OCPBUGS-63120: Home -> Overview page returns error during upgrade process

[krishagarwal278]

No description provided.

[openshift-ci-robot]

@krishagarwal278: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-63120, which is invalid:

• expected the bug to target the "4.21.0" version, but no target version was set

Comment /jira refresh to re-evaluate validity if changes to the Jira bug are made, or edit the title of this pull request to link to a different bug.

The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker.

Details

In response to this:

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

Adds an early guard in the TopologyPage component to return null when viewType is falsy, short-circuiting render before PageContents is produced.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Change Summary
Guard check addition frontend/packages/topology/src/components/page/TopologyPage.tsx	Adds an early null-return when viewType is falsy, altering the component's render path prior to rendering PageContents. No signature or exported API changes.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 3 (Moderate) | ⏱️ ~20 minutes

• Check whether all falsy cases for viewType are correctly handled (e.g., undefined, null, empty string).
• Confirm parent components and consumers are tolerant of TopologyPage rendering null.
• Verify no required initialization/cleanup in PageContents or side-effectful hooks are skipped unexpectedly.

✨ Finishing touches

• 📝 Generate docstrings

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Post copyable unit tests in a comment

---

📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Cache: Disabled due to data retention organization setting

Knowledge base: Disabled due to Reviews -> Disable Knowledge Base setting

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 3cf0d0c and c15608b.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• frontend/packages/topology/src/components/page/TopologyPage.tsx (1 hunks)

🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)

• frontend/packages/topology/src/components/page/TopologyPage.tsx

---

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)

frontend/packages/topology/src/components/page/TopologyPage.tsx (1)

132-134: Clarify when viewType can be falsy; current guard may be redundant or mask the root cause

Given how viewType is derived:

const viewType =
  (queryParams.get('view') as TopologyViewType) || topologyViewState || defaultViewType;

and that defaultViewType defaults to TopologyViewType.graph in the props destructuring, viewType should be truthy under the current type contract. If you’re actually seeing a falsy viewType during upgrade, that suggests an upstream issue (e.g., invalid/undefined value coming from user settings, query params, or a caller passing an unexpected value) that isn’t reflected in the types.

Returning null here will silently render a blank page and may hide that underlying problem.

It would be good to either:

• Document the specific scenario where viewType is falsy (so future readers understand why this guard exists), or
• Tighten the fix closer to the source (e.g., normalizing topologyViewState / defaultViewType or gating on loaded) so viewType is guaranteed non-falsy and this guard isn’t needed.

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Cache: Disabled due to data retention organization setting

Knowledge base: Disabled due to Reviews -> Disable Knowledge Base setting

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 335ed77 and 3cf0d0c.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• frontend/packages/topology/src/components/page/TopologyPage.tsx (1 hunks)

🧰 Additional context used

📓 Path-based instructions (1)

**

⚙️ CodeRabbit configuration file

-Focus on major issues impacting performance, readability, maintainability and security. Avoid nitpicks and avoid verbosity.

Files:

• frontend/packages/topology/src/components/page/TopologyPage.tsx

[krishagarwal278]

/retest

[yanpzhan]

Launched a 4.20 cluster, upgraded the cluster to image built from the pr code. During upgrade, kept observing the Home->Overview page, there was not error on the page. The upgrade finished without error.

$ oc get co --kubeconfig 420.kubeconfig | grep console
console                                    4.21.0-0-2025-12-12-095153-test-ci-ln-q67gg6k-latest   True        False         False      155m    
$ oc get pods -n openshift-console --kubeconfig 420.kubeconfig 
NAME                        READY   STATUS    RESTARTS      AGE
console-7977955f57-qm8sc    1/1     Running   0             15m
console-7977955f57-t4p6k    1/1     Running   0             19m
downloads-bcfb8c878-kdp6j   1/1     Running   0             23m
downloads-bcfb8c878-nthzq   1/1     Running   2 (13m ago)   15m

/verified by yanpzhan

[openshift-ci-robot]

@yanpzhan: This PR has been marked as verified by yanpzhan.

Details

In response to this:

Launched a 4.20 cluster, upgraded the cluster to image built from the pr code. During upgrade, kept observing the Home->Overview page, there was not error on the page. The upgrade finished without error.

$ oc get co --kubeconfig 420.kubeconfig | grep console
console                                    4.21.0-0-2025-12-12-095153-test-ci-ln-q67gg6k-latest   True        False         False      155m    
$ oc get pods -n openshift-console --kubeconfig 420.kubeconfig 
NAME                        READY   STATUS    RESTARTS      AGE
console-7977955f57-qm8sc    1/1     Running   0             15m
console-7977955f57-t4p6k    1/1     Running   0             19m
downloads-bcfb8c878-kdp6j   1/1     Running   0             23m
downloads-bcfb8c878-nthzq   1/1     Running   2 (13m ago)   15m

/verified by yanpzhan

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[krishagarwal278]

/jira refresh

[openshift-ci-robot]

@krishagarwal278: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-63120, which is invalid:

• expected the bug to target either version "4.22." or "openshift-4.22.", but it targets "4.21.0" instead

Comment /jira refresh to re-evaluate validity if changes to the Jira bug are made, or edit the title of this pull request to link to a different bug.

Details

In response to this:

/jira refresh

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[krishagarwal278]

/retest

[krishagarwal278]

/retest

[vikram-raj]

/jira refresh

[openshift-ci-robot]

@vikram-raj: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-63120, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state.

3 validation(s) were run on this bug

• bug is open, matching expected state (open)
• bug target version (4.22.0) matches configured target version for branch (4.22.0)
• bug is in the state ASSIGNED, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, POST)

Requesting review from QA contact:
/cc @yapei

Details

In response to this:

/jira refresh

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[vikram-raj]

/lgtm

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: krishagarwal278, vikram-raj

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

The pull request process is described here

Details

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• frontend/OWNERS [vikram-raj]

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

[krishagarwal278]

/acknowledge-critical-fixes-only

[vikram-raj]

/label acknowledge-critical-fixes-only

[openshift-ci-robot]

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD 19b01f0 and 2 for PR HEAD c15608b in total

[openshift-ci-robot]

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD 9ac9e36 and 1 for PR HEAD c15608b in total

[krishagarwal278]

/retest

[openshift-ci-robot]

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD d3b540a and 0 for PR HEAD c15608b in total

[openshift-ci-robot]

/hold

Revision c15608b was retested 3 times: holding

[krishagarwal278]

/unhold

[krishagarwal278]

/retest

[openshift-ci-robot]

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD 24830e3 and 2 for PR HEAD c15608b in total

[openshift-bot]

/jira refresh

The requirements for Jira bugs have changed (Jira issues linked to PRs on main branch need to target different OCP), recalculating validity.

[openshift-ci-robot]

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-63120, which is valid.

3 validation(s) were run on this bug

• bug is open, matching expected state (open)
• bug target version (4.22.0) matches configured target version for branch (4.22.0)
• bug is in the state POST, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, POST)

Requesting review from QA contact:
/cc @yapei

Details

In response to this:

/jira refresh

The requirements for Jira bugs have changed (Jira issues linked to PRs on main branch need to target different OCP), recalculating validity.

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[openshift-ci-robot]

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD d00353d and 1 for PR HEAD c15608b in total

[openshift-ci-robot]

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD 9c70ba0 and 0 for PR HEAD c15608b in total

[openshift-ci-robot]

/hold

Revision c15608b was retested 3 times: holding

[logonoff]

/unhold
/retest

[openshift-ci]

@krishagarwal278: all tests passed!

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

Details

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. I understand the commands that are listed here.

[openshift-ci-robot]

@krishagarwal278: Jira Issue Verification Checks: Jira Issue OCPBUGS-63120
✔️ This pull request was pre-merge verified.
✔️ All associated pull requests have merged.
✔️ All associated, merged pull requests were pre-merge verified.

Jira Issue OCPBUGS-63120 has been moved to the MODIFIED state and will move to the VERIFIED state when the change is available in an accepted nightly payload. 🕓

Details

In response to this:

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.