Skip to content

fix validateFunctionShape nil pointer if RequestedToCapacityRatio not set #132120

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

fix validateFunctionShape nil pointer if RequestedToCapacityRatio not set #132120

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

flpanbin
Copy link

@flpanbin flpanbin commented Jun 5, 2025 •
edited
Loading

What type of PR is this?

/kind bug

What this PR does / why we need it:

This PR adds validation for the RequestedToCapacityRatio field in the NodeResourcesFitArgs configuration. Currently, when the scoring strategy type is set to RequestedToCapacityRatio but the RequestedToCapacityRatio field is not specified, it can lead to a nil pointer dereference error.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Fixes #

Special notes for your reviewer:

The changes include:

  • Adding a check for RequestedToCapacityRatio field when the scoring strategy type is RequestedToCapacityRatio
  • Providing a clear error message when the field is missing
  • Preventing potential nil pointer dereference errors

My Tests:

If requestedToCapacityRatio not specified, the err msg as shown:

E0605 20:43:55.061646    7252 run.go:72] "command failed" err="initializing profiles: creating profile for scheduler name default-scheduler: initializing plugin \"NodeResourcesFit\": scoringStrategy.requestedToCapacityRatio: Required value: must be specified when type is RequestedToCapacityRatio"

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?


Fixed a potential nil pointer dereference in the scheduler's NodeResourcesFitArgs validation when using RequestedToCapacityRatio scoring strategy

Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.:

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. do-not-merge/needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. labels Jun 5, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Welcome @flpanbin!

It looks like this is your first PR to kubernetes/kubernetes 🎉. Please refer to our pull request process documentation to help your PR have a smooth ride to approval.

You will be prompted by a bot to use commands during the review process. Do not be afraid to follow the prompts! It is okay to experiment. Here is the bot commands documentation.

You can also check if kubernetes/kubernetes has its own contribution guidelines.

You may want to refer to our testing guide if you run into trouble with your tests not passing.

If you are having difficulty getting your pull request seen, please follow the recommended escalation practices. Also, for tips and tricks in the contribution process you may want to read the Kubernetes contributor cheat sheet. We want to make sure your contribution gets all the attention it needs!

Thank you, and welcome to Kubernetes. 😃

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added needs-triage Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `triage/foo` label and requires one. needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. labels Jun 5, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

This issue is currently awaiting triage.

If a SIG or subproject determines this is a relevant issue, they will accept it by applying the triage/accepted label and provide further guidance.

The triage/accepted label can be added by org members by writing /triage accepted in a comment.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @flpanbin. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. label Jun 5, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: flpanbin
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign deads2k for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added kind/api-change Categorizes issue or PR as related to adding, removing, or otherwise changing an API sig/scheduling Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Scheduling. and removed do-not-merge/needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. labels Jun 5, 2025
@k8s-triage-robot
Copy link

This PR may require API review.

If so, when the changes are ready, complete the pre-review checklist and request an API review.

Status of requested reviews is tracked in the API Review project.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@smarterclayton smarterclayton Awaiting requested review from smarterclayton

@tallclair tallclair Awaiting requested review from tallclair

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. kind/api-change Categorizes issue or PR as related to adding, removing, or otherwise changing an API kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. needs-triage Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `triage/foo` label and requires one. release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. sig/scheduling Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Scheduling. size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@flpanbin @k8s-ci-robot @k8s-triage-robot