Skip to content

processor_labels: fix hash config description#11426

Open
eschabell wants to merge 1 commit intofluent:masterfrom
eschabell:erics_processor_labels_desc_fix
Open

processor_labels: fix hash config description#11426
eschabell wants to merge 1 commit intofluent:masterfrom
eschabell:erics_processor_labels_desc_fix

Conversation

@eschabell
Copy link
Contributor

@eschabell eschabell commented Feb 4, 2026

  • Fix incorrect hash algorithm in description: SHA1 -> SHA256 (implementation uses FLB_HASH_SHA256)
  • Fix grammar: "labels value" -> "label's value"

Not attached to an issue, small description fix.


Testing
Before we can approve your change; please submit the following in a comment:

  • [ N/A ] Example configuration file for the change
  • [ N/A ] Debug log output from testing the change
  • [ N/A ] Attached Valgrind output that shows no leaks or memory corruption was found
  • [ N/A ] Run local packaging test showing all targets (including any new ones) build.
  • [ N/A ] Set ok-package-test label to test for all targets (requires maintainer to do).

Documentation

  • [ ALREADY DOCUMENTED ] Documentation required for this feature

Backporting

  • [ N/A ] Backport to latest stable release.

Fluent Bit is licensed under Apache 2.0, by submitting this pull request I understand that this code will be released under the terms of that license.

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Documentation
    • Updated the "hash" configuration description to accurately reflect that values are hashed using SHA256 instead of SHA1.

  - Fix incorrect hash algorithm in description: SHA1 -> SHA256
    (implementation uses FLB_HASH_SHA256)
  - Fix grammar: "labels value" -> "label's value"

Signed-off-by: Eric D. Schabell <eric@schabell.org>
@coderabbitai
Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Feb 4, 2026

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The PR updates the description text for the "hash" configuration option in the labels processor plugin, changing the referenced hash algorithm from SHA1 to SHA256 in the documentation string.

Changes

Cohort / File(s) Summary
Documentation String Update
plugins/processor_labels/labels.c
Updated the config map description for the "hash" option to reflect SHA256 instead of SHA1 as the hashing algorithm.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~2 minutes

Suggested reviewers

  • edsiper
  • cosmo0920

Poem

🐰 A hash so strong, SHA256 now,
Where SHA1 once did stand, wow!
The labels dance with crypto might,
Documentation shines so bright! ✨

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 3
✅ Passed checks (3 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Description Check ✅ Passed Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check ✅ Passed The title accurately summarizes the main change: fixing the hash config description in the processor_labels plugin from SHA1 to SHA256.
Docstring Coverage ✅ Passed No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.

✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.

✨ Finishing touches
  • 📝 Generate docstrings
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Post copyable unit tests in a comment

Important

Action Needed: IP Allowlist Update

If your organization protects your Git platform with IP whitelisting, please add the new CodeRabbit IP address to your allowlist:

  • 136.113.208.247/32 (new)
  • 34.170.211.100/32
  • 35.222.179.152/32

Reviews will stop working after February 8, 2026 if the new IP is not added to your allowlist.


Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

@patrick-stephens
Copy link
Contributor

@edsiper / @cosmo0920 you'll have to merge as I no longer have the permissions to override the requirements.

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

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants