bito-code-review[bot] commented on code in PR #44406:
URL: https://github.com/apache/superset/pull/44406#discussion_r4170191341
##########
tests/unit_tests/common/test_query_context_processor.py:
##########
@@ -117,25 +118,259 @@ def processor(mock_query_context):
return processor
-def test_query_cache_key_binds_annotation_data_to_requesting_user(processor):
- """The cache key for annotated queries must differ per requesting user."""
+def test_annotation_cache_key_binds_native_annotation_read_scope(processor) ->
None:
+ """The annotation cache key for NATIVE layers must differ when the
+ requester's ``can_read`` (Annotation) access differs -- not who they
are."""
query_obj = MagicMock()
query_obj.annotation_layers = [{"sourceType": "NATIVE", "name": "a",
"value": 1}]
- with (
- patch(
- "superset.common.query_context_processor.get_user_id",
- side_effect=[1, 2],
- ),
- patch("superset.common.query_context_processor.security_manager"),
- ):
- processor.query_cache_key(query_obj)
- processor.query_cache_key(query_obj)
+ # ``security_manager`` autodetects as an async spec under a bare
+ # ``patch()`` (its real object trips ``unittest.mock``'s coroutine
+ # inference), which would silently turn every attribute access into an
+ # ``AsyncMock`` returning a fresh unawaited coroutine per call -- always
+ # unequal to itself and never equal to a configured return value. Forcing
+ # ``new_callable=MagicMock`` keeps these synchronous, as the real object
+ # is.
+ with patch(
+ "superset.common.query_context_processor.security_manager",
+ new_callable=MagicMock,
+ ) as security_manager:
+ security_manager.can_access.side_effect = [True, False]
+ processor.annotation_cache_key(query_obj)
+ processor.annotation_cache_key(query_obj)
contexts = [
call.kwargs["annotation_context"] for call in
query_obj.cache_key.call_args_list
]
assert contexts[0] != contexts[1]
+def test_annotation_cache_key_shares_across_same_access_scope() -> None:
+ """Two distinct requesters (separate processor/query-object instances,
+ standing in for two different requests) with identical access scope must
+ produce identical annotation-context material. Reusing a single
+ processor/query_obj across both calls (as this test previously did)
+ would pass trivially regardless of whether the key is scope-based or
+ identity-based, since nothing about "who's asking" would ever vary."""
+ layer = {"sourceType": "NATIVE", "name": "a", "value": 1}
+ processor_a = QueryContextProcessor(MagicMock())
+ processor_b = QueryContextProcessor(MagicMock())
+ query_obj_a = MagicMock(annotation_layers=[layer])
+ query_obj_b = MagicMock(annotation_layers=[layer])
+
+ with patch(
+ "superset.common.query_context_processor.security_manager",
+ new_callable=MagicMock,
+ ) as security_manager:
+ security_manager.can_access.return_value = True
+ context_a = processor_a._annotation_cache_context(query_obj_a)
+ context_b = processor_b._annotation_cache_context(query_obj_b)
+
+ assert context_a == context_b
+
+
+def test_query_cache_key_does_not_bind_annotation_scope(processor) -> None:
+ """The dataframe cache key must stay shared across viewers of the same
+ chart, even when the query has annotation layers — only the separate
+ annotation cache key (see above) carries access-scope material."""
+ query_obj = MagicMock()
+ query_obj.annotation_layers = [{"sourceType": "NATIVE", "name": "a",
"value": 1}]
+ with patch(
+ "superset.common.query_context_processor.security_manager",
+ new_callable=MagicMock,
+ ):
+ processor.query_cache_key(query_obj)
+ processor.query_cache_key(query_obj)
+ for call in query_obj.cache_key.call_args_list:
+ assert "annotation_context" not in call.kwargs
+
+
[email protected]
+def mock_annotation_chart() -> Iterator[MagicMock]:
+ """A found chart, wired as the referenced chart for
+ ``_annotation_source_scope`` tests -- factors out the repeated
+ ``ChartDAO.find_by_id`` patch those tests all need."""
+ chart = MagicMock()
+ with patch(
+ "superset.common.query_context_processor.ChartDAO.find_by_id",
+ return_value=chart,
+ ):
+ yield chart
+
+
+def test_annotation_source_scope_binds_datasource_access(
+ processor, mock_annotation_chart
+) -> None:
+ """A chart-backed annotation layer's scope must differ when the
+ requester's access to the referenced datasource differs."""
+ mock_annotation_chart.get_query_context.return_value = None
+ with patch(
+ "superset.common.query_context_processor.security_manager",
+ new_callable=MagicMock,
+ ) as security_manager:
+ security_manager.can_access_datasource.side_effect = [True, False]
+ security_manager.get_rls_cache_key.return_value = []
+ scope_a = processor._annotation_source_scope({"value": 1})
+ scope_b = processor._annotation_source_scope({"value": 1})
+ assert scope_a != scope_b
+ assert scope_a["access"] is True
+ assert scope_b["access"] is False
+
+
+def test_annotation_source_scope_reuses_referenced_chart_cache_key(
+ processor, mock_annotation_chart
+) -> None:
+ """When the referenced chart has a saved query context, its own cache
+ key(s) -- covering RLS and per-user Jinja/virtual-dataset material -- are
+ reused rather than re-derived."""
+ mock_query_object = MagicMock()
+ mock_query_context = MagicMock()
+ mock_query_context.queries = [mock_query_object]
+ mock_query_context.query_cache_key.return_value = "referenced-chart-key"
+ mock_annotation_chart.get_query_context.return_value = mock_query_context
+ with patch(
+ "superset.common.query_context_processor.security_manager",
+ new_callable=MagicMock,
+ ) as security_manager:
+ security_manager.can_access_datasource.return_value = True
+ scope = processor._annotation_source_scope({"value": 1})
+ assert scope == {"access": True, "data_key": ["referenced-chart-key"]}
+
mock_query_context.query_cache_key.assert_called_once_with(mock_query_object)
+
+
+def test_annotation_source_scope_uses_live_fetch_authorization(
+ processor, mock_annotation_chart
+) -> None:
Review Comment:
<div>
<div id="suggestion">
<div id="issue"><b>Fixture params unannotated</b></div>
<div id="fix">
Same BITO 11810/12490 violation as the first test (line 218): the
fixture-injected parameters `processor` and `mock_annotation_chart` in this new
test function lack explicit type annotations. Both types are already imported
in this module.
</div>
</div>
<small><i>Code Review Run #a2d0a6</i></small>
</div>
---
Should Bito avoid suggestions like this for future reviews? (<a
href=https://alpha.bito.ai/home/ai-agents/review-rules>Manage Rules</a>)
- [ ] Yes, avoid them
##########
tests/unit_tests/common/test_query_context_processor.py:
##########
@@ -117,25 +118,259 @@ def processor(mock_query_context):
return processor
-def test_query_cache_key_binds_annotation_data_to_requesting_user(processor):
- """The cache key for annotated queries must differ per requesting user."""
+def test_annotation_cache_key_binds_native_annotation_read_scope(processor) ->
None:
+ """The annotation cache key for NATIVE layers must differ when the
+ requester's ``can_read`` (Annotation) access differs -- not who they
are."""
query_obj = MagicMock()
query_obj.annotation_layers = [{"sourceType": "NATIVE", "name": "a",
"value": 1}]
- with (
- patch(
- "superset.common.query_context_processor.get_user_id",
- side_effect=[1, 2],
- ),
- patch("superset.common.query_context_processor.security_manager"),
- ):
- processor.query_cache_key(query_obj)
- processor.query_cache_key(query_obj)
+ # ``security_manager`` autodetects as an async spec under a bare
+ # ``patch()`` (its real object trips ``unittest.mock``'s coroutine
+ # inference), which would silently turn every attribute access into an
+ # ``AsyncMock`` returning a fresh unawaited coroutine per call -- always
+ # unequal to itself and never equal to a configured return value. Forcing
+ # ``new_callable=MagicMock`` keeps these synchronous, as the real object
+ # is.
+ with patch(
+ "superset.common.query_context_processor.security_manager",
+ new_callable=MagicMock,
+ ) as security_manager:
+ security_manager.can_access.side_effect = [True, False]
+ processor.annotation_cache_key(query_obj)
+ processor.annotation_cache_key(query_obj)
contexts = [
call.kwargs["annotation_context"] for call in
query_obj.cache_key.call_args_list
]
assert contexts[0] != contexts[1]
+def test_annotation_cache_key_shares_across_same_access_scope() -> None:
+ """Two distinct requesters (separate processor/query-object instances,
+ standing in for two different requests) with identical access scope must
+ produce identical annotation-context material. Reusing a single
+ processor/query_obj across both calls (as this test previously did)
+ would pass trivially regardless of whether the key is scope-based or
+ identity-based, since nothing about "who's asking" would ever vary."""
+ layer = {"sourceType": "NATIVE", "name": "a", "value": 1}
+ processor_a = QueryContextProcessor(MagicMock())
+ processor_b = QueryContextProcessor(MagicMock())
+ query_obj_a = MagicMock(annotation_layers=[layer])
+ query_obj_b = MagicMock(annotation_layers=[layer])
+
+ with patch(
+ "superset.common.query_context_processor.security_manager",
+ new_callable=MagicMock,
+ ) as security_manager:
+ security_manager.can_access.return_value = True
+ context_a = processor_a._annotation_cache_context(query_obj_a)
+ context_b = processor_b._annotation_cache_context(query_obj_b)
+
+ assert context_a == context_b
+
+
+def test_query_cache_key_does_not_bind_annotation_scope(processor) -> None:
+ """The dataframe cache key must stay shared across viewers of the same
+ chart, even when the query has annotation layers — only the separate
+ annotation cache key (see above) carries access-scope material."""
+ query_obj = MagicMock()
+ query_obj.annotation_layers = [{"sourceType": "NATIVE", "name": "a",
"value": 1}]
+ with patch(
+ "superset.common.query_context_processor.security_manager",
+ new_callable=MagicMock,
+ ):
+ processor.query_cache_key(query_obj)
+ processor.query_cache_key(query_obj)
+ for call in query_obj.cache_key.call_args_list:
+ assert "annotation_context" not in call.kwargs
+
+
[email protected]
+def mock_annotation_chart() -> Iterator[MagicMock]:
+ """A found chart, wired as the referenced chart for
+ ``_annotation_source_scope`` tests -- factors out the repeated
+ ``ChartDAO.find_by_id`` patch those tests all need."""
+ chart = MagicMock()
+ with patch(
+ "superset.common.query_context_processor.ChartDAO.find_by_id",
+ return_value=chart,
+ ):
+ yield chart
+
+
+def test_annotation_source_scope_binds_datasource_access(
+ processor, mock_annotation_chart
+) -> None:
+ """A chart-backed annotation layer's scope must differ when the
+ requester's access to the referenced datasource differs."""
+ mock_annotation_chart.get_query_context.return_value = None
+ with patch(
+ "superset.common.query_context_processor.security_manager",
+ new_callable=MagicMock,
+ ) as security_manager:
+ security_manager.can_access_datasource.side_effect = [True, False]
+ security_manager.get_rls_cache_key.return_value = []
+ scope_a = processor._annotation_source_scope({"value": 1})
+ scope_b = processor._annotation_source_scope({"value": 1})
+ assert scope_a != scope_b
+ assert scope_a["access"] is True
+ assert scope_b["access"] is False
+
+
+def test_annotation_source_scope_reuses_referenced_chart_cache_key(
+ processor, mock_annotation_chart
+) -> None:
Review Comment:
<div>
<div id="suggestion">
<div id="issue"><b>Fixture params unannotated</b></div>
<div id="fix">
BITO adaptive rules 11810/12490 require explicit type annotations on
fixture-injected parameters in new test functions. `processor` and
`mock_annotation_chart` are unannotated here (the same pattern repeats at line
239). Both types are already imported in this module, so the annotation is a
one-line change per test.
</div>
</div>
<small><i>Code Review Run #a2d0a6</i></small>
</div>
---
Should Bito avoid suggestions like this for future reviews? (<a
href=https://alpha.bito.ai/home/ai-agents/review-rules>Manage Rules</a>)
- [ ] Yes, avoid them
##########
tests/unit_tests/common/test_query_context_processor.py:
##########
@@ -2630,6 +3041,94 @@ def
test_mark_force_executed_noop_without_nonce(processor, mock_query_context):
cache_manager.data_cache.set.assert_not_called()
+# =============================================================================
+# Annotation-data cache decoupled from the dataframe cache
+# =============================================================================
+
+
+def test_get_annotation_data_cached_reads_from_cache(processor):
Review Comment:
<div>
<div id="suggestion">
<div id="issue"><b>Missing return type hints</b></div>
<div id="fix">
BITO.md adaptive rules 7819/12898 require explicit return type annotations
on all new test functions. The three new tests here (lines 3049, 3068, 3092)
omit `-> None`, unlike the 12 annotated tests already in this file. Adding `->
None` keeps the file consistent with the mandated standard and lets static
checks verify test contracts.
</div>
</div>
<small><i>Code Review Run #a2d0a6</i></small>
</div>
---
Should Bito avoid suggestions like this for future reviews? (<a
href=https://alpha.bito.ai/home/ai-agents/review-rules>Manage Rules</a>)
- [ ] Yes, avoid them
##########
tests/unit_tests/common/test_query_context_processor.py:
##########
@@ -117,25 +118,259 @@ def processor(mock_query_context):
return processor
-def test_query_cache_key_binds_annotation_data_to_requesting_user(processor):
- """The cache key for annotated queries must differ per requesting user."""
+def test_annotation_cache_key_binds_native_annotation_read_scope(processor) ->
None:
+ """The annotation cache key for NATIVE layers must differ when the
+ requester's ``can_read`` (Annotation) access differs -- not who they
are."""
query_obj = MagicMock()
query_obj.annotation_layers = [{"sourceType": "NATIVE", "name": "a",
"value": 1}]
- with (
- patch(
- "superset.common.query_context_processor.get_user_id",
- side_effect=[1, 2],
- ),
- patch("superset.common.query_context_processor.security_manager"),
- ):
- processor.query_cache_key(query_obj)
- processor.query_cache_key(query_obj)
+ # ``security_manager`` autodetects as an async spec under a bare
+ # ``patch()`` (its real object trips ``unittest.mock``'s coroutine
+ # inference), which would silently turn every attribute access into an
+ # ``AsyncMock`` returning a fresh unawaited coroutine per call -- always
+ # unequal to itself and never equal to a configured return value. Forcing
+ # ``new_callable=MagicMock`` keeps these synchronous, as the real object
+ # is.
+ with patch(
+ "superset.common.query_context_processor.security_manager",
+ new_callable=MagicMock,
+ ) as security_manager:
+ security_manager.can_access.side_effect = [True, False]
+ processor.annotation_cache_key(query_obj)
+ processor.annotation_cache_key(query_obj)
contexts = [
call.kwargs["annotation_context"] for call in
query_obj.cache_key.call_args_list
]
assert contexts[0] != contexts[1]
+def test_annotation_cache_key_shares_across_same_access_scope() -> None:
+ """Two distinct requesters (separate processor/query-object instances,
+ standing in for two different requests) with identical access scope must
+ produce identical annotation-context material. Reusing a single
+ processor/query_obj across both calls (as this test previously did)
+ would pass trivially regardless of whether the key is scope-based or
+ identity-based, since nothing about "who's asking" would ever vary."""
+ layer = {"sourceType": "NATIVE", "name": "a", "value": 1}
+ processor_a = QueryContextProcessor(MagicMock())
+ processor_b = QueryContextProcessor(MagicMock())
+ query_obj_a = MagicMock(annotation_layers=[layer])
+ query_obj_b = MagicMock(annotation_layers=[layer])
+
+ with patch(
+ "superset.common.query_context_processor.security_manager",
+ new_callable=MagicMock,
+ ) as security_manager:
+ security_manager.can_access.return_value = True
+ context_a = processor_a._annotation_cache_context(query_obj_a)
+ context_b = processor_b._annotation_cache_context(query_obj_b)
+
+ assert context_a == context_b
+
+
+def test_query_cache_key_does_not_bind_annotation_scope(processor) -> None:
+ """The dataframe cache key must stay shared across viewers of the same
+ chart, even when the query has annotation layers — only the separate
+ annotation cache key (see above) carries access-scope material."""
+ query_obj = MagicMock()
+ query_obj.annotation_layers = [{"sourceType": "NATIVE", "name": "a",
"value": 1}]
+ with patch(
+ "superset.common.query_context_processor.security_manager",
+ new_callable=MagicMock,
+ ):
+ processor.query_cache_key(query_obj)
+ processor.query_cache_key(query_obj)
+ for call in query_obj.cache_key.call_args_list:
+ assert "annotation_context" not in call.kwargs
+
+
[email protected]
+def mock_annotation_chart() -> Iterator[MagicMock]:
+ """A found chart, wired as the referenced chart for
+ ``_annotation_source_scope`` tests -- factors out the repeated
+ ``ChartDAO.find_by_id`` patch those tests all need."""
+ chart = MagicMock()
+ with patch(
+ "superset.common.query_context_processor.ChartDAO.find_by_id",
+ return_value=chart,
+ ):
+ yield chart
+
+
+def test_annotation_source_scope_binds_datasource_access(
+ processor, mock_annotation_chart
+) -> None:
+ """A chart-backed annotation layer's scope must differ when the
+ requester's access to the referenced datasource differs."""
+ mock_annotation_chart.get_query_context.return_value = None
+ with patch(
+ "superset.common.query_context_processor.security_manager",
+ new_callable=MagicMock,
+ ) as security_manager:
+ security_manager.can_access_datasource.side_effect = [True, False]
+ security_manager.get_rls_cache_key.return_value = []
+ scope_a = processor._annotation_source_scope({"value": 1})
+ scope_b = processor._annotation_source_scope({"value": 1})
+ assert scope_a != scope_b
+ assert scope_a["access"] is True
+ assert scope_b["access"] is False
+
+
+def test_annotation_source_scope_reuses_referenced_chart_cache_key(
+ processor, mock_annotation_chart
+) -> None:
+ """When the referenced chart has a saved query context, its own cache
+ key(s) -- covering RLS and per-user Jinja/virtual-dataset material -- are
+ reused rather than re-derived."""
+ mock_query_object = MagicMock()
+ mock_query_context = MagicMock()
+ mock_query_context.queries = [mock_query_object]
+ mock_query_context.query_cache_key.return_value = "referenced-chart-key"
+ mock_annotation_chart.get_query_context.return_value = mock_query_context
+ with patch(
+ "superset.common.query_context_processor.security_manager",
+ new_callable=MagicMock,
+ ) as security_manager:
+ security_manager.can_access_datasource.return_value = True
+ scope = processor._annotation_source_scope({"value": 1})
+ assert scope == {"access": True, "data_key": ["referenced-chart-key"]}
+
mock_query_context.query_cache_key.assert_called_once_with(mock_query_object)
+
+
+def test_annotation_source_scope_uses_live_fetch_authorization(
+ processor, mock_annotation_chart
+) -> None:
+ """When the referenced chart has a saved query context, ``access`` must
+ come from that context's own ``raise_for_access`` -- the same
+ authorization path the live fetch in ``get_viz_annotation_data`` uses --
+ not the coarser, context-free ``can_access_datasource``. A requester
+ denied by ``can_access_datasource`` but granted via a bypass that depends
+ on the chart's own saved form_data (e.g. a dashboard/viewer-promiscuous
+ bypass) must get a scope distinct from one truly denied, or the latter
+ could read the former's cached payload."""
+ from superset.exceptions import SupersetSecurityException
Review Comment:
<div>
<div id="suggestion">
<div id="issue"><b>Inline import unjustified</b></div>
<div id="fix">
BITO adaptive rule 12745 requires module-level imports unless a documented
circular dependency exists. `SupersetSecurityException` is imported inside the
test body, yet `superset.exceptions` is already imported at module level (line
35 of this file), so no circular dependency is possible — extend that import
instead.
</div>
</div>
<small><i>Code Review Run #a2d0a6</i></small>
</div>
---
Should Bito avoid suggestions like this for future reviews? (<a
href=https://alpha.bito.ai/home/ai-agents/review-rules>Manage Rules</a>)
- [ ] Yes, avoid them
##########
tests/unit_tests/common/test_query_context_processor.py:
##########
@@ -2630,6 +3041,94 @@ def
test_mark_force_executed_noop_without_nonce(processor, mock_query_context):
cache_manager.data_cache.set.assert_not_called()
+# =============================================================================
+# Annotation-data cache decoupled from the dataframe cache
+# =============================================================================
+
+
+def test_get_annotation_data_cached_reads_from_cache(processor):
+ """A hit on the annotation-specific key skips recomputation entirely."""
+ with patch(
+ "superset.common.query_context_processor.cache_manager"
+ ) as cache_manager:
+ cache_manager.data_cache.get.return_value = {"annotation_data": {"a":
1}}
+ with patch.object(processor, "get_annotation_data") as mock_get:
+ result = processor._get_annotation_data_cached(
+ query_obj=MagicMock(),
+ cache_key="ak",
+ force_query=False,
+ force_cached=False,
+ timeout=60,
+ datasource_uid="ds",
+ )
+ assert result == {"a": 1}
+ mock_get.assert_not_called()
+
+
+def test_get_annotation_data_cached_computes_and_caches_on_miss(processor):
Review Comment:
<div>
<div id="suggestion">
<div id="issue"><b>Missing test docstring</b></div>
<div id="fix">
BITO.md adaptive rule 12148 requires every new test function to carry a
docstring; the sibling tests in this same diff (`..._reads_from_cache`,
`..._force_cached_raises_on_miss`) have one, but
`test_get_annotation_data_cached_computes_and_caches_on_miss` does not. Adding
a one-line docstring keeps test intent visible and consistent across the
section.
</div>
</div>
<small><i>Code Review Run #a2d0a6</i></small>
</div>
---
Should Bito avoid suggestions like this for future reviews? (<a
href=https://alpha.bito.ai/home/ai-agents/review-rules>Manage Rules</a>)
- [ ] Yes, avoid them
##########
tests/unit_tests/common/test_query_context_processor.py:
##########
@@ -117,25 +118,259 @@ def processor(mock_query_context):
return processor
-def test_query_cache_key_binds_annotation_data_to_requesting_user(processor):
- """The cache key for annotated queries must differ per requesting user."""
+def test_annotation_cache_key_binds_native_annotation_read_scope(processor) ->
None:
+ """The annotation cache key for NATIVE layers must differ when the
+ requester's ``can_read`` (Annotation) access differs -- not who they
are."""
query_obj = MagicMock()
query_obj.annotation_layers = [{"sourceType": "NATIVE", "name": "a",
"value": 1}]
- with (
- patch(
- "superset.common.query_context_processor.get_user_id",
- side_effect=[1, 2],
- ),
- patch("superset.common.query_context_processor.security_manager"),
- ):
- processor.query_cache_key(query_obj)
- processor.query_cache_key(query_obj)
+ # ``security_manager`` autodetects as an async spec under a bare
+ # ``patch()`` (its real object trips ``unittest.mock``'s coroutine
+ # inference), which would silently turn every attribute access into an
+ # ``AsyncMock`` returning a fresh unawaited coroutine per call -- always
+ # unequal to itself and never equal to a configured return value. Forcing
+ # ``new_callable=MagicMock`` keeps these synchronous, as the real object
+ # is.
+ with patch(
+ "superset.common.query_context_processor.security_manager",
+ new_callable=MagicMock,
+ ) as security_manager:
+ security_manager.can_access.side_effect = [True, False]
+ processor.annotation_cache_key(query_obj)
+ processor.annotation_cache_key(query_obj)
contexts = [
call.kwargs["annotation_context"] for call in
query_obj.cache_key.call_args_list
]
assert contexts[0] != contexts[1]
+def test_annotation_cache_key_shares_across_same_access_scope() -> None:
+ """Two distinct requesters (separate processor/query-object instances,
+ standing in for two different requests) with identical access scope must
+ produce identical annotation-context material. Reusing a single
+ processor/query_obj across both calls (as this test previously did)
+ would pass trivially regardless of whether the key is scope-based or
+ identity-based, since nothing about "who's asking" would ever vary."""
+ layer = {"sourceType": "NATIVE", "name": "a", "value": 1}
+ processor_a = QueryContextProcessor(MagicMock())
+ processor_b = QueryContextProcessor(MagicMock())
+ query_obj_a = MagicMock(annotation_layers=[layer])
+ query_obj_b = MagicMock(annotation_layers=[layer])
+
+ with patch(
+ "superset.common.query_context_processor.security_manager",
+ new_callable=MagicMock,
+ ) as security_manager:
+ security_manager.can_access.return_value = True
+ context_a = processor_a._annotation_cache_context(query_obj_a)
+ context_b = processor_b._annotation_cache_context(query_obj_b)
+
+ assert context_a == context_b
+
+
+def test_query_cache_key_does_not_bind_annotation_scope(processor) -> None:
+ """The dataframe cache key must stay shared across viewers of the same
+ chart, even when the query has annotation layers — only the separate
+ annotation cache key (see above) carries access-scope material."""
+ query_obj = MagicMock()
+ query_obj.annotation_layers = [{"sourceType": "NATIVE", "name": "a",
"value": 1}]
+ with patch(
+ "superset.common.query_context_processor.security_manager",
+ new_callable=MagicMock,
+ ):
+ processor.query_cache_key(query_obj)
+ processor.query_cache_key(query_obj)
+ for call in query_obj.cache_key.call_args_list:
+ assert "annotation_context" not in call.kwargs
+
+
[email protected]
+def mock_annotation_chart() -> Iterator[MagicMock]:
+ """A found chart, wired as the referenced chart for
+ ``_annotation_source_scope`` tests -- factors out the repeated
+ ``ChartDAO.find_by_id`` patch those tests all need."""
+ chart = MagicMock()
+ with patch(
+ "superset.common.query_context_processor.ChartDAO.find_by_id",
+ return_value=chart,
+ ):
+ yield chart
+
+
+def test_annotation_source_scope_binds_datasource_access(
+ processor, mock_annotation_chart
+) -> None:
+ """A chart-backed annotation layer's scope must differ when the
+ requester's access to the referenced datasource differs."""
+ mock_annotation_chart.get_query_context.return_value = None
+ with patch(
+ "superset.common.query_context_processor.security_manager",
+ new_callable=MagicMock,
+ ) as security_manager:
+ security_manager.can_access_datasource.side_effect = [True, False]
+ security_manager.get_rls_cache_key.return_value = []
+ scope_a = processor._annotation_source_scope({"value": 1})
+ scope_b = processor._annotation_source_scope({"value": 1})
+ assert scope_a != scope_b
+ assert scope_a["access"] is True
+ assert scope_b["access"] is False
+
+
+def test_annotation_source_scope_reuses_referenced_chart_cache_key(
+ processor, mock_annotation_chart
+) -> None:
+ """When the referenced chart has a saved query context, its own cache
+ key(s) -- covering RLS and per-user Jinja/virtual-dataset material -- are
+ reused rather than re-derived."""
+ mock_query_object = MagicMock()
+ mock_query_context = MagicMock()
+ mock_query_context.queries = [mock_query_object]
+ mock_query_context.query_cache_key.return_value = "referenced-chart-key"
+ mock_annotation_chart.get_query_context.return_value = mock_query_context
+ with patch(
+ "superset.common.query_context_processor.security_manager",
+ new_callable=MagicMock,
+ ) as security_manager:
+ security_manager.can_access_datasource.return_value = True
+ scope = processor._annotation_source_scope({"value": 1})
+ assert scope == {"access": True, "data_key": ["referenced-chart-key"]}
+
mock_query_context.query_cache_key.assert_called_once_with(mock_query_object)
+
+
+def test_annotation_source_scope_uses_live_fetch_authorization(
+ processor, mock_annotation_chart
+) -> None:
+ """When the referenced chart has a saved query context, ``access`` must
+ come from that context's own ``raise_for_access`` -- the same
+ authorization path the live fetch in ``get_viz_annotation_data`` uses --
+ not the coarser, context-free ``can_access_datasource``. A requester
+ denied by ``can_access_datasource`` but granted via a bypass that depends
+ on the chart's own saved form_data (e.g. a dashboard/viewer-promiscuous
+ bypass) must get a scope distinct from one truly denied, or the latter
+ could read the former's cached payload."""
+ from superset.exceptions import SupersetSecurityException
+
+ mock_query_object = MagicMock()
+ mock_query_context = MagicMock()
Review Comment:
<div>
<div id="suggestion">
<div id="issue"><b>Mock vars unannotated</b></div>
<div id="fix">
Same BITO 12787 violation as lines 224-225: `mock_query_object` and
`mock_query_context` are bare `MagicMock()` assignments in this new test.
Annotating keeps the mock type visible to readers and static checkers.
</div>
</div>
<small><i>Code Review Run #a2d0a6</i></small>
</div>
---
Should Bito avoid suggestions like this for future reviews? (<a
href=https://alpha.bito.ai/home/ai-agents/review-rules>Manage Rules</a>)
- [ ] Yes, avoid them
##########
tests/unit_tests/common/test_query_context_processor.py:
##########
@@ -117,25 +118,259 @@ def processor(mock_query_context):
return processor
-def test_query_cache_key_binds_annotation_data_to_requesting_user(processor):
- """The cache key for annotated queries must differ per requesting user."""
+def test_annotation_cache_key_binds_native_annotation_read_scope(processor) ->
None:
+ """The annotation cache key for NATIVE layers must differ when the
+ requester's ``can_read`` (Annotation) access differs -- not who they
are."""
query_obj = MagicMock()
query_obj.annotation_layers = [{"sourceType": "NATIVE", "name": "a",
"value": 1}]
- with (
- patch(
- "superset.common.query_context_processor.get_user_id",
- side_effect=[1, 2],
- ),
- patch("superset.common.query_context_processor.security_manager"),
- ):
- processor.query_cache_key(query_obj)
- processor.query_cache_key(query_obj)
+ # ``security_manager`` autodetects as an async spec under a bare
+ # ``patch()`` (its real object trips ``unittest.mock``'s coroutine
+ # inference), which would silently turn every attribute access into an
+ # ``AsyncMock`` returning a fresh unawaited coroutine per call -- always
+ # unequal to itself and never equal to a configured return value. Forcing
+ # ``new_callable=MagicMock`` keeps these synchronous, as the real object
+ # is.
+ with patch(
+ "superset.common.query_context_processor.security_manager",
+ new_callable=MagicMock,
+ ) as security_manager:
+ security_manager.can_access.side_effect = [True, False]
+ processor.annotation_cache_key(query_obj)
+ processor.annotation_cache_key(query_obj)
contexts = [
call.kwargs["annotation_context"] for call in
query_obj.cache_key.call_args_list
]
assert contexts[0] != contexts[1]
+def test_annotation_cache_key_shares_across_same_access_scope() -> None:
+ """Two distinct requesters (separate processor/query-object instances,
+ standing in for two different requests) with identical access scope must
+ produce identical annotation-context material. Reusing a single
+ processor/query_obj across both calls (as this test previously did)
+ would pass trivially regardless of whether the key is scope-based or
+ identity-based, since nothing about "who's asking" would ever vary."""
+ layer = {"sourceType": "NATIVE", "name": "a", "value": 1}
+ processor_a = QueryContextProcessor(MagicMock())
+ processor_b = QueryContextProcessor(MagicMock())
+ query_obj_a = MagicMock(annotation_layers=[layer])
+ query_obj_b = MagicMock(annotation_layers=[layer])
+
+ with patch(
+ "superset.common.query_context_processor.security_manager",
+ new_callable=MagicMock,
+ ) as security_manager:
+ security_manager.can_access.return_value = True
+ context_a = processor_a._annotation_cache_context(query_obj_a)
+ context_b = processor_b._annotation_cache_context(query_obj_b)
+
+ assert context_a == context_b
+
+
+def test_query_cache_key_does_not_bind_annotation_scope(processor) -> None:
+ """The dataframe cache key must stay shared across viewers of the same
+ chart, even when the query has annotation layers — only the separate
+ annotation cache key (see above) carries access-scope material."""
+ query_obj = MagicMock()
+ query_obj.annotation_layers = [{"sourceType": "NATIVE", "name": "a",
"value": 1}]
+ with patch(
+ "superset.common.query_context_processor.security_manager",
+ new_callable=MagicMock,
+ ):
+ processor.query_cache_key(query_obj)
+ processor.query_cache_key(query_obj)
+ for call in query_obj.cache_key.call_args_list:
+ assert "annotation_context" not in call.kwargs
+
+
[email protected]
+def mock_annotation_chart() -> Iterator[MagicMock]:
+ """A found chart, wired as the referenced chart for
+ ``_annotation_source_scope`` tests -- factors out the repeated
+ ``ChartDAO.find_by_id`` patch those tests all need."""
+ chart = MagicMock()
+ with patch(
+ "superset.common.query_context_processor.ChartDAO.find_by_id",
+ return_value=chart,
+ ):
+ yield chart
+
+
+def test_annotation_source_scope_binds_datasource_access(
+ processor, mock_annotation_chart
+) -> None:
+ """A chart-backed annotation layer's scope must differ when the
+ requester's access to the referenced datasource differs."""
+ mock_annotation_chart.get_query_context.return_value = None
+ with patch(
+ "superset.common.query_context_processor.security_manager",
+ new_callable=MagicMock,
+ ) as security_manager:
+ security_manager.can_access_datasource.side_effect = [True, False]
+ security_manager.get_rls_cache_key.return_value = []
+ scope_a = processor._annotation_source_scope({"value": 1})
+ scope_b = processor._annotation_source_scope({"value": 1})
+ assert scope_a != scope_b
+ assert scope_a["access"] is True
+ assert scope_b["access"] is False
+
+
+def test_annotation_source_scope_reuses_referenced_chart_cache_key(
+ processor, mock_annotation_chart
+) -> None:
+ """When the referenced chart has a saved query context, its own cache
+ key(s) -- covering RLS and per-user Jinja/virtual-dataset material -- are
+ reused rather than re-derived."""
+ mock_query_object = MagicMock()
+ mock_query_context = MagicMock()
Review Comment:
<div>
<div id="suggestion">
<div id="issue"><b>Mock vars unannotated</b></div>
<div id="fix">
BITO adaptive rule 12787 requires explicit `: MagicMock` annotations on mock
variables in test files. `mock_query_object` and `mock_query_context` are bare
assignments here; the identical pattern repeats at lines 252-253 in the second
test. Annotating keeps the mock type visible to readers and static checkers.
</div>
</div>
<small><i>Code Review Run #a2d0a6</i></small>
</div>
---
Should Bito avoid suggestions like this for future reviews? (<a
href=https://alpha.bito.ai/home/ai-agents/review-rules>Manage Rules</a>)
- [ ] Yes, avoid them
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
