Open
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Cassandra Coyle <cassie@diagrid.io>
Author
|
@brackendawson, @ccoVeille, @dolmen - mind reviewing this one? 🙏🏻 |
Collaborator
|
I feel like @brackendawson is busy lately. I am also. Let's wait for a bit cc @fredbi who might be interested by the issue on his own fork |
|
Thanks @ccoVeille I’ll look into it asap. I am trying to keep up with upstream |
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Summary
Revert the check early behavior introduced in this PR. Add tests to ensure there are no panics due to nil derefs. Restores v1.10 behavior for Never(), Eventually(), EventuallyWithT()
Motivation
We hit nil deref panics in our dapr/dapr unit tests after upgrading to v1.11.x here in this PR (see panic here) because
EventuallyWithTnow runs the condition immediately on entry. You can see where I pinned back to 1.10 to resolve the issue in this PR as a test to confirm the regression and after confirming merged the pinned version in this PR. The test from the linked CI failure is here for easy reference where we use atomic ptr, hence why I added a very similar test to your test suite.Related issues