fix panic when calling ToUnstructured on nil metav1.Time

[com6056]

Currently, when calling ToUnstructured on a metav1.Time that is a nil pointer, you get a panic:

panic: value method k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/apis/meta/v1.Time.ToUnstructured called using nil *Time pointer

goroutine 1 [running]:
k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/apis/meta/v1.(*Time).ToUnstructured(0x100000001?)
	<autogenerated>:1 +0x48
sigs.k8s.io/structured-merge-diff/v4/value.TypeReflectCacheEntry.ToUnstructured({0x1, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x1, 0x0, 0x0, {0x0, 0x0, 0x0}}, ...)
	external/io_k8s_sigs_structured_merge_diff_v4/value/reflectcache.go:192 +0x658
k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/runtime.toUnstructured({0x108eaaf80?, 0x14001065390?, 0x1?}, {0x108686960?, 0x14003e181b0?, 0x98?})
	external/io_k8s_apimachinery/pkg/runtime/converter.go:655 +0x6d4
k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/runtime.structToUnstructured({0x108a15600?, 0x14001065378?, 0x1?}, {0x108686960?, 0x14003e18150?, 0x104d118f8?})
	external/io_k8s_apimachinery/pkg/runtime/converter.go:843 +0x764
k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/runtime.toUnstructured({0x108a15600?, 0x14001065378?, 0x3?}, {0x108686960?, 0x14003e18150?, 0x98?})
	external/io_k8s_apimachinery/pkg/runtime/converter.go:692 +0x628
k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/runtime.structToUnstructured({0x108b1ca20?, 0x14001065008?, 0x8?}, {0x10870bce0?, 0x14001783600?, 0x104d118f8?})
	external/io_k8s_apimachinery/pkg/runtime/converter.go:843 +0x764
k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/runtime.toUnstructured({0x108b1ca20?, 0x14001065008?, 0x10823aa40?}, {0x10870bce0?, 0x14001783600?, 0x8?})
	external/io_k8s_apimachinery/pkg/runtime/converter.go:692 +0x628
k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/runtime.(*unstructuredConverter).ToUnstructured(0x10b8d9c80, {0x108e80880, 0x14001065008})
	external/io_k8s_apimachinery/pkg/runtime/converter.go:586 +0x250
...

This moves the nil pointer check up to before we check if there is a custom converter so that we don't attempt to call ToUnstructured on a nil pointer which triggers the panic.

Related issues:

• Panic in TypeReflectCacheEntry.ToUnstructured if a pointer-typed field without omitempty specifier is attempted to be converted #229
• Converting an operator group object to an unstructured object causes a panic operator-framework/api#269

[k8s-ci-robot]

Welcome @com6056!

It looks like this is your first PR to kubernetes-sigs/structured-merge-diff 🎉. Please refer to our pull request process documentation to help your PR have a smooth ride to approval.

You will be prompted by a bot to use commands during the review process. Do not be afraid to follow the prompts! It is okay to experiment. Here is the bot commands documentation.

You can also check if kubernetes-sigs/structured-merge-diff has its own contribution guidelines.

You may want to refer to our testing guide if you run into trouble with your tests not passing.

If you are having difficulty getting your pull request seen, please follow the recommended escalation practices. Also, for tips and tricks in the contribution process you may want to read the Kubernetes contributor cheat sheet. We want to make sure your contribution gets all the attention it needs!

Thank you, and welcome to Kubernetes. 😃

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @com6056. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

[dprotaso]

/ok-to-test
/assign @jpbetz

[com6056]

@jpbetz anything I can do to help get this reviewed? Let me know if I can provide any additional context! 🙏

[Rubik0000]

It seems the PR fixes metav1.Duration too, so it would be nice to have the fix, thanks @com6056

[jpbetz]

ack, i'll try to get to this

[jpbetz]

/lgtm
/approve
Thanks for the fix!

[dprotaso]

Looks like the owner file is out of date - @apelisse is the only approved

…

On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 17:21 Kubernetes Prow Robot < ***@***.***> wrote: [APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is *NOT APPROVED* This pull-request has been approved by: *com6056 <#258#>*, *jpbetz <#258 (comment)>* *Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label*, please assign apelisse <https://github.com/apelisse> for approval. For more information see the Kubernetes Code Review Process <https://git.k8s.io/community/contributors/guide/owners.md#the-code-review-process> . The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here <https://go.k8s.io/bot-commands?repo=kubernetes-sigs%2Fstructured-merge-diff> . Needs approval from an approver in each of these files: - *OWNERS <https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/structured-merge-diff/blob/master/OWNERS>* Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#258 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAAERASG6WD4BZLFZN5RSD3ZEZBF3AVCNFSM6AAAAABHXQIVHWVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDCMZYGI4DIMJQG4> . You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[apelisse]

/approve

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: apelisse, com6056, jpbetz

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [apelisse]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment