Skip to content

[release/6.0-staging] Fix Item4 is missing in some ValueTuples' IStructuralEquatable.Equals - #91472

Closed
github-actions[bot] wants to merge 2 commits into
release/6.0-stagingfrom
backport/pr-91461-to-release/6.0-staging
Closed

[release/6.0-staging] Fix Item4 is missing in some ValueTuples' IStructuralEquatable.Equals#91472
github-actions[bot] wants to merge 2 commits into
release/6.0-stagingfrom
backport/pr-91461-to-release/6.0-staging

Conversation

@github-actions

@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot commented Sep 1, 2023•
edited by jeffhandley
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Backport of #91461 to release/6.0-staging

/cc @jeffhandley@hamarb123@skyoxZ

Customer Impact

When ValueTuple has 5 or more items, the bool IStructuralEquatable.Equals(object? other, IEqualityComparer comparer) implementation skips over Item4. This leads to instances returning as equal when they are not.

usingSystem.Collections;vara=ValueTuple.Create(1,2,3,4,5);varb=ValueTuple.Create(1,2,3,0,5);// Any comparer will result in the buggy behaviorvarcomparer=StructuralComparisons.StructuralEqualityComparer;varequal=((IStructuralEquatable)a).Equals(b,comparer);

This was reported by a customer in #91457 and fixed in .NET 8 with #91461. This latent behavioral bug could be silently affecting customer applications with potential data loss and data corruption issues. The bug only surfaces when explicitly using IStructuralEquatable.Equals with a comparer provided. That usage pattern would be most prevalent within framework and library usage where it could be hard for customers to diagnose or work around the issue if encountered.

A GitHub code search revealed signal of such usage patterns being used. Here are a couple examples: 1, 2

Testing

The ValueTuple implementation was scanned for other errors like this and they were all fixed together. Unit tests were added to ensure each item of the tuple affects equality.

Risk

Medium. This is a behavioral correction to a latent bug. It's plausible that data has been persisted based on the incorrect behavior; in such a case, the behavioral correction might surface for customers.

@ghostghost added the needs-area-label An area label is needed to ensure this gets routed to the appropriate area owners label Sep 1, 2023
@jeffhandleyjeffhandley self-assigned this Sep 1, 2023
@jeffhandleyjeffhandley added area-System.Runtime and removed needs-area-label An area label is needed to ensure this gets routed to the appropriate area owners labels Sep 1, 2023
@jeffhandleyjeffhandley added this to the 6.0.x milestone Sep 1, 2023
@ghost

ghost commented Sep 1, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/area-system-runtime
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

Issue Details

Backport of #91461 to release/6.0-staging

/cc @jeffhandley@hamarb123

Customer Impact

Testing

Risk

IMPORTANT: If this backport is for a servicing release, please verify that:

  • The PR target branch is release/X.0-staging, not release/X.0.

  • If the change touches code that ships in a NuGet package, you have added the necessary package authoring and gotten it explicitly reviewed.

Author:github-actions[bot]
Assignees:jeffhandley
Labels:

area-System.Runtime

Milestone:-

@build-analysisbuild-analysisBot mentioned this pull request Sep 1, 2023
Open
@carlossanlop

carlossanlop commented Sep 11, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Same request as in the 7.0 one: #91471 (comment)

jeffhandley
jeffhandley approved these changes Sep 11, 2023
View reviewed changes

@jeffhandleyjeffhandley left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This has my support for servicing into 6.0. It's a latent functional bug that could lead to notable customer impact.

Adding @artl93 for review/approval.

artl93
artl93 approved these changes Sep 11, 2023
View reviewed changes

@artl93artl93 left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

M2 approved.

@carlossanlop

carlossanlop commented Sep 12, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

From the email conversation, we will wait for this to cook a bit in 8.0, then we will service this to 7.0 and 6.0 in the next servicing release.

@jkotas
jkotas deleted the backport/pr-91461-to-release/6.0-staging branch September 16, 2023 13:20
@ghostghost locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Oct 16, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Reviewers

@jeffhandleyjeffhandleyjeffhandley approved these changes
@stephentoubstephentoubstephentoub approved these changes
@artl93artl93artl93 approved these changes

Assignees

@jeffhandleyjeffhandley

Labels

area-System.RuntimeServicing-rejected

Projects

None yet

Milestone

6.0.x

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@carlossanlop@jeffhandley@stephentoub@artl93@hamarb123
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { // Add copy buttons to all 
 blocks
(function() {
function addCopyButtons() {
document.querySelectorAll('pre code').forEach(function(codeBlock) {
if (codeBlock.parentElement.hasAttribute('data-copy-added')) return;
codeBlock.parentElement.setAttribute('data-copy-added', 'true');
var btn = document.createElement('button');
btn.textContent = 'Copy';
btn.style.cssText = 'position:absolute;top:4px;right:4px;padding:2px 8px;font-size:11px;background:#4ecdc4;border:none;border-radius:4px;color:#1a1a2e;cursor:pointer;opacity:0.7;transition:opacity 0.2s;';
btn.onmouseover = function() { this.style.opacity = '1'; };
btn.onmouseout = function() { this.style.opacity = '0.7'; };
btn.onclick = function() {
navigator.clipboard.writeText(codeBlock.textContent).then(function() {
btn.textContent = 'Copied!';
setTimeout(function() { btn.textContent = 'Copy'; }, 1500);
});
};
codeBlock.parentElement.style.position = 'relative';
codeBlock.parentElement.appendChild(btn);
});
}
addCopyButtons();
// Re-run on dynamic content
var observer = new MutationObserver(addCopyButtons);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "github.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "github\\.com" + '
[release/6.0-staging] Fix `Item4` is missing in some `ValueTuple`s' `IStructuralEquatable.Equals` by github-actions[bot] · Pull Request #91472 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
[release/6.0-staging] Fix Item4 is missing in some ValueTuples' IStructuralEquatable.Equals - #91472
Closed
github-actions[bot] wants to merge 2 commits into
release/6.0-stagingfrom 
backport/pr-91461-to-release/6.0-staging
Closed
[release/6.0-staging] Fix Item4 is missing in some ValueTuples' IStructuralEquatable.Equals#91472
github-actions[bot] wants to merge 2 commits into
release/6.0-stagingfrom 
backport/pr-91461-to-release/6.0-staging
Conversation
@github-actions
@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot
commented
Sep 1, 2023•

edited by jeffhandley

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Backport of #91461 to release/6.0-staging
/cc @jeffhandley@hamarb123@skyoxZ
Customer Impact
When ValueTuple has 5 or more items, the bool IStructuralEquatable.Equals(object? other, IEqualityComparer comparer) implementation skips over Item4. This leads to instances returning as equal when they are not.
usingSystem.Collections;vara=ValueTuple.Create(1,2,3,4,5);varb=ValueTuple.Create(1,2,3,0,5);// Any comparer will result in the buggy behaviorvarcomparer=StructuralComparisons.StructuralEqualityComparer;varequal=((IStructuralEquatable)a).Equals(b,comparer);
This was reported by a customer in #91457 and fixed in .NET 8 with #91461. This latent behavioral bug could be silently affecting customer applications with potential data loss and data corruption issues. The bug only surfaces when explicitly using IStructuralEquatable.Equals with a comparer provided. That usage pattern would be most prevalent within framework and library usage where it could be hard for customers to diagnose or work around the issue if encountered.
A GitHub code search revealed signal of such usage patterns being used. Here are a couple examples: 1, 2
Testing
The ValueTuple implementation was scanned for other errors like this and they were all fixed together. Unit tests were added to ensure each item of the tuple affects equality.
Risk
Medium. This is a behavioral correction to a latent bug. It's plausible that data has been persisted based on the incorrect behavior; in such a case, the behavioral correction might surface for customers.
@ghostghost
added
the 
needs-area-label
An area label is needed to ensure this gets routed to the appropriate area owners
label
Sep 1, 2023
@jeffhandleyjeffhandley
self-assigned this
Sep 1, 2023
@jeffhandleyjeffhandley
added

area-System.Runtime

and removed

needs-area-label
An area label is needed to ensure this gets routed to the appropriate area owners
labels
Sep 1, 2023
@jeffhandleyjeffhandley
added this to the 6.0.x milestone
Sep 1, 2023
@ghost
ghost
commented
Sep 1, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/area-system-runtime

See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.
Issue Details
Backport of #91461 to release/6.0-staging
/cc @jeffhandley@hamarb123
Customer Impact
Testing
Risk
IMPORTANT: If this backport is for a servicing release, please verify that:
  • The PR target branch is release/X.0-staging, not release/X.0.
  • If the change touches code that ships in a NuGet package, you have added the necessary package authoring and gotten it explicitly reviewed.
Author:github-actions[bot]
Assignees:jeffhandley
Labels:
area-System.Runtime
Milestone:-
@build-analysisbuild-analysisBot
mentioned this pull request
Sep 1, 2023

Open

@carlossanlop
carlossanlop
commented
Sep 11, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Same request as in the 7.0 one: #91471 (comment)
jeffhandley
jeffhandley
approved these changes
Sep 11, 2023
View reviewed changes
@jeffhandleyjeffhandley
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This has my support for servicing into 6.0. It's a latent functional bug that could lead to notable customer impact.
Adding @artl93 for review/approval.
artl93
artl93
approved these changes
Sep 11, 2023
View reviewed changes
@artl93artl93
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

M2 approved.
@carlossanlop
carlossanlop
commented
Sep 12, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
From the email conversation, we will wait for this to cook a bit in 8.0, then we will service this to 7.0 and 6.0 in the next servicing release.
@jkotas
jkotas
deleted the

backport/pr-91461-to-release/6.0-staging

branch
September 16, 2023 13:20
@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Oct 16, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@jeffhandleyjeffhandleyjeffhandley approved these changes
@stephentoubstephentoubstephentoub approved these changes
@artl93artl93artl93 approved these changes

Assignees

@jeffhandleyjeffhandley

Labels

area-System.RuntimeServicing-rejected

Projects


None yet


Milestone

6.0.x

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@carlossanlop@jeffhandley@stephentoub@artl93@hamarb123

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Force GitHub README to respect dark mode
(function() {
var style = document.createElement('style');
style.textContent = '
.markdown-body {
color-scheme: dark light;
}
.markdown-body pre { background: #161b22 !important; }
.markdown-body code { background: rgba(110, 118, 129, 0.4) !important; }
.markdown-body table th, .markdown-body table td { border-color: #30363d !important; }
.markdown-body img { background: #0d1117; }
.markdown-body blockquote { border-left-color: #8b949e; }
.markdown-body hr { border-color: #30363d; }
';
document.head.appendChild(style);
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:GitHub Dark Mode README Fix]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
[release/6.0-staging] Fix `Item4` is missing in some `ValueTuple`s' `IStructuralEquatable.Equals` by github-actions[bot] · Pull Request #91472 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
[release/6.0-staging] Fix Item4 is missing in some ValueTuples' IStructuralEquatable.Equals - #91472
Closed
github-actions[bot] wants to merge 2 commits into
release/6.0-stagingfrom 
backport/pr-91461-to-release/6.0-staging
Closed
[release/6.0-staging] Fix Item4 is missing in some ValueTuples' IStructuralEquatable.Equals#91472
github-actions[bot] wants to merge 2 commits into
release/6.0-stagingfrom 
backport/pr-91461-to-release/6.0-staging
Conversation
@github-actions
@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot
commented
Sep 1, 2023•

edited by jeffhandley

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Backport of #91461 to release/6.0-staging
/cc @jeffhandley@hamarb123@skyoxZ
Customer Impact
When ValueTuple has 5 or more items, the bool IStructuralEquatable.Equals(object? other, IEqualityComparer comparer) implementation skips over Item4. This leads to instances returning as equal when they are not.
usingSystem.Collections;vara=ValueTuple.Create(1,2,3,4,5);varb=ValueTuple.Create(1,2,3,0,5);// Any comparer will result in the buggy behaviorvarcomparer=StructuralComparisons.StructuralEqualityComparer;varequal=((IStructuralEquatable)a).Equals(b,comparer);
This was reported by a customer in #91457 and fixed in .NET 8 with #91461. This latent behavioral bug could be silently affecting customer applications with potential data loss and data corruption issues. The bug only surfaces when explicitly using IStructuralEquatable.Equals with a comparer provided. That usage pattern would be most prevalent within framework and library usage where it could be hard for customers to diagnose or work around the issue if encountered.
A GitHub code search revealed signal of such usage patterns being used. Here are a couple examples: 1, 2
Testing
The ValueTuple implementation was scanned for other errors like this and they were all fixed together. Unit tests were added to ensure each item of the tuple affects equality.
Risk
Medium. This is a behavioral correction to a latent bug. It's plausible that data has been persisted based on the incorrect behavior; in such a case, the behavioral correction might surface for customers.
@ghostghost
added
the 
needs-area-label
An area label is needed to ensure this gets routed to the appropriate area owners
label
Sep 1, 2023
@jeffhandleyjeffhandley
self-assigned this
Sep 1, 2023
@jeffhandleyjeffhandley
added

area-System.Runtime

and removed

needs-area-label
An area label is needed to ensure this gets routed to the appropriate area owners
labels
Sep 1, 2023
@jeffhandleyjeffhandley
added this to the 6.0.x milestone
Sep 1, 2023
@ghost
ghost
commented
Sep 1, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/area-system-runtime

See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.
Issue Details
Backport of #91461 to release/6.0-staging
/cc @jeffhandley@hamarb123
Customer Impact
Testing
Risk
IMPORTANT: If this backport is for a servicing release, please verify that:
  • The PR target branch is release/X.0-staging, not release/X.0.
  • If the change touches code that ships in a NuGet package, you have added the necessary package authoring and gotten it explicitly reviewed.
Author:github-actions[bot]
Assignees:jeffhandley
Labels:
area-System.Runtime
Milestone:-
@build-analysisbuild-analysisBot
mentioned this pull request
Sep 1, 2023

Open

@carlossanlop
carlossanlop
commented
Sep 11, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Same request as in the 7.0 one: #91471 (comment)
jeffhandley
jeffhandley
approved these changes
Sep 11, 2023
View reviewed changes
@jeffhandleyjeffhandley
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This has my support for servicing into 6.0. It's a latent functional bug that could lead to notable customer impact.
Adding @artl93 for review/approval.
artl93
artl93
approved these changes
Sep 11, 2023
View reviewed changes
@artl93artl93
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

M2 approved.
@carlossanlop
carlossanlop
commented
Sep 12, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
From the email conversation, we will wait for this to cook a bit in 8.0, then we will service this to 7.0 and 6.0 in the next servicing release.
@jkotas
jkotas
deleted the

backport/pr-91461-to-release/6.0-staging

branch
September 16, 2023 13:20
@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Oct 16, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@jeffhandleyjeffhandleyjeffhandley approved these changes
@stephentoubstephentoubstephentoub approved these changes
@artl93artl93artl93 approved these changes

Assignees

@jeffhandleyjeffhandley

Labels

area-System.RuntimeServicing-rejected

Projects


None yet


Milestone

6.0.x

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@carlossanlop@jeffhandley@stephentoub@artl93@hamarb123

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Highlight search terms from Google/DuckDuckGo/Bing referrer
(function() {
var ref = document.referrer;
var terms = [];
if (ref.includes('google.com') || ref.includes('duckduckgo.com') || ref.includes('bing.com')) {
var url = new URL(ref);
var q = url.searchParams.get('q') || url.searchParams.get('p');
if (q) {
terms = q.split(/\s+/).filter(function(t) { return t.length > 2; });
}
}
if (terms.length === 0) return;
var style = document.createElement('style');
style.textContent = '.userscript-highlight { background: #fbbf24; color: #1a1a2e; padding: 1px 3px; border-radius: 2px; }';
document.head.appendChild(style);
function highlight(node) {
if (node.nodeType === 3) { // text node
var text = node.textContent;
var found = false;
terms.forEach(function(term) {
var regex = new RegExp('(' + term.replace(/[.*+?^${}()|[\]\\]/g, '\\') + ')', 'gi');
if (regex.test(text)) {
found = true;
var frag = document.createDocumentFragment();
var parts = text.split(regex);
parts.forEach(function(part, i) {
if (i % 2 === 0) {
frag.appendChild(document.createTextNode(part));
} else {
var span = document.createElement('span');
span.className = 'userscript-highlight';
span.textContent = part;
frag.appendChild(span);
}
});
node.parentNode.replaceChild(frag, node);
}
});
} else if (node.nodeType === 1 && node.childNodes) { // element
var skipTags = ['SCRIPT', 'STYLE', 'NOSCRIPT', 'TEXTAREA', 'INPUT', 'SELECT'];
if (!skipTags.includes(node.tagName)) {
Array.from(node.childNodes).forEach(highlight);
}
}
}
highlight(document.body);
// Re-highlight on dynamic content
var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {
mutations.forEach(function(m) {
m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {
if (node.nodeType === 1 || node.nodeType === 3) highlight(node);
});
});
});
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Highlight Search Terms]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
[release/6.0-staging] Fix `Item4` is missing in some `ValueTuple`s' `IStructuralEquatable.Equals` by github-actions[bot] · Pull Request #91472 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
[release/6.0-staging] Fix Item4 is missing in some ValueTuples' IStructuralEquatable.Equals - #91472
Closed
github-actions[bot] wants to merge 2 commits into
release/6.0-stagingfrom 
backport/pr-91461-to-release/6.0-staging
Closed
[release/6.0-staging] Fix Item4 is missing in some ValueTuples' IStructuralEquatable.Equals#91472
github-actions[bot] wants to merge 2 commits into
release/6.0-stagingfrom 
backport/pr-91461-to-release/6.0-staging
Conversation
@github-actions
@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot
commented
Sep 1, 2023•

edited by jeffhandley

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Backport of #91461 to release/6.0-staging
/cc @jeffhandley@hamarb123@skyoxZ
Customer Impact
When ValueTuple has 5 or more items, the bool IStructuralEquatable.Equals(object? other, IEqualityComparer comparer) implementation skips over Item4. This leads to instances returning as equal when they are not.
usingSystem.Collections;vara=ValueTuple.Create(1,2,3,4,5);varb=ValueTuple.Create(1,2,3,0,5);// Any comparer will result in the buggy behaviorvarcomparer=StructuralComparisons.StructuralEqualityComparer;varequal=((IStructuralEquatable)a).Equals(b,comparer);
This was reported by a customer in #91457 and fixed in .NET 8 with #91461. This latent behavioral bug could be silently affecting customer applications with potential data loss and data corruption issues. The bug only surfaces when explicitly using IStructuralEquatable.Equals with a comparer provided. That usage pattern would be most prevalent within framework and library usage where it could be hard for customers to diagnose or work around the issue if encountered.
A GitHub code search revealed signal of such usage patterns being used. Here are a couple examples: 1, 2
Testing
The ValueTuple implementation was scanned for other errors like this and they were all fixed together. Unit tests were added to ensure each item of the tuple affects equality.
Risk
Medium. This is a behavioral correction to a latent bug. It's plausible that data has been persisted based on the incorrect behavior; in such a case, the behavioral correction might surface for customers.
@ghostghost
added
the 
needs-area-label
An area label is needed to ensure this gets routed to the appropriate area owners
label
Sep 1, 2023
@jeffhandleyjeffhandley
self-assigned this
Sep 1, 2023
@jeffhandleyjeffhandley
added

area-System.Runtime

and removed

needs-area-label
An area label is needed to ensure this gets routed to the appropriate area owners
labels
Sep 1, 2023
@jeffhandleyjeffhandley
added this to the 6.0.x milestone
Sep 1, 2023
@ghost
ghost
commented
Sep 1, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/area-system-runtime

See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.
Issue Details
Backport of #91461 to release/6.0-staging
/cc @jeffhandley@hamarb123
Customer Impact
Testing
Risk
IMPORTANT: If this backport is for a servicing release, please verify that:
  • The PR target branch is release/X.0-staging, not release/X.0.
  • If the change touches code that ships in a NuGet package, you have added the necessary package authoring and gotten it explicitly reviewed.
Author:github-actions[bot]
Assignees:jeffhandley
Labels:
area-System.Runtime
Milestone:-
@build-analysisbuild-analysisBot
mentioned this pull request
Sep 1, 2023

Open

@carlossanlop
carlossanlop
commented
Sep 11, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Same request as in the 7.0 one: #91471 (comment)
jeffhandley
jeffhandley
approved these changes
Sep 11, 2023
View reviewed changes
@jeffhandleyjeffhandley
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This has my support for servicing into 6.0. It's a latent functional bug that could lead to notable customer impact.
Adding @artl93 for review/approval.
artl93
artl93
approved these changes
Sep 11, 2023
View reviewed changes
@artl93artl93
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

M2 approved.
@carlossanlop
carlossanlop
commented
Sep 12, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
From the email conversation, we will wait for this to cook a bit in 8.0, then we will service this to 7.0 and 6.0 in the next servicing release.
@jkotas
jkotas
deleted the

backport/pr-91461-to-release/6.0-staging

branch
September 16, 2023 13:20
@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Oct 16, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@jeffhandleyjeffhandleyjeffhandley approved these changes
@stephentoubstephentoubstephentoub approved these changes
@artl93artl93artl93 approved these changes

Assignees

@jeffhandleyjeffhandley

Labels

area-System.RuntimeServicing-rejected

Projects


None yet


Milestone

6.0.x

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@carlossanlop@jeffhandley@stephentoub@artl93@hamarb123

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Strip utm_, fbclid, gclid, etc. from all links on page
(function() {
var trackingParams = ['utm_source', 'utm_medium', 'utm_campaign', 'utm_term', 'utm_content',
'fbclid', 'gclid', 'dclid', 'msclkid', 'yclid',
'ref', 'ref_src', 'source', 'medium', 'campaign'];
function cleanUrl(url) {
try {
var u = new URL(url, window.location.origin);
var changed = false;
trackingParams.forEach(function(p) {
if (u.searchParams.has(p)) {
u.searchParams.delete(p);
changed = true;
}
});
return changed ? u.toString() : url;
} catch (e) {
return url;
}
}
function cleanLinks() {
document.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {
var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);
if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;
});
}
cleanLinks();
var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {
mutations.forEach(function(m) {
m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {
if (node.nodeType === 1) {
if (node.tagName === 'A') cleanLinks();
node.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {
var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);
if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;
});
}
});
});
});
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Remove Tracking Parameters from Links]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "youtube.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "youtube\\.com" + '
[release/6.0-staging] Fix `Item4` is missing in some `ValueTuple`s' `IStructuralEquatable.Equals` by github-actions[bot] · Pull Request #91472 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
[release/6.0-staging] Fix Item4 is missing in some ValueTuples' IStructuralEquatable.Equals - #91472
Closed
github-actions[bot] wants to merge 2 commits into
release/6.0-stagingfrom 
backport/pr-91461-to-release/6.0-staging
Closed
[release/6.0-staging] Fix Item4 is missing in some ValueTuples' IStructuralEquatable.Equals#91472
github-actions[bot] wants to merge 2 commits into
release/6.0-stagingfrom 
backport/pr-91461-to-release/6.0-staging
Conversation
@github-actions
@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot
commented
Sep 1, 2023•

edited by jeffhandley

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Backport of #91461 to release/6.0-staging
/cc @jeffhandley@hamarb123@skyoxZ
Customer Impact
When ValueTuple has 5 or more items, the bool IStructuralEquatable.Equals(object? other, IEqualityComparer comparer) implementation skips over Item4. This leads to instances returning as equal when they are not.
usingSystem.Collections;vara=ValueTuple.Create(1,2,3,4,5);varb=ValueTuple.Create(1,2,3,0,5);// Any comparer will result in the buggy behaviorvarcomparer=StructuralComparisons.StructuralEqualityComparer;varequal=((IStructuralEquatable)a).Equals(b,comparer);
This was reported by a customer in #91457 and fixed in .NET 8 with #91461. This latent behavioral bug could be silently affecting customer applications with potential data loss and data corruption issues. The bug only surfaces when explicitly using IStructuralEquatable.Equals with a comparer provided. That usage pattern would be most prevalent within framework and library usage where it could be hard for customers to diagnose or work around the issue if encountered.
A GitHub code search revealed signal of such usage patterns being used. Here are a couple examples: 1, 2
Testing
The ValueTuple implementation was scanned for other errors like this and they were all fixed together. Unit tests were added to ensure each item of the tuple affects equality.
Risk
Medium. This is a behavioral correction to a latent bug. It's plausible that data has been persisted based on the incorrect behavior; in such a case, the behavioral correction might surface for customers.
@ghostghost
added
the 
needs-area-label
An area label is needed to ensure this gets routed to the appropriate area owners
label
Sep 1, 2023
@jeffhandleyjeffhandley
self-assigned this
Sep 1, 2023
@jeffhandleyjeffhandley
added

area-System.Runtime

and removed

needs-area-label
An area label is needed to ensure this gets routed to the appropriate area owners
labels
Sep 1, 2023
@jeffhandleyjeffhandley
added this to the 6.0.x milestone
Sep 1, 2023
@ghost
ghost
commented
Sep 1, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/area-system-runtime

See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.
Issue Details
Backport of #91461 to release/6.0-staging
/cc @jeffhandley@hamarb123
Customer Impact
Testing
Risk
IMPORTANT: If this backport is for a servicing release, please verify that:
  • The PR target branch is release/X.0-staging, not release/X.0.
  • If the change touches code that ships in a NuGet package, you have added the necessary package authoring and gotten it explicitly reviewed.
Author:github-actions[bot]
Assignees:jeffhandley
Labels:
area-System.Runtime
Milestone:-
@build-analysisbuild-analysisBot
mentioned this pull request
Sep 1, 2023

Open

@carlossanlop
carlossanlop
commented
Sep 11, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Same request as in the 7.0 one: #91471 (comment)
jeffhandley
jeffhandley
approved these changes
Sep 11, 2023
View reviewed changes
@jeffhandleyjeffhandley
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This has my support for servicing into 6.0. It's a latent functional bug that could lead to notable customer impact.
Adding @artl93 for review/approval.
artl93
artl93
approved these changes
Sep 11, 2023
View reviewed changes
@artl93artl93
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

M2 approved.
@carlossanlop
carlossanlop
commented
Sep 12, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
From the email conversation, we will wait for this to cook a bit in 8.0, then we will service this to 7.0 and 6.0 in the next servicing release.
@jkotas
jkotas
deleted the

backport/pr-91461-to-release/6.0-staging

branch
September 16, 2023 13:20
@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Oct 16, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@jeffhandleyjeffhandleyjeffhandley approved these changes
@stephentoubstephentoubstephentoub approved these changes
@artl93artl93artl93 approved these changes

Assignees

@jeffhandleyjeffhandley

Labels

area-System.RuntimeServicing-rejected

Projects


None yet


Milestone

6.0.x

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@carlossanlop@jeffhandley@stephentoub@artl93@hamarb123

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Auto-enable theater mode on YouTube
(function() {
function tryTheater() {
var btn = document.querySelector('button[aria-label="Theater mode"], ytd-player #player button[title="Theater mode"]');
if (btn && !btn.classList.contains('activated')) {
btn.click();
}
}
// Try immediately
tryTheater();
// Try after navigation (SPA)
var lastUrl = location.href;
setInterval(function() {
if (location.href !== lastUrl) {
lastUrl = location.href;
setTimeout(tryTheater, 500);
}
}, 1000);
// Also try on player load
var observer = new MutationObserver(tryTheater);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:YouTube Theater Mode Default]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
[release/6.0-staging] Fix `Item4` is missing in some `ValueTuple`s' `IStructuralEquatable.Equals` by github-actions[bot] · Pull Request #91472 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
[release/6.0-staging] Fix Item4 is missing in some ValueTuples' IStructuralEquatable.Equals - #91472
Closed
github-actions[bot] wants to merge 2 commits into
release/6.0-stagingfrom 
backport/pr-91461-to-release/6.0-staging
Closed
[release/6.0-staging] Fix Item4 is missing in some ValueTuples' IStructuralEquatable.Equals#91472
github-actions[bot] wants to merge 2 commits into
release/6.0-stagingfrom 
backport/pr-91461-to-release/6.0-staging
Conversation
@github-actions
@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot
commented
Sep 1, 2023•

edited by jeffhandley

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Backport of #91461 to release/6.0-staging
/cc @jeffhandley@hamarb123@skyoxZ
Customer Impact
When ValueTuple has 5 or more items, the bool IStructuralEquatable.Equals(object? other, IEqualityComparer comparer) implementation skips over Item4. This leads to instances returning as equal when they are not.
usingSystem.Collections;vara=ValueTuple.Create(1,2,3,4,5);varb=ValueTuple.Create(1,2,3,0,5);// Any comparer will result in the buggy behaviorvarcomparer=StructuralComparisons.StructuralEqualityComparer;varequal=((IStructuralEquatable)a).Equals(b,comparer);
This was reported by a customer in #91457 and fixed in .NET 8 with #91461. This latent behavioral bug could be silently affecting customer applications with potential data loss and data corruption issues. The bug only surfaces when explicitly using IStructuralEquatable.Equals with a comparer provided. That usage pattern would be most prevalent within framework and library usage where it could be hard for customers to diagnose or work around the issue if encountered.
A GitHub code search revealed signal of such usage patterns being used. Here are a couple examples: 1, 2
Testing
The ValueTuple implementation was scanned for other errors like this and they were all fixed together. Unit tests were added to ensure each item of the tuple affects equality.
Risk
Medium. This is a behavioral correction to a latent bug. It's plausible that data has been persisted based on the incorrect behavior; in such a case, the behavioral correction might surface for customers.
@ghostghost
added
the 
needs-area-label
An area label is needed to ensure this gets routed to the appropriate area owners
label
Sep 1, 2023
@jeffhandleyjeffhandley
self-assigned this
Sep 1, 2023
@jeffhandleyjeffhandley
added

area-System.Runtime

and removed

needs-area-label
An area label is needed to ensure this gets routed to the appropriate area owners
labels
Sep 1, 2023
@jeffhandleyjeffhandley
added this to the 6.0.x milestone
Sep 1, 2023
@ghost
ghost
commented
Sep 1, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/area-system-runtime

See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.
Issue Details
Backport of #91461 to release/6.0-staging
/cc @jeffhandley@hamarb123
Customer Impact
Testing
Risk
IMPORTANT: If this backport is for a servicing release, please verify that:
  • The PR target branch is release/X.0-staging, not release/X.0.
  • If the change touches code that ships in a NuGet package, you have added the necessary package authoring and gotten it explicitly reviewed.
Author:github-actions[bot]
Assignees:jeffhandley
Labels:
area-System.Runtime
Milestone:-
@build-analysisbuild-analysisBot
mentioned this pull request
Sep 1, 2023

Open

@carlossanlop
carlossanlop
commented
Sep 11, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Same request as in the 7.0 one: #91471 (comment)
jeffhandley
jeffhandley
approved these changes
Sep 11, 2023
View reviewed changes
@jeffhandleyjeffhandley
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This has my support for servicing into 6.0. It's a latent functional bug that could lead to notable customer impact.
Adding @artl93 for review/approval.
artl93
artl93
approved these changes
Sep 11, 2023
View reviewed changes
@artl93artl93
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

M2 approved.
@carlossanlop
carlossanlop
commented
Sep 12, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
From the email conversation, we will wait for this to cook a bit in 8.0, then we will service this to 7.0 and 6.0 in the next servicing release.
@jkotas
jkotas
deleted the

backport/pr-91461-to-release/6.0-staging

branch
September 16, 2023 13:20
@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Oct 16, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@jeffhandleyjeffhandleyjeffhandley approved these changes
@stephentoubstephentoubstephentoub approved these changes
@artl93artl93artl93 approved these changes

Assignees

@jeffhandleyjeffhandley

Labels

area-System.RuntimeServicing-rejected

Projects


None yet


Milestone

6.0.x

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@carlossanlop@jeffhandley@stephentoub@artl93@hamarb123

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Remove or un-stick sticky/fixed headers that block content
(function() {
function unstick() {
document.querySelectorAll('header, nav, [role="banner"], .header, .navbar, .sticky, .fixed-top, [style*="position: fixed"], [style*="position:sticky"]').forEach(function(el) {
if (el.style.position === 'fixed' || el.style.position === 'sticky' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'fixed' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'sticky') {
el.style.position = 'static';
el.style.top = 'auto';
el.style.zIndex = 'auto';
}
});
}
unstick();
var observer = new MutationObserver(unstick);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true, attributes: true, attributeFilter: ['style', 'class'] });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Kill Sticky Headers]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
[release/6.0-staging] Fix `Item4` is missing in some `ValueTuple`s' `IStructuralEquatable.Equals` by github-actions[bot] · Pull Request #91472 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
[release/6.0-staging] Fix Item4 is missing in some ValueTuples' IStructuralEquatable.Equals - #91472
Closed
github-actions[bot] wants to merge 2 commits into
release/6.0-stagingfrom 
backport/pr-91461-to-release/6.0-staging
Closed
[release/6.0-staging] Fix Item4 is missing in some ValueTuples' IStructuralEquatable.Equals#91472
github-actions[bot] wants to merge 2 commits into
release/6.0-stagingfrom 
backport/pr-91461-to-release/6.0-staging
Conversation
@github-actions
@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot
commented
Sep 1, 2023•

edited by jeffhandley

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Backport of #91461 to release/6.0-staging
/cc @jeffhandley@hamarb123@skyoxZ
Customer Impact
When ValueTuple has 5 or more items, the bool IStructuralEquatable.Equals(object? other, IEqualityComparer comparer) implementation skips over Item4. This leads to instances returning as equal when they are not.
usingSystem.Collections;vara=ValueTuple.Create(1,2,3,4,5);varb=ValueTuple.Create(1,2,3,0,5);// Any comparer will result in the buggy behaviorvarcomparer=StructuralComparisons.StructuralEqualityComparer;varequal=((IStructuralEquatable)a).Equals(b,comparer);
This was reported by a customer in #91457 and fixed in .NET 8 with #91461. This latent behavioral bug could be silently affecting customer applications with potential data loss and data corruption issues. The bug only surfaces when explicitly using IStructuralEquatable.Equals with a comparer provided. That usage pattern would be most prevalent within framework and library usage where it could be hard for customers to diagnose or work around the issue if encountered.
A GitHub code search revealed signal of such usage patterns being used. Here are a couple examples: 1, 2
Testing
The ValueTuple implementation was scanned for other errors like this and they were all fixed together. Unit tests were added to ensure each item of the tuple affects equality.
Risk
Medium. This is a behavioral correction to a latent bug. It's plausible that data has been persisted based on the incorrect behavior; in such a case, the behavioral correction might surface for customers.
@ghostghost
added
the 
needs-area-label
An area label is needed to ensure this gets routed to the appropriate area owners
label
Sep 1, 2023
@jeffhandleyjeffhandley
self-assigned this
Sep 1, 2023
@jeffhandleyjeffhandley
added

area-System.Runtime

and removed

needs-area-label
An area label is needed to ensure this gets routed to the appropriate area owners
labels
Sep 1, 2023
@jeffhandleyjeffhandley
added this to the 6.0.x milestone
Sep 1, 2023
@ghost
ghost
commented
Sep 1, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/area-system-runtime

See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.
Issue Details
Backport of #91461 to release/6.0-staging
/cc @jeffhandley@hamarb123
Customer Impact
Testing
Risk
IMPORTANT: If this backport is for a servicing release, please verify that:
  • The PR target branch is release/X.0-staging, not release/X.0.
  • If the change touches code that ships in a NuGet package, you have added the necessary package authoring and gotten it explicitly reviewed.
Author:github-actions[bot]
Assignees:jeffhandley
Labels:
area-System.Runtime
Milestone:-
@build-analysisbuild-analysisBot
mentioned this pull request
Sep 1, 2023

Open

@carlossanlop
carlossanlop
commented
Sep 11, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Same request as in the 7.0 one: #91471 (comment)
jeffhandley
jeffhandley
approved these changes
Sep 11, 2023
View reviewed changes
@jeffhandleyjeffhandley
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This has my support for servicing into 6.0. It's a latent functional bug that could lead to notable customer impact.
Adding @artl93 for review/approval.
artl93
artl93
approved these changes
Sep 11, 2023
View reviewed changes
@artl93artl93
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

M2 approved.
@carlossanlop
carlossanlop
commented
Sep 12, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
From the email conversation, we will wait for this to cook a bit in 8.0, then we will service this to 7.0 and 6.0 in the next servicing release.
@jkotas
jkotas
deleted the

backport/pr-91461-to-release/6.0-staging

branch
September 16, 2023 13:20
@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Oct 16, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@jeffhandleyjeffhandleyjeffhandley approved these changes
@stephentoubstephentoubstephentoub approved these changes
@artl93artl93artl93 approved these changes

Assignees

@jeffhandleyjeffhandley

Labels

area-System.RuntimeServicing-rejected

Projects


None yet


Milestone

6.0.x

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@carlossanlop@jeffhandley@stephentoub@artl93@hamarb123

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Universal Dark Mode - works on any site
(function() {
var enabled = true;
function applyDarkMode() {
if (!enabled) return;
// Create style element if it doesn't exist
var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');
if (!style) {
style = document.createElement('style');
style.id = 'universal-dark-mode-style';
document.head.appendChild(style);
}
// Dark mode CSS - inverts colors but preserves images/video
style.textContent = '
/* Invert everything except media */
html {
filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;
background: #1a1a2e !important;
}
/* Restore images, videos, iframes, canvas */
img, video, iframe, canvas, svg, picture, [style*="background-image"] {
filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;
}
/* Preserve specific elements that should not be inverted */
.no-dark-mode, .no-dark-mode *,
[data-theme="light"], [data-theme="light"],
.ace_editor, .ace_editor *,
.CodeMirror, .CodeMirror *,
.monaco-editor, .monaco-editor *,
.markdown-body pre, .markdown-body pre *,
.highlight, .highlight *,
pre code, pre code * {
filter: none !important;
}
/* Fix common UI elements */
.modal, .popup, .dropdown-menu, .tooltip, .popover {
filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;
background: #2d2d44 !important;
border-color: #444 !important;
}
/* Scrollbars */
::-webkit-scrollbar { background: #1a1a2e !important; }
::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb { background: #444 !important; }
::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb:hover { background: #555 !important; }
/* Selection */
::selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }
::-moz-selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }
';
}
function removeDarkMode() {
var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');
if (style) style.remove();
}
// Toggle with Alt+Shift+D
document.addEventListener('keydown', function(e) {
if (e.altKey && e.shiftKey && e.key === 'D') {
e.preventDefault();
enabled = !enabled;
if (enabled) {
applyDarkMode();
console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Enabled');
} else {
removeDarkMode();
console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Disabled');
}
}
});
// Apply on load
applyDarkMode();
// Re-apply on dynamic content
var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {
if (enabled && !document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style')) {
applyDarkMode();
}
});
observer.observe(document.head, { childList: true });
console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Loaded - Press Alt+Shift+D to toggle');
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Universal Dark Mode]', __e); }
})();
})();
[release/6.0-staging] Fix `Item4` is missing in some `ValueTuple`s' `IStructuralEquatable.Equals` by github-actions[bot] · Pull Request #91472 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
[release/6.0-staging] Fix Item4 is missing in some ValueTuples' IStructuralEquatable.Equals - #91472
Closed
github-actions[bot] wants to merge 2 commits into
release/6.0-stagingfrom 
backport/pr-91461-to-release/6.0-staging
Closed
[release/6.0-staging] Fix Item4 is missing in some ValueTuples' IStructuralEquatable.Equals#91472
github-actions[bot] wants to merge 2 commits into
release/6.0-stagingfrom 
backport/pr-91461-to-release/6.0-staging
Conversation
@github-actions
@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot
commented
Sep 1, 2023•

edited by jeffhandley

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Backport of #91461 to release/6.0-staging
/cc @jeffhandley@hamarb123@skyoxZ
Customer Impact
When ValueTuple has 5 or more items, the bool IStructuralEquatable.Equals(object? other, IEqualityComparer comparer) implementation skips over Item4. This leads to instances returning as equal when they are not.
usingSystem.Collections;vara=ValueTuple.Create(1,2,3,4,5);varb=ValueTuple.Create(1,2,3,0,5);// Any comparer will result in the buggy behaviorvarcomparer=StructuralComparisons.StructuralEqualityComparer;varequal=((IStructuralEquatable)a).Equals(b,comparer);
This was reported by a customer in #91457 and fixed in .NET 8 with #91461. This latent behavioral bug could be silently affecting customer applications with potential data loss and data corruption issues. The bug only surfaces when explicitly using IStructuralEquatable.Equals with a comparer provided. That usage pattern would be most prevalent within framework and library usage where it could be hard for customers to diagnose or work around the issue if encountered.
A GitHub code search revealed signal of such usage patterns being used. Here are a couple examples: 1, 2
Testing
The ValueTuple implementation was scanned for other errors like this and they were all fixed together. Unit tests were added to ensure each item of the tuple affects equality.
Risk
Medium. This is a behavioral correction to a latent bug. It's plausible that data has been persisted based on the incorrect behavior; in such a case, the behavioral correction might surface for customers.
@ghostghost
added
the 
needs-area-label
An area label is needed to ensure this gets routed to the appropriate area owners
label
Sep 1, 2023
@jeffhandleyjeffhandley
self-assigned this
Sep 1, 2023
@jeffhandleyjeffhandley
added

area-System.Runtime

and removed

needs-area-label
An area label is needed to ensure this gets routed to the appropriate area owners
labels
Sep 1, 2023
@jeffhandleyjeffhandley
added this to the 6.0.x milestone
Sep 1, 2023
@ghost
ghost
commented
Sep 1, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/area-system-runtime

See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.
Issue Details
Backport of #91461 to release/6.0-staging
/cc @jeffhandley@hamarb123
Customer Impact
Testing
Risk
IMPORTANT: If this backport is for a servicing release, please verify that:
  • The PR target branch is release/X.0-staging, not release/X.0.
  • If the change touches code that ships in a NuGet package, you have added the necessary package authoring and gotten it explicitly reviewed.
Author:github-actions[bot]
Assignees:jeffhandley
Labels:
area-System.Runtime
Milestone:-
@build-analysisbuild-analysisBot
mentioned this pull request
Sep 1, 2023

Open

@carlossanlop
carlossanlop
commented
Sep 11, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Same request as in the 7.0 one: #91471 (comment)
jeffhandley
jeffhandley
approved these changes
Sep 11, 2023
View reviewed changes
@jeffhandleyjeffhandley
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This has my support for servicing into 6.0. It's a latent functional bug that could lead to notable customer impact.
Adding @artl93 for review/approval.
artl93
artl93
approved these changes
Sep 11, 2023
View reviewed changes
@artl93artl93
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

M2 approved.
@carlossanlop
carlossanlop
commented
Sep 12, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
From the email conversation, we will wait for this to cook a bit in 8.0, then we will service this to 7.0 and 6.0 in the next servicing release.
@jkotas
jkotas
deleted the

backport/pr-91461-to-release/6.0-staging

branch
September 16, 2023 13:20
@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Oct 16, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@jeffhandleyjeffhandleyjeffhandley approved these changes
@stephentoubstephentoubstephentoub approved these changes
@artl93artl93artl93 approved these changes

Assignees

@jeffhandleyjeffhandley

Labels

area-System.RuntimeServicing-rejected

Projects


None yet


Milestone

6.0.x

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@carlossanlop@jeffhandley@stephentoub@artl93@hamarb123