Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

chore: fix nil pointer dereference #1954

Draft
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Draft

chore: fix nil pointer dereference #1954

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

jigisha620
Copy link
Contributor

Fixes #N/A

Description
Saw cases where cleaning up node from cluster state can cause nil pointer dereference when c.nodes[id] = nil. Added a check to validate this.

How was this change tested?

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. label Feb 3, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: jigisha620
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign jonathan-innis for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @jigisha620. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Feb 3, 2025
@coveralls
Copy link

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 13120090697

Details

  • 1 of 1 (100.0%) changed or added relevant line in 1 file are covered.
  • 4 unchanged lines in 1 file lost coverage.
  • Overall coverage decreased (-0.02%) to 81.192%
Files with Coverage Reduction New Missed Lines %
pkg/controllers/disruption/consolidation.go 4 88.55%
Totals Coverage Status
Change from base Build 13107799622: -0.02%
Covered Lines: 9087
Relevant Lines: 11192
💛 - Coveralls

jonathan-innis
jonathan-innis reviewed Feb 3, 2025
View reviewed changes
pkg/controllers/state/cluster.go
@@ -547,7 +547,7 @@ func (c *Cluster) newStateFromNode(ctx context.Context, node *corev1.Node, oldNo

func (c *Cluster) cleanupNode(name string) {
if id := c.nodeNameToProviderID[name]; id != "" {
if c.nodes[id].NodeClaim == nil {
if c.nodes[id] != nil && c.nodes[id].NodeClaim == nil {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think we should understand the scenarios that this can occur under before we just ignore these cases -- it seems odd to me that we would get into this state but maybe this can happen when we have two nodes with the same providerID?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Based on discussion in triage meeting, this could possibly be the node name instead?

@jigisha620 jigisha620 marked this pull request as draft February 7, 2025 18:25
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Feb 7, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@jonathan-innis jonathan-innis jonathan-innis left review comments

@rschalo rschalo rschalo left review comments

@engedaam engedaam Awaiting requested review from engedaam

@tallaxes tallaxes Awaiting requested review from tallaxes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
5 participants
@jigisha620 @k8s-ci-robot @coveralls @jonathan-innis @rschalo