-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 501
[Bug]fix panic when watcher and metadata not set in kvcache.spec #1526
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
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Summary of Changes
Hello @zhixian82, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!
This pull request addresses a potential panic scenario in the KVCache controller by implementing robust nil checks. It ensures that reconciliation logic for metadata services and watcher components only proceeds when the corresponding specifications are explicitly defined, thereby enhancing the controller's stability and resilience against incomplete configurations.
Highlights
- Panic Prevention: Introduced nil pointer checks for
kvCache.Spec.MetadataandkvCache.Spec.Watcherto prevent panics when these fields are not set in the KVCache specification during reconciliation. - Conditional Reconciliation: Reconciliation of Redis services and watcher-related Kubernetes resources (ServiceAccount, Role, RoleBinding, Pod) is now conditional on the presence of
MetadataandWatcherspecifications, respectively. - Code Refinement: Refactored the
reconcileMetadataServicefunction in the Vineyard backend to remove a redundant nil check, improving code clarity and efficiency.
Using Gemini Code Assist
The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.
Invoking Gemini
You can request assistance from Gemini at any point in your pull request via creating an issue comment (i.e. comment on the pull request page) using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands.
| Feature | Command | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Code Review | /gemini review |
Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state. |
| Pull Request Summary | /gemini summary |
Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state. |
| Comment | @gemini-code-assist | Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in issue comments and review comments. |
| Help | /gemini help |
Displays a list of available commands. |
Customization
To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.
Limitations & Feedback
Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.
You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.
Footnotes
-
Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Code Review
This pull request aims to fix a panic that occurs when watcher or metadata are not set in the KVCache spec. The changes involve adding nil-pointer checks before reconciling these components, which is the correct approach. I've identified one area where the fix is incomplete and could still result in a panic, and a minor style inconsistency. Overall, this is a good fix that improves the controller's stability.
8d10640 to
5f7644f
Compare
ff0bdf4 to
9812954
Compare
googs1025
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
These checks can effectively reduce panic
9812954 to
4748419
Compare
|
cc @Jeffwan |
|
There're two ways, you can also check object exist or not inside the reconcile method. which makes the main workflow looks cleaner. I do not have strong opinion on this one. |
Signed-off-by: zhixian82 <[email protected]>
4748419 to
ce7152d
Compare
Pull Request Description
validate pointer before reconcile metadata and watcher
Related Issues
Resolves: #1110
Important: Before submitting, please complete the description above and review the checklist below.
Contribution Guidelines (Expand for Details)
We appreciate your contribution to aibrix! To ensure a smooth review process and maintain high code quality, please adhere to the following guidelines:
Pull Request Title Format
Your PR title should start with one of these prefixes to indicate the nature of the change:
[Bug]: Corrections to existing functionality[CI]: Changes to build process or CI pipeline[Docs]: Updates or additions to documentation[API]: Modifications to aibrix's API or interface[CLI]: Changes or additions to the Command Line Interface[Misc]: For changes not covered above (use sparingly)Note: For changes spanning multiple categories, use multiple prefixes in order of importance.
Submission Checklist
By submitting this PR, you confirm that you've read these guidelines and your changes align with the project's contribution standards.