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

Add back support for azblob cache #5725

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 13, 2025

Conversation

vangarp
Copy link
Contributor

@vangarp vangarp commented Feb 12, 2025

Add azblob cache back and fixes #5233

@vangarp
Copy link
Contributor Author

vangarp commented Feb 12, 2025

@tonistiigi @crazy-max please take a look

}

// For uploading manifests, use the Upload API which follows "last writer wins" sematics
// This is slightly slower than UploadStream call but is safe to call concurrently from multiple threads. Refer to:
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Do you need to check our UploadStream call in the gha backend?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

ok to do in a follow up PR? wanted to keep this limited to the vulnerability fixes so keeping everything else as it was. need to do some more testing (talking to azblob team) before changing this

var _ io.ReadSeekCloser = &readSeekCloser{}

type readSeekCloser struct {
io.Reader
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why hide the other functions from interface detection? I would just embed *bytes.Reader and io.Closer

Copy link
Contributor Author

@vangarp vangarp Feb 12, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

wanted to keep the changes in this PR to a minimum and get the vulnerabilities unblocked, but open to changing. do you think a separate follow up PR is fine?

Copy link
Member

@tonistiigi tonistiigi left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Squash the review commits and update the deps to match v0.20.0-rc1 go.mod

@tonistiigi tonistiigi added this to the v0.20.0 milestone Feb 13, 2025
@vangarp vangarp force-pushed the vangarp/azblob-cache-sdk-upgrade branch from ab4fa88 to 1d5af10 Compare February 13, 2025 04:28
@vangarp vangarp requested a review from tonistiigi February 13, 2025 04:54
@vangarp vangarp requested a review from crazy-max February 13, 2025 09:09
@crazy-max crazy-max merged commit a2fd040 into moby:master Feb 13, 2025
104 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Fix code scanning alert - CVE-2024-35255 / GO-2024-2918
3 participants