotContain(
- /* expected: String, actual: ImmutableList<String> */ evalToListOfStrings(implicits));
+ .containsNoneIn(evalToListOfStrings(implicits));
  }
 
- @SuppressWarnings("TruthIncompatibleType")
  @Test
  public void testNoImplicitDeps_toolchains() throws Exception {
  MockRule ruleWithImplicitDeps =
@@ -266,8 +264,7 @@ public void testNoImplicitDeps_toolchains() throws Exception {
  assertThat(evalToListOfStrings("deps(//test:my_rule)"))
  .containsAtLeastElementsIn(evalToListOfStrings(explicits));
  assertThat(evalToListOfStrings("deps(//test:my_rule)"))
- .doesNotContain(
- /* expected: String, actual: ImmutableList<String> */ evalToListOfStrings(implicits));
+ .containsNoneIn(evalToListOfStrings(implicits));
  }
 
  // Regression test for b/148550864