177 Commits (148b19b0d7e36b6f2b8a169d2cb7b6069ab5d00a)

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Mutahhir Hayat	148b19b0d7	return validate value instead of dynamic value	2 years ago
Mutahhir Hayat	d398fa50c6	handle overlooked error in test	2 years ago
Mutahhir Hayat	cb28bf3379	remove unused test	2 years ago
Mutahhir Hayat	e20891ac1d	add tests for local values through data sources	2 years ago
Mutahhir Hayat	6bbc8cdc76	Add more tests for local values	2 years ago
Mutahhir Hayat	2667a0f2c3	cleanup comments	2 years ago
Mutahhir Hayat	5e12bdf048	Stack evaluation should also visit local values when walking the stack	2 years ago
Mutahhir Hayat	be317d4d3a	Make Stack and Stack config aware of local values	2 years ago
Mutahhir Hayat	6554ce6bfd	Add planning test to test for locals usage	2 years ago
Mutahhir Hayat	129d58fed3	Create local value structs, including config and tests	2 years ago
Mutahhir Hayat	d695f8197c	Add local values test	2 years ago
kmoe	b74715e5fb	stacks: fix invalid filename (#35111)	2 years ago
Daniel Schmidt	35f44b01f0	stacks: fix comment and add assertion for diagnostics	2 years ago
Daniel Schmidt	aeb5b47723	stacks: remove unused test case	2 years ago
Daniel Schmidt	f847360a40	stacks: component.CheckInstances now reports on for each value diagnostics ... So there is no need for checkValid to do this during th walkDynamicObjects phase	2 years ago
Daniel Schmidt	c370e5e71d	stacks: use more precise name for variable	2 years ago
Daniel Schmidt	1afc9789ef	stacks: use UnknownForEachRepetitionData for instance map repetition data in for_each	2 years ago
Daniel Schmidt	91a18a6b30	stacks: fix typo ... Co-authored-by: Liam Cervante <liam.cervante@hashicorp.com>	2 years ago
Daniel Schmidt	7d0c4cfc4d	stacks: early exit on invalid for_each values for components	2 years ago
Daniel Schmidt	d1168ffa62	stacks: return instance value for wildcard component instances	2 years ago
Daniel Schmidt	6f95225a91	stacks: handle unknown dynamic values	2 years ago
Daniel Schmidt	3cbfd39721	stacks: validate unknown component for_each type	2 years ago
Daniel Schmidt	3a7150b27e	stacks: handle unknown values in component for_each	2 years ago
Martin Atkins	30e2fd6525	Handle marks a little more consistently ... In the very first implementation of "sensitive values" we were unfortunately not disciplined about separating the idea of "marked value" from the idea of "sensitive value" (where the latter is a subset of the former). The first implementation just assumed that any marking whatsoever meant "sensitive". We later improved that by adding the marks package and the marks.Sensitive value to standardize on the representation of "sensitive value" as being a value marked with _that specific mark_. However, we did not perform a thorough review of all of the mark-handling codepaths to make sure they all agreed on that definition. In particular, the state and plan models were both designed as if they supported arbitrary marks but then in practice marks other than marks.Sensitive would be handled in various inconsistent ways: dropped entirely, or interpreted as if marks.Sensitive, and possibly do so inconsistently when a value is used only in memory vs. round-tripped through a wire/file format. The goal of this commit is to resolve those oddities so that there are now two possible situations: - General mark handling: some codepaths genuinely handle marks generically, by transporting them from input value to output value in a way consistent with how cty itself deals with marks. This is the ideal case because it means we can add new marks in future and assume these codepaths will handle them correctly without any further modifications. - Sensitive-only mark preservation: the codepaths that interact with our wire protocols and file formats typically have only specialized support for sensitive values in particular, and lack support for any other marks. Those codepaths are now subject to a new rule where they must return an error if asked to deal with any other mark, so that if we introduce new marks in future we'll be forced either to define how we'll avoid those markings reaching the file/wire formats or extend the file/wire formats to support the new marks. Some new helper functions in package marks are intended to standardize how we deal with the "sensitive values only" situations, in the hope that this will make it easier to keep things consistent as the codebase evolves in future. In practice the modules runtime only ever uses marks.Sensitive as a mark today, so all of these checks are effectively covering "should never happen" cases. The only other mark Terraform uses is an implementation detail of "terraform console" and does not interact with any of the codepaths that only support sensitive values in particular.	2 years ago
Nick Fagerlund	4d46cc81e3	Fix several deferred actions tests by setting DeferralAllowed	2 years ago
Nick Fagerlund	2b4147e0ba	Add DeferralAllowed to stackeval.PlanOpts (temporary) ... Ultimately, we want deferred actions to always be enabled for Stacks. However, it's not ready to turn on yet, as it currently regresses other features. So, adding a top-level option that flows through to the main terraform.PlanOpts field will allow us to enable it selectively in tests while we sort out various behaviors.	2 years ago
Nick Fagerlund	d5be799cb9	End unknown_instances language experiment, in favor of whole-plan option ... We're still iterating on the ability to defer unplannable changes to a later plan. However, instead of enabling it via a "contagious" experimental feature switch that can bubble up from any module, it's now behind a per-plan option in the PlanOpts struct. That option travels a winding path into the internals (see previous commit), and node execution logic can then access it during the plan walk via the `Deferred.DeferralAllowed()` method. This commit updates the spot where we switch between the deferral yea/nay code paths to respect this top-level plan option rather than the experiment flag.	2 years ago
Alisdair McDiarmid	f409639934	Merge pull request #34765 from hashicorp/alisdair/stack-root-input-variable-defaults ... stackruntime: Apply defaults to root variables	2 years ago
Alisdair McDiarmid	f3ec86b17b	stackruntime: Treat unset and null equally ... When handling root input variable values, we now consider unset and null values to be equivalent to each other. This is consistent with how we handle variables in embedded stacks, and very similar to how we handle variable in the modules runtime with `nullable = false`. One difference from the modules runtime case is that we do not prevent a null default value for stack variables.	2 years ago
Alisdair McDiarmid	0fe26468cd	stackruntime: Apply defaults to root variables ... When evaluating a stack's root input variables, supplied by the caller, we must apply any default values specified in the variable configuration for variables with no specified value. This commit adds this default fallback case, using NilVal as a marker indicating the lack of a specified value. If no default value exists for a variable, it is therefore required to be supplied by the caller. This commit also reports a diagnostic error in this case.	2 years ago
CJ Horton	5a750561e6	round-trip check results through stack plans ... Components expect that check results will be round-tripped through the plan in order to update unknown check results during the apply. We hadn't wired this up for stack plans, resulting in panics when the apply tries to update a check status that doesn't exist.	2 years ago
Daniel Schmidt	49ad27f1c9	Merge pull request #34737 from hashicorp/stacks-for-each ... stacks: make component for_each more robust	2 years ago
Nick Fagerlund	c9c24706aa	Merge pull request #34741 from hashicorp/nf/feb24-provider-addrs-in-statuses ... Stacks, Hooks: Include full provider addresses	2 years ago
Daniel Schmidt	2a0962328d	stacks: make error message more precise	2 years ago
Daniel Schmidt	8da61e2d20	stacks: reword for_each error message	2 years ago
Daniel Schmidt	217879e510	stacks: make component for_each more robust	2 years ago
Liam Cervante	cec4b7b74c	stacks: validate providers based on types instead of local names (#34735) ... * stacks: validate providers based on types instead of local names * fix tests	2 years ago
Nick Fagerlund	f58c71e77c	Stacks: Update expectations in TestTerraformHook	2 years ago
Nick Fagerlund	7703a5aead	Stacks: Add ProviderAddr field to ResourceInstanceStatusHookData ... This updates the stackruntime `hooks.ResourceInstanceStatusHookData` struct to include the provider address, and updates everything that instantiates that struct to pass along the valid provider address it received from its own caller. In other words, this commit is a bridge between the terraform.Hook interface methods (which already have access to the provider address) and the stacks hook callbacks that result in RPC messages being sent to the agent.	2 years ago
Nick Fagerlund	94ea534e40	Refactor terraform.Hook to use a resource-identifying wrapper struct ... The terraform.Hook interface lets other areas of code perform streaming reactions to various events, generally in the service of some UI somewhere. Nearly all of the methods on this interface take an `addrs.AbsResourceInstance` as their first argument, to identify the resource that's being operated on. However, that addrs struct doesn't necessarily contain everything you might want in order to uniquely and usefully identify a resource. It has the module instance and resource instance addresses, but it lacks the provider source address, which can affect how the consuming UI should display the resource's events. (For example, Terraform Cloud wants reliable info about who maintains a given provider, what cloud provider it operates on, and where to find its documentation.) Instead of polluting `addrs.AbsResourceInstance` with extra information that isn't relevant to other call sites, let's change the first argument of each Hook method to be a wrapper struct defined in the package that owns the Hook interface, and add the provider address to that wrapper as a sibling of the resource address. This causes a big noisy commit today, but should streamline future updates to the UI-facing "identity" of a resource; existing callers can ignore any new fields they're uninterested in, or exploit new info as needed. Other than making new information available for future edits to Hook implementing types, this commit should have no effect on existing behavior.	2 years ago
Liam Cervante	31a7fa88d5	stacks: validate provider configurations during static analysis (#34730)	2 years ago
Alisdair McDiarmid	1459825e53	Merge pull request #34725 from hashicorp/alisdair/configs-sourcebundle-parser ... Add and use a source bundle aware configuration parser for stacks	2 years ago
Alisdair McDiarmid	2c22c213e9	stackeval: More robust absolute source addrs ... Instead of relying on the module call's source being unique, we now use the entire path as the key for looking up the parent's absolute source address.	2 years ago
Alisdair McDiarmid	7a043fe54a	stackeval: Another module source test case ... If multiple submodules of a given component share the same relative source, they should result in distint source addresses in the diagnostics. This commit introduces an example with the following structure: - component.remote_invalid_grandchildren - module.first_child - module.child (source = "./child") - module.second_child - module.child (source = "./child") Both of these use the same invalid module as the rest of the examples in this test, so we should (and do) see equivalent diagnostics differing only in filename.	2 years ago
Alisdair McDiarmid	7d956bbc11	stackeval: Fix module loader source addr building ... The source bundle aware module loader requires "absolute" source addresses, which are fully qualified rather than relative. We generate these during the module loading process. The previous implementation assumed that any local module source address should be parented by the root module source, but this is incorrect when a descendant module targets a remote or registry source. This commit addresses this by tracking each module request's generated absolute source address, and using it as the base for any descendant local module requests.	2 years ago
Martin Atkins	a45d4467f1	stackeval: Don't fail when data resource is removed ... Due to an oversight in our handling of resource instance objects that are neither in configuration nor plan -- which is true for data resources that have since been removed from the configuration -- we were generating plan change objects that were lacking a provider configuration address, which made them syntactically invalid and thus not reloadable using the raw plan parser. This is a bit of a strange situation since we don't technically _need_ a provider configuration address for these; all we're going to do is just unceremoniously delete them from the state during apply anyway. However, we always have the provider configuration address available anyway, so adding this in here is overall simpler than changing the parser, the models it populates, and all of the downstream users of those models to treat this field as optional. This commit is more test case than it is fix, since the fix was relatively straightforward once I had a test case to reproduce the problem it's fixing.	2 years ago
Liam Cervante	b2cc7dbadf	stacks: validate the types of input variables during validation (#34722)	2 years ago
Liam Cervante	68fd15dfdd	stacks: expand reference scope of static validations (#34721)	2 years ago
Liam Cervante	831630fabe	stacks: the plan function should stop on validation errors (#34720)	2 years ago
Alisdair McDiarmid	97a220fb82	stacks: Use source bundle aware config parser	2 years ago