From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <s.sterz@proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B2B069170F
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu,  4 Apr 2024 13:04:34 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 88F4E37558
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu,  4 Apr 2024 13:04:04 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
 [94.136.29.106])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu,  4 Apr 2024 13:04:03 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
 by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 874C84524B
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu,  4 Apr 2024 13:04:03 +0200 (CEST)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2024 13:04:02 +0200
Message-Id: <D0BAEBDTSF5O.2GO05J9V6VBW@proxmox.com>
From: "Stefan Sterz" <s.sterz@proxmox.com>
To: "Proxmox VE development discussion" <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
 "Friedrich Weber" <f.weber@proxmox.com>
X-Mailer: aerc 0.17.0-69-g65571b67d7d3-dirty
References: <20240403091010.11544-1-f.weber@proxmox.com>
 <20240403091010.11544-4-f.weber@proxmox.com>
 <D0B6YC1ETEX7.18Y1P4WQZXBCR@proxmox.com>
 <a61ff6e8-c79c-4539-a2b6-acacc79c6440@proxmox.com>
 <D0B89ODDN2EF.32UYX8ZQQZHU5@proxmox.com>
 <147ee23c-97ae-4cc5-8c1f-ffc2ad4d6773@proxmox.com>
 <D0BA76BBMVSJ.1ZB5V8HU1XQOC@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <D0BA76BBMVSJ.1ZB5V8HU1XQOC@proxmox.com>
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL -0.075 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
 BAYES_00                 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
 DMARC_MISSING             0.1 Missing DMARC policy
 KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
 SPF_HELO_NONE           0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
 SPF_PASS               -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH widget-toolkit 3/3] window: edit: avoid
 shared object for extra request params
X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2024 11:04:34 -0000

On Thu Apr 4, 2024 at 12:54 PM CEST, Stefan Sterz wrote:
> On Thu Apr 4, 2024 at 12:10 PM CEST, Friedrich Weber wrote:
> > On 04/04/2024 11:23, Stefan Sterz wrote:
> > > -- >8 snip 8< --
> > >>>
> > >>> i did a quick an dirty test and using a constructor like this seems=
 to
> > >>> rule out this class of bug completelly:
> > >>>
> > >>> ```js
> > >>>     constructor: function(conf) {
> > >>>         let me =3D this;
> > >>>         me.extraRequestParams =3D {};
> > >>>         me.initConfig(conf);
> > >>>         me.callParent();
> > >>>     },
> > >>> ```
> > >>>
> > >>> basically it configures the edit window as usual, but overwrites th=
e
> > >>> `extraRequestParams` object for each instance with a new empty obje=
ct.
> > >>> so there are no more shared objects :) could you check whether that=
 also
> > >>> fixes the other instances?
> > >>>
> > >>> [1]: https://docs-devel.sencha.com/extjs/7.0.0/classic/Ext.window.W=
indow.html#method-constructor
> > >>
> > >> Nifty, didn't think about a constructor solution. Such a general
> > >> solution would be way more elegant, thanks for suggesting it!
> > >>
> > >> However, this particular constructor seems to break the pattern of
> > >> defining `extraRequestParams` in the subclass properties, as done by
> > >> `PVE.Pool.AddVM` [1]. With the constructor above, the API request do=
ne
> > >> by `AddVM` seems to be missing the `allow-move` parameter.
> > >>
> > >> Looks like once `PVE.Pool.AddVM` is instantiated and the constructor=
 is
> > >> called, `extraRequestParams` with `allow-move` is only defined in
> > >> `me.__proto__`, so `me.extraRequestParams =3D {}` essentially shadow=
s it
> > >> with an empty object, losing the `allow-move`.
> > >>
> > >
> > > not sure what you mean by that, if an `PVE.Pool.AddVM` is instantiate=
d,
> > > the `extraRequestParams` is already set, so it isn't just in `__proto=
__`
> > > for me. but yeah, the problem is correct as `me.extraRequestParams =
=3D {}`
> > > overwrites the field.
> >
> > I agree it doesn't matter here, but just for completeness, I meant that
> > if I set a breakpoint before line 2, so before the overwrite:
> >
> > ```js
> >     constructor: function(conf) {
> >         let me =3D this;
> > =3D>        me.extraRequestParams =3D {};
> >         me.initConfig(conf);
> >         me.callParent();
> >     },
> > ```
> >
> > ... `extraRequestParams` is not a property of `me`, but inherited from
> > its prototype:
> >
> > ```
> > >> me.extraRequestParams
> > Object { "allow-move": 1 }
> > >> "extraRequestParams" in me
> > true
> > >> Object.hasOwn(me, "extraRequestParams")
> > false
> > ```
> >
> > Doesn't make a difference for the overwrite, though.
> >
>
> ah yeah, that makes sense, but yeah, it doesn't really matter here i
> suppose.
>
> > >> Do you have an idea how to fix this? Maybe making a copy of
> > >> `extraRequestParams` would work (I suppose the overhead of creating =
a
> > >> new object for all edit window (subclass) instances is negligible).
> > >>
> > >> [1]
> > >> https://git.proxmox.com/?p=3Dpve-manager.git;a=3Dblob;f=3Dwww/manage=
r6/grid/PoolMembers.js;h=3D75f20cab;hb=3D4b06efb5#l9
> > >
> > > this worked for me, can you confirm that this also does what it shoul=
d
> > > for you?
> > >
> > > ```js
> > >     extraRequestParams: undefined,
> > >
> > >     constructor: function(conf) {
> > >         let me =3D this;
> > >         if (!me.extraRequestParams) {
> > >                 me.extraRequestParams =3D {};
> > >         }
> > >         me.initConfig(conf);
> > >         me.callParent();
> > >     },
> > > ```
> >
> > It works in the sense that it fixes the bug mentioned in my patch 1/3,
> > and fixes the lost `allow-move` issue from the previous constructor. Bu=
t
> > with this constructor, all instances of `AddVM` share the same
> > `extraRequestParams` (the body of the `if` never gets executed for
> > `AddVM` instances), which is the condition that my patch 2/3 tries to
> > avoid (even though it is currently not buggy).
> >
> > Maybe we could do:
> >
> > ```js
> >     extraRequestParams: {},
> >
> >     constructor: function(conf) {
> >         let me =3D this;
> > 	me.extraRequestParams =3D Ext.clone(me.extraRequestParams);
> >         me.initConfig(conf);
> >         me.callParent();
> >     },
> > ```
> >
> > ... which, if I'm not missing anything, *should* cover everything (with
> > the cost of allocating unnecessary empty objects)?
>
> yeah looks good to me. cloning shouldn't cost too much here. if we are
> really worried we could check whether the object is empty, clone
> it in that case and assign an empty object otherwise.
>

i just looked through the code for `Ext.clone` [1], if i'm not mistaken
in modern browsers (which we restrict ourselves to anyway, mostly), this
basically returns an empty object anyway, we would skip a few
assignments and checks, but i doubt performance would improve to the
point where adding such a check makes sense.

[1]: https://docs.sencha.com/extjs/7.0.0/modern/src/Ext.js.html#Ext-method-=
clone

>
> _______________________________________________
> pve-devel mailing list
> pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
> https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel