feat(rest-api): Enhance get-all VPC peering filtering and peer tenant visibility#2867
Open
hwadekar-nv wants to merge 3 commits into
Open
feat(rest-api): Enhance get-all VPC peering filtering and peer tenant visibility#2867hwadekar-nv wants to merge 3 commits into
hwadekar-nv wants to merge 3 commits into
Conversation
Contributor
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml Review profile: CHILL Plan: Enterprise Run ID: ⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (4)
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
Summary by CodeRabbit
WalkthroughThe PR adds VPC peering list filters for status, VPC ID, and peer tenant ID. It also returns tenant IDs for both peered VPCs and filters peerings by either side’s owning tenant. ChangesVPC peering API and persistence updates
Estimated code review effort🎯 3 (Moderate) | ⏱️ ~25 minutes 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4 | ❌ 1❌ Failed checks (1 warning)
✅ Passed checks (4 passed)
✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings. ✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Comment |
hwadekar-nv
force-pushed
the
feat/enhance-vpc-peering
branch
from
4c4191a to
55e5ce7
Compare
|
🌿 Preview your docs: https://nvidia-preview-pull-request-2867.docs.buildwithfern.com/infra-controller |
🔍 Container Scan SummaryNo Grype artifacts were found to aggregate. |
🔐 TruffleHog Secret Scan✅ No secrets or credentials found! Your code has been scanned for 700+ types of secrets and credentials. All clear! 🎉 🕐 Last updated: 2026-06-25 00:07:22 UTC | Commit: 4c4191a |
Contributor
|
Exposing |
hwadekar-nv
force-pushed
the
feat/enhance-vpc-peering
branch
from
bfa3732 to
d9962df
Compare
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Inline comments:
In `@rest-api/api/pkg/api/handler/vpcpeering.go`:
- Around line 614-621: The relation preload logic in the VPC peering handler is
too narrowly gated by filterInput.VpcIDs and filterInput.PeerTenantIDs, which
can leave vpc1TenantId and vpc2TenantId unset in normal list responses. Update
the includeRelations handling in the vpc peering list path so Vpc1RelationName
and Vpc2RelationName are always loaded whenever the response includes tenant ID
fields, keeping the response consistent with the OpenAPI contract and preserving
compatibility.
- Around line 563-578: The peer tenant query handling in the VPC peering handler
only reads a single `peerTenantId`, so repeated query values are dropped and the
`PeerTenantIDs` filter is not populated consistently. Update the `Get`/query
parsing logic in `vpcpeering.go` to read all `peerTenantId` values from the
request, resolve each one through `common.GetTenantFromIDString`, and append
valid tenant IDs into `filterInput.PeerTenantIDs` while preserving the existing
invalid/not-found/error responses and `logger.Error` behavior.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Enterprise
Run ID: 882a2acf-2c0d-4f35-a284-ff78d73528ab
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (33)
rest-api/sdk/standard/api_vpc_peering.gois excluded by!rest-api/sdk/standard/api_*.gorest-api/sdk/standard/client.gois excluded by!rest-api/sdk/standard/client.gorest-api/sdk/standard/model_batch_instance_create_request.gois excluded by!rest-api/sdk/standard/model_*.gorest-api/sdk/standard/model_expected_machine.gois excluded by!rest-api/sdk/standard/model_*.gorest-api/sdk/standard/model_expected_machine_create_request.gois excluded by!rest-api/sdk/standard/model_*.gorest-api/sdk/standard/model_expected_machine_update_request.gois excluded by!rest-api/sdk/standard/model_*.gorest-api/sdk/standard/model_expected_power_shelf.gois excluded by!rest-api/sdk/standard/model_*.gorest-api/sdk/standard/model_expected_power_shelf_create_request.gois excluded by!rest-api/sdk/standard/model_*.gorest-api/sdk/standard/model_expected_power_shelf_update_request.gois excluded by!rest-api/sdk/standard/model_*.gorest-api/sdk/standard/model_expected_rack.gois excluded by!rest-api/sdk/standard/model_*.gorest-api/sdk/standard/model_expected_rack_create_request.gois excluded by!rest-api/sdk/standard/model_*.gorest-api/sdk/standard/model_expected_rack_update_request.gois excluded by!rest-api/sdk/standard/model_*.gorest-api/sdk/standard/model_expected_switch.gois excluded by!rest-api/sdk/standard/model_*.gorest-api/sdk/standard/model_expected_switch_create_request.gois excluded by!rest-api/sdk/standard/model_*.gorest-api/sdk/standard/model_expected_switch_update_request.gois excluded by!rest-api/sdk/standard/model_*.gorest-api/sdk/standard/model_infini_band_partition.gois excluded by!rest-api/sdk/standard/model_*.gorest-api/sdk/standard/model_infini_band_partition_create_request.gois excluded by!rest-api/sdk/standard/model_*.gorest-api/sdk/standard/model_infini_band_partition_update_request.gois excluded by!rest-api/sdk/standard/model_*.gorest-api/sdk/standard/model_instance.gois excluded by!rest-api/sdk/standard/model_*.gorest-api/sdk/standard/model_instance_create_request.gois excluded by!rest-api/sdk/standard/model_*.gorest-api/sdk/standard/model_instance_type.gois excluded by!rest-api/sdk/standard/model_*.gorest-api/sdk/standard/model_instance_type_create_request.gois excluded by!rest-api/sdk/standard/model_*.gorest-api/sdk/standard/model_instance_type_update_request.gois excluded by!rest-api/sdk/standard/model_*.gorest-api/sdk/standard/model_instance_update_request.gois excluded by!rest-api/sdk/standard/model_*.gorest-api/sdk/standard/model_machine.gois excluded by!rest-api/sdk/standard/model_*.gorest-api/sdk/standard/model_machine_update_request.gois excluded by!rest-api/sdk/standard/model_*.gorest-api/sdk/standard/model_network_security_group.gois excluded by!rest-api/sdk/standard/model_*.gorest-api/sdk/standard/model_network_security_group_create_request.gois excluded by!rest-api/sdk/standard/model_*.gorest-api/sdk/standard/model_network_security_group_update_request.gois excluded by!rest-api/sdk/standard/model_*.gorest-api/sdk/standard/model_vpc.gois excluded by!rest-api/sdk/standard/model_*.gorest-api/sdk/standard/model_vpc_create_request.gois excluded by!rest-api/sdk/standard/model_*.gorest-api/sdk/standard/model_vpc_peering.gois excluded by!rest-api/sdk/standard/model_*.gorest-api/sdk/standard/model_vpc_update_request.gois excluded by!rest-api/sdk/standard/model_*.go
📒 Files selected for processing (7)
rest-api/api/pkg/api/handler/vpcpeering.gorest-api/api/pkg/api/handler/vpcpeering_test.gorest-api/api/pkg/api/model/vpcpeering.gorest-api/api/pkg/api/model/vpcpeering_test.gorest-api/db/pkg/db/model/vpcpeering.gorest-api/db/pkg/db/model/vpcpeering_test.gorest-api/openapi/spec.yaml
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (6)
- rest-api/db/pkg/db/model/vpcpeering_test.go
- rest-api/openapi/spec.yaml
- rest-api/api/pkg/api/handler/vpcpeering_test.go
- rest-api/api/pkg/api/model/vpcpeering.go
- rest-api/db/pkg/db/model/vpcpeering.go
- rest-api/api/pkg/api/model/vpcpeering_test.go
nvlitagaki
requested changes
Jun 25, 2026
Comment on lines
+548
to
+554
| vpc, verr := common.GetVpcFromIDString(ctx, nil, vpcIDStr, nil, gavph.dbSession) | ||
| if verr != nil { | ||
| if verr == common.ErrInvalidID { | ||
| return cutil.NewAPIErrorResponse(c, http.StatusBadRequest, fmt.Sprintf("Invalid VPC ID %v in query", vpcIDStr), nil) | ||
| } | ||
| if errors.Is(verr, cdb.ErrDoesNotExist) { | ||
| return cutil.NewAPIErrorResponse(c, http.StatusNotFound, fmt.Sprintf("Could not find VPC with ID %v specified in query", vpcIDStr), nil) |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please add logging for the first two error cases.
| in: query | ||
| name: vpcId | ||
| required: false | ||
| description: Optional filter by VPC ID involved in the peering as either vpc1 or vpc2. |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For consistency, we should state that this can be repeated multiple times.
Comment on lines
+568
to
+572
| if verr == common.ErrInvalidID { | ||
| return cutil.NewAPIErrorResponse(c, http.StatusBadRequest, fmt.Sprintf("Invalid peer tenant ID %v in query", peerTenantIDStr), nil) | ||
| } | ||
| if errors.Is(verr, cdb.ErrDoesNotExist) { | ||
| return cutil.NewAPIErrorResponse(c, http.StatusNotFound, fmt.Sprintf("Could not find tenant with ID %v specified in query", peerTenantIDStr), nil) |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please add logging here before these early returns
| OrderBy: pageRequest.OrderBy, | ||
| } | ||
| vpcPeerings, total, err := vpcPeeringDAO.GetAll(ctx, nil, filterInput, vpcPeeringPageInput, qIncludeRelations) | ||
| includeRelations := vpcPeeringIncludeRelationsForTenantIDs(qIncludeRelations) |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why are we sending the whole of vpc1 and vpc2 back in the response even when the client didn't ask for them? Agreed that we need to look at the VPCs to get the tenant values, but that doesn't mean we need to send all that extra information back unexpectedly.
| expectedCount: 1, | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| name: "tenant admin 1 filters by pending status", |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It might be more useful to validate that filtering by multiple statuses works
Comment on lines
+651
to
+657
| name: "tenant admin 1 filters by vpcId", | ||
| reqOrgName: tnOrg1, | ||
| queryParams: map[string]string{"vpcId": vpc1.ID.String()}, | ||
| user: tnu1, | ||
| expectedStatus: http.StatusOK, | ||
| expectedCount: 3, | ||
| }, |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Since all the created peerings have vpc1 as the first vpc, this doesn't really help test that the filter works regardless of whether the vpc specified in the filter is the first vpc or the second. It would be good to have a test case that covers that.
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // Get peerTenantId from query param | ||
| if peerTenantIDStr := c.QueryParam("peerTenantId"); peerTenantIDStr != "" { |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Any particular reason for not supporting multiple peerTenantID values?
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
2 participants
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.
#2089
The get-all VPC peering endpoint only supported filtering by siteId and isMultiTenant, so users could not narrow results by status, a specific VPC, or a linked peer tenant. For multi-tenant peerings, the response also did not show which tenant owned each VPC.
Type of Change
Testing