You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@qpid.apache.org by fgiorgetti <gi...@git.apache.org> on 2018/06/13 01:59:24 UTC
[GitHub] qpid-dispatch pull request #324: DISPATCH-976 - Fixed issue with policy vali...
GitHub user fgiorgetti opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-dispatch/pull/324
DISPATCH-976 - Fixed issue with policy validation of allowed addresses
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/fgiorgetti/qpid-dispatch fgiorgetti-DISPATCH-976-1
Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-dispatch/pull/324.patch
To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch
with (at least) the following in the commit message:
This closes #324
----
commit 1892f5dc68296e5b5ec107f6212e0e24f4b852e3
Author: Fernando Giorgetti <fg...@...>
Date: 2018-06-13T01:57:17Z
DISPATCH-976 - Fixed issue with policy validation of allowed addresses
----
---
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@qpid.apache.org
[GitHub] qpid-dispatch issue #324: DISPATCH-976 - Fixed issue with policy validation ...
Posted by fgiorgetti <gi...@git.apache.org>.
Github user fgiorgetti commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-dispatch/pull/324
@ganeshmurthy and @ChugR after debugging it a little bit more, I noticed that the first if statement that checks for an absent user key in the iterating allowed address, was also checking the "need_check_nosubst" boolean, enforcing that only one address with "absent" user key is defined.
So with this boolean flag, in case more than one address is defined in the tree (without the user key), it causes the last "else" statement to be processed and then executing the "assert(false);" which was crashing the router.
In this PR I have removed the need_check_nosubst flag which seems to resolve the issue reported in DISPATCH-1026 as well.
---
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@qpid.apache.org
[GitHub] qpid-dispatch issue #324: DISPATCH-976 - Fixed issue with policy validation ...
Posted by codecov-io <gi...@git.apache.org>.
Github user codecov-io commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-dispatch/pull/324
# [Codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/apache/qpid-dispatch/pull/324?src=pr&el=h1) Report
> Merging [#324](https://codecov.io/gh/apache/qpid-dispatch/pull/324?src=pr&el=desc) into [master](https://codecov.io/gh/apache/qpid-dispatch/commit/8c7e87275fb481f25d8deaa4f639f3a4d1c532d9?src=pr&el=desc) will **decrease** coverage by `0.01%`.
> The diff coverage is `100%`.
[](https://codecov.io/gh/apache/qpid-dispatch/pull/324?src=pr&el=tree)
```diff
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #324 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 86.55% 86.54% -0.02%
==========================================
Files 69 69
Lines 15466 15464 -2
==========================================
- Hits 13387 13383 -4
- Misses 2079 2081 +2
```
| [Impacted Files](https://codecov.io/gh/apache/qpid-dispatch/pull/324?src=pr&el=tree) | Coverage Δ | |
|---|---|---|
| [src/policy.c](https://codecov.io/gh/apache/qpid-dispatch/pull/324/diff?src=pr&el=tree#diff-c3JjL3BvbGljeS5j) | `86.75% <100%> (+0.85%)` | :arrow_up: |
| [src/router\_core/agent\_link.c](https://codecov.io/gh/apache/qpid-dispatch/pull/324/diff?src=pr&el=tree#diff-c3JjL3JvdXRlcl9jb3JlL2FnZW50X2xpbmsuYw==) | `63.21% <0%> (-0.58%)` | :arrow_down: |
| [src/router\_core/router\_core.c](https://codecov.io/gh/apache/qpid-dispatch/pull/324/diff?src=pr&el=tree#diff-c3JjL3JvdXRlcl9jb3JlL3JvdXRlcl9jb3JlLmM=) | `98.88% <0%> (-0.38%)` | :arrow_down: |
| [src/router\_core/transfer.c](https://codecov.io/gh/apache/qpid-dispatch/pull/324/diff?src=pr&el=tree#diff-c3JjL3JvdXRlcl9jb3JlL3RyYW5zZmVyLmM=) | `90.26% <0%> (-0.32%)` | :arrow_down: |
| [src/router\_core/connections.c](https://codecov.io/gh/apache/qpid-dispatch/pull/324/diff?src=pr&el=tree#diff-c3JjL3JvdXRlcl9jb3JlL2Nvbm5lY3Rpb25zLmM=) | `95.01% <0%> (-0.24%)` | :arrow_down: |
| [src/router\_node.c](https://codecov.io/gh/apache/qpid-dispatch/pull/324/diff?src=pr&el=tree#diff-c3JjL3JvdXRlcl9ub2RlLmM=) | `94.57% <0%> (-0.15%)` | :arrow_down: |
| [src/server.c](https://codecov.io/gh/apache/qpid-dispatch/pull/324/diff?src=pr&el=tree#diff-c3JjL3NlcnZlci5j) | `87.73% <0%> (-0.12%)` | :arrow_down: |
| [src/iterator.c](https://codecov.io/gh/apache/qpid-dispatch/pull/324/diff?src=pr&el=tree#diff-c3JjL2l0ZXJhdG9yLmM=) | `86.8% <0%> (+0.19%)` | :arrow_up: |
------
[Continue to review full report at Codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/apache/qpid-dispatch/pull/324?src=pr&el=continue).
> **Legend** - [Click here to learn more](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/codecov-delta)
> `Δ = absolute <relative> (impact)`, `ø = not affected`, `? = missing data`
> Powered by [Codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/apache/qpid-dispatch/pull/324?src=pr&el=footer). Last update [8c7e872...1892f5d](https://codecov.io/gh/apache/qpid-dispatch/pull/324?src=pr&el=lastupdated). Read the [comment docs](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/pull-request-comments).
---
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@qpid.apache.org
[GitHub] qpid-dispatch issue #324: DISPATCH-976 - Fixed issue with policy validation ...
Posted by fgiorgetti <gi...@git.apache.org>.
Github user fgiorgetti commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-dispatch/pull/324
Done. Seems to be working fine.
---
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@qpid.apache.org
[GitHub] qpid-dispatch issue #324: DISPATCH-976 - Fixed issue with policy validation ...
Posted by ChugR <gi...@git.apache.org>.
Github user ChugR commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-dispatch/pull/324
Looking at it again I think all three of these need_check_* booleans are suspect. Don't delete just the one, get rid of them all.
---
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@qpid.apache.org
[GitHub] qpid-dispatch pull request #324: DISPATCH-976 - Fixed issue with policy vali...
Posted by fgiorgetti <gi...@git.apache.org>.
Github user fgiorgetti closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/qpid-dispatch/pull/324
---
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@qpid.apache.org