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

chore: validate type assertion to prevent panic #436

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Apr 8, 2024

Conversation

reversearrow
Copy link
Contributor

I observed panics couple of times in tests. Validating type assertion before proceeding further should prevent this panic.

@reversearrow reversearrow requested a review from a team as a code owner April 8, 2024 19:40
@reversearrow reversearrow requested a review from a team April 8, 2024 19:40
@reversearrow reversearrow requested a review from a team as a code owner April 8, 2024 19:40
@CLAassistant
Copy link

CLAassistant commented Apr 8, 2024

CLA assistant check
All committers have signed the CLA.

@CLAassistant
Copy link

CLA assistant check
Thank you for your submission! We really appreciate it. Like many open source projects, we ask that you sign our Contributor License Agreement before we can accept your contribution.
You have signed the CLA already but the status is still pending? Let us recheck it.

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Apr 8, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 33.33333% with 2 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 59.42%. Comparing base (4a817ad) to head (0029337).

Files Patch % Lines
kong/test_utils.go 33.33% 1 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #436      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   59.44%   59.42%   -0.03%     
==========================================
  Files          71       71              
  Lines        4392     4394       +2     
==========================================
  Hits         2611     2611              
- Misses       1170     1171       +1     
- Partials      611      612       +1     
Flag Coverage Δ
2.1 35.75% <0.00%> (-0.02%) ⬇️
2.2 48.31% <33.33%> (-0.03%) ⬇️
2.3 48.95% <33.33%> (-0.03%) ⬇️
2.4 48.99% <33.33%> (-0.03%) ⬇️
2.5 48.99% <33.33%> (-0.03%) ⬇️
2.6 48.99% <33.33%> (-0.03%) ⬇️
2.7 50.70% <33.33%> (-0.03%) ⬇️
2.8 50.70% <33.33%> (-0.03%) ⬇️
3.0 54.64% <33.33%> (-0.03%) ⬇️
3.1 56.28% <33.33%> (-0.03%) ⬇️
3.2 56.32% <33.33%> (-0.03%) ⬇️
3.3 56.32% <33.33%> (-0.03%) ⬇️
3.4 58.71% <33.33%> (-0.03%) ⬇️
3.5 56.50% <33.33%> (-0.03%) ⬇️
3.6 56.50% <33.33%> (-0.03%) ⬇️
community 43.42% <0.00%> (-0.02%) ⬇️
enterprise 58.03% <33.33%> (-0.03%) ⬇️
integration 59.42% <33.33%> (-0.03%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Copy link
Contributor

@rainest rainest left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is presumably caused by the test checking the admin API before it's properly available. We should try to make that not happen, but I suppose this is at least slightly better than the panic.

@rainest rainest merged commit a652a4e into main Apr 8, 2024
79 checks passed
@rainest rainest deleted the chore/validate_type_assertion branch April 8, 2024 22:38
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants