Skip to content

ROX-33133: Remove hardcoded key-exchange in gRPC#2991

Draft
vladbologa wants to merge 2 commits intomasterfrom
vb/grpc-pqc
Draft

ROX-33133: Remove hardcoded key-exchange in gRPC#2991
vladbologa wants to merge 2 commits intomasterfrom
vb/grpc-pqc

Conversation

@vladbologa
Copy link
Contributor

Description

A detailed explanation of the changes in your PR.

Feel free to remove this section if it is overkill for your PR, and the title of your PR is sufficiently descriptive.

Checklist

  • Investigated and inspected CI test results
  • Updated documentation accordingly

Automated testing

  • Added unit tests
  • Added integration tests
  • Added regression tests

If any of these don't apply, please comment below.

Testing Performed

TODO(replace-me)
Use this space to explain how you tested your PR, or, if you didn't test it, why you did not do so. (Valid reasons include "CI is sufficient" or "No testable changes")
In addition to reviewing your code, reviewers must also review your testing instructions, and make sure they are sufficient.

For more details, ref the Confluence page about this section.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm a bit concerned about carrying a patch for this ourselves. I can already tell the line has moved on the master branch of grpc, so when we decide to update the dependency, this patch will need to be regenerated.

Is there any way we could directly upstream something instead of working around it ourselves?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@vladbologa vladbologa Feb 27, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm just trying to get ML-KEM to work for now.

As for the upstreaming, I don't know. They had a ticket and they didn't fix it. It would be best to fix it upstream, but I'm not sure that can be done in time for 4.11.

@vladbologa vladbologa force-pushed the vb/grpc-pqc branch 2 times, most recently from cc9fab5 to 10a9dc5 Compare February 27, 2026 13:17
@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Feb 27, 2026

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 27.38%. Comparing base (74649d8) to head (7514157).
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #2991   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   27.38%   27.38%           
=======================================
  Files          95       95           
  Lines        5427     5427           
  Branches     2548     2548           
=======================================
  Hits         1486     1486           
  Misses       3214     3214           
  Partials      727      727           
Flag Coverage Δ
collector-unit-tests 27.38% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@vladbologa
Copy link
Contributor Author

/retest collector-on-push

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants