-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 26.4k
Fix misleading NPE when request parameter is not Serializable #16299
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
Open
chensishang
wants to merge
4
commits into
apache:3.3
Choose a base branch
from
chensishang:fix-16293-misleading-npe
base: 3.3
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+27
−0
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
6a87012
Fix misleading NPE when request parameter is not Serializable
chensishang 9bc0d46
Merge branch '3.3' into fix-16293-misleading-npe
chensishang bd222c1
Make null path error message generic to avoid misleading diagnosis
chensishang 817f80b
Merge branch 'fix-16293-misleading-npe' of https://github.com/chensis…
chensishang File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is non-serializable parameter really the only scenario that can make path null here? In the normal Dubbo request format, the service path is encoded/decoded before arguments, and DubboInvoker also sets PATH_KEY before sending the request. So a null path seems more generally like missing/malformed invocation metadata, custom codec/invocation behavior, or decode/protocol incompatibility. Could we make this error message less specific than “Please ensure all parameter types implement Serializable” to avoid another misleading diagnosis?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for the careful review — you're right, and I appreciate you pointing this out. A null path indicates missing or corrupted invocation metadata in general, and my original message attributing ▎ it solely to non-serializable parameters could indeed cause another misleading diagnosis
I've updated the message to describe the problem generically and only mention deserialization failure as one of several possible causes (along with protocol incompatibility and custom
codec/invocation implementations). Please let me know if the wording could be further improved — happy to adjust.