fix crash when waypoint is not network address type #842
Conversation
Signed-off-by: YaoZengzeng <[email protected]>
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
... and 16 files with indirect coverage changes Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.
|
| @@ -501,7 +501,7 @@ func (p *Processor) handleService(service *workloadapi.Service) error { | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| // Preprocess service, remove the waypoint from waypoint service, otherwise it will fall into a loop in bpf | |||
| if service.Waypoint != nil { | |||
| if service.Waypoint != nil && service.GetWaypoint().GetAddress() != nil && len(service.Addresses) != 0 { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| if service.Waypoint != nil && service.GetWaypoint().GetAddress() != nil && len(service.Addresses) != 0 { | |
| if service.Waypoint != nil && len(service.GetWaypoint().GetAddress()) > 0 { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The return type of service.GetWaypoint().GetAddress() is a struct, ref: https://github.com/kmesh-net/kmesh/blob/main/api/v2/workloadapi/workload.pb.go#L1292
There was a problem hiding this comment.
my fault, misread service.Addresses as waypoint.Address
There was a problem hiding this comment.
how could service.Addresses cause panic now
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As the description, it could be empty when it's the headless service: https://github.com/kmesh-net/kmesh/blob/main/api/v2/workloadapi/workload.pb.go#L540
Also I think it's fine to determine whether it's out of bound before accessing the slice as a defensive method.
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: hzxuzhonghu The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
|
/lgtm |
What type of PR is this?
/kind bug
What this PR does / why we need it:
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #815
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?: