Skip to content

Conversation

@zmc
Copy link
Member

@zmc zmc commented Mar 19, 2025

When unlock_one_safe is called with run_name, the caller means to express "unlock this node if it belongs to this run".
When it is called with run_name and job_id, it means "unlock this node if it belongs to this job in this run".
We had inverted the logic, causing leaks on reimage failures.

When unlock_one_safe is called with run_name, the caller means to express
"unlock this node if it belongs to this run".
When it is called with run_name and job_id, it means "unlock this node if it
belongs to this job in this run".
We had inverted the logic, causing leaks on reimage failures.

Signed-off-by: Zack Cerza <[email protected]>
@zmc zmc marked this pull request as ready for review December 11, 2025 02:30
@zmc zmc requested a review from a team as a code owner December 11, 2025 02:30
@zmc zmc requested review from amathuria and kamoltat and removed request for a team December 11, 2025 02:30
@VallariAg VallariAg self-requested a review December 16, 2025 12:30
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants