command/jsonstate: remove redundant remarking of resource instance #29049
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
ResourceInstanceObjectSrc.Decode already handles marking values with any marks stored in ri.Current.AttrSensitivePaths, so re-applying those marks is not necessary. We've gotten reports of panics coming from this line of code, though I have yet to reproduce the panic in a test.
mildwonkey
added
the
1.0-backport
|
|
|
@davidalger, can you sign the CLA so I can include your commit in this PR? Thanks! |
|
@mildwonkey CLA signed. |
alisdair
approved these changes
Jun 29, 2021
Luxcompany
approved these changes
Jul 18, 2021
|
I'm going to lock this pull request because it has been closed for 30 days ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active contributions. |
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
ResourceInstanceObjectSrc.Decodealready handles marking the decoded values with any marks stored inAttrSensitivePaths, so re-applying those marks is not necessary and seems to be related to panics seen in the wild, as seen in #29042.I have yet to reproduce the reported panic in a test (or locally, for that matter), so I won't close the linked issue until we can get a reproduction/confirmation. The test case I added was not enough to cause a panic, even though the value was already marked.Update: @davidalger wrote a test for me, yay! @apparentlymart believes that an upstream fix he recently merged would fix this panic, but the code is still redundant (and yay, more test cases!) so I'd still like this reviewed.