Fix: Route existing nodes through updateNode to prevent configuration…#26933
Open
mehtahet619 wants to merge 2 commits into
Open
Fix: Route existing nodes through updateNode to prevent configuration…#26933mehtahet619 wants to merge 2 commits into
mehtahet619 wants to merge 2 commits into
Conversation
comment-ops-bot
Bot
added
bug
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
Note
Copilot was unable to run its full agentic suite in this review.
Adjusts Nodes#addNode to treat adding a node with an already-existing name as an update rather than an add, aiming to route through the “update” flow for existing nodes.
Changes:
- Added an early check for existing node names in
addNode. - Routed existing-name additions to
updateNode(node)and returned early.
💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.
Comment on lines
+183
to
+187
| // THE FIX: Route to the proper update flow if it already exists | ||
| if (nodes.containsKey(node.getNodeName())) { | ||
| updateNode(node); | ||
| return; | ||
| } |
Comment on lines
+184
to
+187
| if (nodes.containsKey(node.getNodeName())) { | ||
| updateNode(node); | ||
| return; | ||
| } |
| Jenkins.checkGoodName(node.getNodeName()); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // THE FIX: Route to the proper update flow if it already exists |
| updateNode(node); | ||
| return; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
mehtahet619
force-pushed
the
fix-issue-26692
branch
from
da18a46 to
96f7a20
Compare
mawinter69
reviewed
Jun 15, 2026
| return; | ||
| } | ||
| // If a node with this name exists, treat this as an update to preserve update semantics | ||
| updateNode(node); |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not sure but is calling updateNode really fixing the issue?
Shouldn't that call replaceNode(old, node)
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Taking a closer look, I think that this will also not fix the issue.
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Best to add a unit test that shows that the problem is fixed
mehtahet619
force-pushed
the
fix-issue-26692
branch
from
96f7a20 to
76b9c81
Compare
Comment on lines
+184
to
+193
| Node old = nodes.putIfAbsent(node.getNodeName(), node); | ||
|
|
||
| if (old != null) { | ||
| if (node == old) { | ||
| return; | ||
| } | ||
| // Use replaceNode as suggested by maintainers to ensure deep configuration sync | ||
| replaceNode(old, node); | ||
| } else { | ||
| handleAddedNode(node, null); |
Comment on lines
+184
to
+191
| Node old = nodes.putIfAbsent(node.getNodeName(), node); | ||
|
|
||
| if (old != null) { | ||
| if (node == old) { | ||
| return; | ||
| } | ||
| // Use replaceNode as suggested by maintainers to ensure deep configuration sync | ||
| replaceNode(old, node); |
| if (node == old) { | ||
| return; | ||
| } | ||
| // Use replaceNode as suggested by maintainers to ensure deep configuration sync |
Contributor
|
After the comment #26692 (comment) it is clear that we run into the case |
mehtahet619
force-pushed
the
fix-issue-26692
branch
from
76b9c81 to
d0bf091
Compare
Contributor
|
You will not be able to solve the problem by calling |
mehtahet619
force-pushed
the
fix-issue-26692
branch
from
d0bf091 to
8cb3236
Compare
Comment on lines
+184
to
+191
| Node old = nodes.put(node.getNodeName(), node); | ||
| if (node != old) { | ||
| handleAddedNode(node, old); | ||
| } else { | ||
| // Fixes #26692: Explicitly update the active Computer so it picks up | ||
| // the mutated configuration when the exact same instance is re-added. | ||
| Jenkins j = Jenkins.get(); | ||
| j.updateComputers(node); |
| if (node != old) { | ||
| handleAddedNode(node, old); | ||
| } else { | ||
| // Fixes #26692: Explicitly update the active Computer so it picks up |
mehtahet619
force-pushed
the
fix-issue-26692
branch
from
8cb3236 to
9c4d32f
Compare
Comment on lines
+184
to
+193
| // Array used to safely capture the existing node from inside the lambda | ||
| final Node[] previousNode = new Node[1]; | ||
|
|
||
| // Atomic swap: The map is locked ONLY for this tiny operation | ||
| nodes.compute(node.getNodeName(), (name, existingNode) -> { | ||
| previousNode[0] = existingNode; | ||
| return node; | ||
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| Node old = previousNode[0]; |
Comment on lines
+187
to
+188
| // Atomic swap: The map is locked ONLY for this tiny operation | ||
| nodes.compute(node.getNodeName(), (name, existingNode) -> { |
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Fixes #26692
Testing done
Manually verified the logic path. Previously, calling
addNode()with an existing node name would silently overwrite theNodeconfiguration in the internalConcurrentMapwithout notifying the activeComputerobject. This resulted in the running agent caching old configurations (such asSSHLauncherparameters) until a manual restart.By delegating existing nodes to the dedicated
updateNode()method, theComputerobject properly evaluates the new configuration and reconnects if necessary to sync the live runtime state with the updated properties.Screenshots (UI changes only)
Before
N/A (Core logic change)
After
N/A
Proposed changelog entries
addNodetriggers the proper runtime update lifecycle.Proposed changelog category
/label bug
Proposed upgrade guidelines
N/A
Submitter checklist
@Restrictedor have@since TODOJavadocs, as appropriate.@Deprecated(since = "TODO")or@Deprecated(forRemoval = true, since = "TODO"), if applicable.Desired reviewers
@jenkinsci/core-pr-reviewers