Fix HEAD requests for static content #4813
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
FileResponse directly injects the response into the socket with sendfile() (if it can), which bypasses the checks in Response that prevent any content being sent for HEAD requests and for 204 (No Content) and 304 (Not Modified) responses. I've duplicated that logic into FileResponse. I'm not sure if the status checks are actually applicable (since StaticResource already has its own handling for Not Modified) and I don't currently have any tests for them. Closes aio-libs#4809.
psf-chronographer
bot
added
the
bot:chronographer:provided
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #4813 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 97.60% 97.60%
=======================================
Files 43 43
Lines 8932 8934 +2
Branches 1406 1407 +1
=======================================
+ Hits 8718 8720 +2
Misses 95 95
Partials 119 119
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
StreamWriter.wait_closed doesn't exist on 3.6.
asvetlov
approved these changes
Oct 15, 2020
💔 Backport was not successfulThe PR was attempted backported to the following branches:
|
asvetlov
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 15, 2020
* Fix HEAD requests for static content FileResponse directly injects the response into the socket with sendfile() (if it can), which bypasses the checks in Response that prevent any content being sent for HEAD requests and for 204 (No Content) and 304 (Not Modified) responses. I've duplicated that logic into FileResponse. I'm not sure if the status checks are actually applicable (since StaticResource already has its own handling for Not Modified) and I don't currently have any tests for them. Closes #4809.
asvetlov
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 16, 2020
* Fix HEAD requests for static content FileResponse directly injects the response into the socket with sendfile() (if it can), which bypasses the checks in Response that prevent any content being sent for HEAD requests and for 204 (No Content) and 304 (Not Modified) responses. I've duplicated that logic into FileResponse. I'm not sure if the status checks are actually applicable (since StaticResource already has its own handling for Not Modified) and I don't currently have any tests for them. Closes #4809.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
What do these changes do?
It makes HEAD requests work correctly for static resources.
FileResponse directly injects the response into the socket with
sendfile() (if it can), which bypasses the checks in Response that
prevent any content being sent for HEAD requests and for 204 (No
Content) and 304 (Not Modified) responses. I've duplicated that logic
into FileResponse. I'm not sure if the status checks are actually
applicable (since StaticResource already has its own handling for Not
Modified) and I don't currently have any tests for them.
Are there changes in behavior for the user?
Bugfix only.
Related issue number
#4809
Checklist
CONTRIBUTORS.txtCHANGESfolder<issue_id>.<type>for example (588.bugfix)issue_idchange it to the pr id after creating the pr.feature: Signifying a new feature..bugfix: Signifying a bug fix..doc: Signifying a documentation improvement..removal: Signifying a deprecation or removal of public API..misc: A ticket has been closed, but it is not of interest to users.