[Self-hosted] Flags filtering is broken in the Tree view/Code tree/File list, when flag_regexes is added in component_management

[nikosatwork]

Describe the bug [Self-hosted] Flags filtering is broken in the Tree view/Code tree/File list, when flag_regexes is added in component_management entries

Environment (please complete the following information):

• Browser: All
• System: CI, UI
• Version: 25.1.16, 25.1.3, 25.3.3

To Reproduce Steps to reproduce the behavior:

1. Setup a component(s) in component_management in codecov.yml, using both paths and flag_regexes, or just flag_regexes
2. Upload a new report that targets the component, as expected
3. Having selected the component in the Codecov dashboard > in Tree view, the coverage percentage is correct, based on the flag_regex and path ~union~ intersection.
4. Still in the Tree view and having selected any flag in the Flags dropdown, the coverage percentage is wrong, and represents the total coverage, regardless the Component filter.

Expected behavior Having selected a flag in the Flags dropdown, the coverage percentage is calculated based on the ~union~ intersection of the path and flag_regex in component_management, or just the flag_regex when the path is not specified, and the flag(s) selected.

[nikosatwork]

Hi team. Have you had a chance to look at this issue? Thanks.

[spalmurray-codecov]

Hi @nikosatwork! Thanks for the bug report and sorry for the delay in getting back to you on this. I've added the bug label and this should get assigned for an upcoming sprint.

[spalmurray-codecov]

This actually looks like a duplicate of this: https://github.com/codecov/engineering-team/issues/2765

I will follow up with the relevant folks about the status here.

[nikosatwork]

Thank you @spalmurray-codecov. I am not sure how the issue you linked above is related. Could you please explain in case I missed the connection?

[spalmurray-codecov]

Np @nikosatwork! Given the context in the other issue, I'm lead to believe your issue is also caused by us not supporting file coverage filtered by flag. I don't think the component is relevant. To confirm this I'd think that, after your steps to reproduce, when you deselect the component and have only flags selected, the coverage shown does not change. (You may have actually tested this already if I'm reading what you've said correctly)

Please let me know if you think I'm misunderstanding the problem here!

[nikosatwork]

That is not the case. After my repro steps, deselecting the component works as expected i.e. the results are filtered correctly by just the selected flag.

For some context this is the component in codecov.yml:

And this is the behavior in Codecov:

Note: I have opened another ticket which is relevant too, in case it helps with reproducing on your side -> https://github.com/codecov/feedback/issues/629

[spalmurray-codecov]

Ahh okay you're right this is different. I thought you were saying the coverage numbers were wrong, not that the actual files shown are wrong. Thanks for correcting me and providing an example, this helps a lot!

[nikosatwork]

I thought you were saying the coverage numbers were wrong

The numbers are wrong.

In the example above when just the Asteroid Controller component is selected the coverage for AsteroidController.cs is 100% which is correct, based on the component setup in codecov.yml.

When the CameraTests flag is selected while the Asteroid Controller component is selected the coverage for AsteroidController.cs is still 100%, which is wrong, as the CameraTests flag contributes 0% coverage to the file, therefore the coverage should have been 0%.

the actual files shown are wrong

The files shown are correct, as when you deselect the Asteroid Controller component leaving just the CameraTests flag selected, the Tree view/Code tree/File list result is not limited/filtered to the path in the component setup in codecov.yml. Therefore, the files shown are all the files that have been inlcuded in the upload with the CameraTests flag.

[spalmurray-codecov]

I was under the impression your expected behavior is that we show the union of everything selected. Is this accurate? In you previous message it sounds like you might actually be looking for the intersection of the flag and component.

The union of everything selected would mean showing all covered lines captured by the component and all covered lines captured by the flag.

The intersection would mean showing only covered lines captured by the flag that are also captured by the component.

I think I could make in argument in favor of either tbh. Let me know what you think @nikosatwork

edit: I did have the thought that the current behavior for selecting multiple flags or multiple components is to union, so it may make sense to carry that logic over to this case also.

[nikosatwork]

My bad @spalmurray-codecov - I used union instead of intersection, but I meant intersection

[spalmurray-codecov]

Got it, apologies for any confusion!

If we're talking about the intersection, I believe this is what the code is trying do to based on the files shown being correct, but we just don't support breaking down line coverage by flag today (this is the ask in https://github.com/codecov/engineering-team/issues/2765).

For example, say lines 1-5 are covered by flagA and lines 3-8 are covered by flagB. My understanding is that we don't currently have the ability to tell you that lines 3-5 are covered by both flags.

Selecting multiple flags (union) doesn't work today for this reason also.

Whether it's union or intersection, it seems like we need to solve 2765 first, which is good to know!

Thinking out loud, you might be able to compute the values you're looking for now if you get creative with our public API

[nikosatwork]

Hi @spalmurray @thomasrockhu-codecov. Could you please provide an update on the status of this ticket? I could provide additional details if required. Thank you!