🐛 Fix potential VM validation webhook NPE for Spec.Network #827
Conversation
This file contains 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
bryanv
changed the title
If the VM Spec.Network was changed to/from nil, the validation webhook would NPE. I think the stems from late in v1a2 we decided to make most of the top level Spec/Status fields pointers and this was just missed. Add a few basic update tests for VM Spec.Network.
bryanv
force-pushed
the
bryanv/fix-nil-networkspec-npe-validation-webhook
branch
from
a501746 to
ac3ac59
Compare
zyiyi11
approved these changes
Dec 13, 2024
Minimum allowed line rate is |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
What does this PR do, and why is it needed?
If the VM Spec.Network was changed to/from nil, the validation webhook would NPE.
Add a few basic update tests for VM Spec.Network.
Which issue(s) is/are addressed by this PR? (optional, in
fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...)format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):Fixes #
Are there any special notes for your reviewer:
I think the stems from late in v1a2 we decided to make most of the top level Spec/Status fields pointers and this was just missed.
Please add a release note if necessary: