[Flight] Resolve Deep Cycles #33664
Merged
[Flight] Resolve Deep Cycles #33664
+422
−162
Conversation
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
github-actions
bot
added
the
React Core Team
unstubbable
approved these changes
Jun 29, 2025
Collaborator
unstubbable
left a comment
unstubbable
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Love it!
I haven't been able to construct a normal scenario where this would break. So this doesn't fail any tests.
This actually fixes vercel/next.js#72104, and we can close #32316 (an inferior solution). I've added the test from that PR to this one.
Collaborator
Author
|
Oh weird. I actually originally had that test in this branch but I didn't think it would fix it. I guess I did something along the way that did fix it. |
sebmarkbage
force-pushed
the
flightcycles
branch
from
119c751 to
7b52178
Compare
sebmarkbage
added a commit
to sebmarkbage/react
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 3, 2025
FlightReplyServer are for client->server and ReactFlightClient is for server->client. They're not 100% symmetrical. We did a number of refactors to ReactFlightClient in PRs like facebook#29823 and facebook#33664 to change the structure of the resolution. This PR brings those changes to synchronize the two approaches. Which addresses deep resolution of cycles and deferred error handling. This also fixes a critical security vulnerability.
sebmarkbage
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 3, 2025
FlightReplyServer are for client->server and ReactFlightClient is for server->client. They're not 100% symmetrical. We did a number of refactors to ReactFlightClient in PRs like #29823 and #33664 to change the structure of the resolution. This PR brings those changes to synchronize the two approaches. Which addresses deep resolution of cycles and deferred error handling. This also fixes a critical security vulnerability.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
5 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.
Stacked on #33666.
If we ever get a future reference to a cycle and that reference gets eagerly parsed before the target has loaded then we can end up with a cycle that never gets resolved. That's because our cycle resolution only works if the cyclic future reference is created synchronously within the parsing path of the child.
I haven't been able to construct a normal scenario where this would break. So this doesn't fail any tests. However, I can construct it with debug info since those are eagerly evaluated. It's also a prerequisite if the debug data can come out of order, like if it's on a different stream.
The fix here is to make all the internal dependencies in the "listener" list into introspectable objects instead of closures. That way we can traverse the list of dependencies of a blocked reference to see if it ends up in a cycle and therefore skip the reference.
It would be nice to address this once and for all to be more resilient to server changes, but I'm not sure if it's worth this complexity and the extra CPU cost of tracing the dependencies. Especially if it's just for debug data.
closes #32316
fixes vercel/next.js#72104