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.

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

Fix uninitialised use of ESPPreferenceObject.backend_ #2411

Merged

Conversation

paulmonigatti
Copy link
Contributor

What does this implement/fix?

ESPPreferenceObject.save() checks that the backend_ is not null before proceeding to save a preference; however, this variable was not initialised.

Types of changes

  • Bugfix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
  • Other

Related issue or feature (if applicable): fixes

Pull request in esphome-docs with documentation (if applicable): esphome/esphome-docs#

Test Environment

  • ESP32
  • ESP8266

Example entry for config.yaml:

Checklist:

  • The code change is tested and works locally.
  • Tests have been added to verify that the new code works (under tests/ folder).

If user exposed functionality or configuration variables are added/changed:

@project-bot project-bot bot added this to Needs Review in ESPHome Dev Sep 28, 2021
@oxan oxan merged commit 2b9054d into esphome:dev Sep 28, 2021
ESPHome Dev automation moved this from Needs Review to Done Sep 28, 2021
@oxan
Copy link
Member

oxan commented Sep 28, 2021

Thanks!

@alexyao2015
Copy link
Contributor

This would explain the crashing I was seeing on preference saves.

@paulmonigatti paulmonigatti deleted the fix-uninitialised-ESPPreferenceBackend branch September 28, 2021 23:17
@github-actions github-actions bot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Sep 30, 2021
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants