Backport of Guard against double marking in other locations in evaluate into v0.14 #27286
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
teamterraform
force-pushed
the
backport/pselle/double-mark/strangely-positive-ram
branch
from
1cf7caa to
ade3789
Compare
Codecov Report
|
pselle
deleted the
backport/pselle/double-mark/strangely-positive-ram
branch
|
I'm going to lock this issue because it has been closed for 30 days ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active issues. If you have found a problem that seems similar to this, please open a new issue and complete the issue template so we can capture all the details necessary to investigate further. |
ghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Backport
This PR is auto-generated from #27281 to be assessed for backporting due to the inclusion of the label 0.14-backport.
The below text is copied from the body of the original PR.
Add checks for double marking elsewhere in the evaluate code -- this is tough to test for, so submitting this as a cautionary patch, carrying the fix for #27131 over to output values without waiting for a bug report of "how" this can happen.