Fixing NullReferenceException issue with SqlDataAdapter

[priyankatiwari08]

Description

This Pull Request addresses issue #3716 by introducing a null check for systemParams, which stores the system-level parameters for SQL RPC (Remote Procedure Call) operations. In batch scenarios, certain SQL RPC calls may not include system parameters, and this change ensures proper handling in such cases.

Issues

#3716

[Copilot]

Pull Request Overview

This pull request adds a null check for systemParams before accessing its Length property in the parameter encryption metadata retrieval logic. This defensive programming change prevents a potential NullReferenceException when processing RPC batch commands.

Key Changes

• Added null check for _RPCList[i].systemParams before accessing its Length property in TryFetchInputParameterEncryptionInfo method

Comments suppressed due to low confidence (1)

src/Microsoft.Data.SqlClient/src/Microsoft/Data/SqlClient/SqlCommand.Encryption.cs:1296

• The added null check for systemParams lacks test coverage. Based on the code analysis, systemParams is initialized through GetRPCObject() which always allocates and initializes the array when systemParamCount > 0. However, a newly constructed _SqlRPC object (as seen in AddBatchCommand line 21) has systemParams initially null. A test case should be added that exercises the batch RPC mode encryption path with an RPC object that has not yet had its systemParams initialized to verify this defensive check works correctly.

                    if (_RPCList[i].systemParams != null && _RPCList[i].systemParams.Length > 1)

[paulmedynski]

Need some tests for this.

[Copilot]

Pull Request Overview

Copilot reviewed 3 out of 3 changed files in this pull request and generated 4 comments.

[apoorvdeshmukh]

There are build failures while compiling the tests.

[Copilot]

Pull Request Overview

Copilot reviewed 3 out of 3 changed files in this pull request and generated 3 comments.

[Copilot]

Pull Request Overview

Copilot reviewed 3 out of 3 changed files in this pull request and generated 5 comments.

[Copilot]

Pull Request Overview

Copilot reviewed 3 out of 3 changed files in this pull request and generated 5 comments.

[Copilot]

Pull Request Overview

Copilot reviewed 3 out of 3 changed files in this pull request and generated 4 comments.

[Copilot]

Pull Request Overview

Copilot reviewed 3 out of 3 changed files in this pull request and generated 1 comment.

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 3 out of 3 changed files in this pull request and generated 6 comments.

[priyankatiwari08]

@dotnet-policy-service agree company="Microsoft"

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 0% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 69.84%. Comparing base (995df25) to head (6137517).
⚠️ Report is 10 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
.../Microsoft/Data/SqlClient/SqlCommand.Encryption.cs	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

❗ There is a different number of reports uploaded between BASE (995df25) and HEAD (6137517). Click for more details.

HEAD has 1 upload less than BASE

Flag	BASE (995df25)	HEAD (6137517)
addons	1	0

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3749      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   76.61%   69.84%   -6.77%     
==========================================
  Files         274      268       -6     
  Lines       43393    66432   +23039     
==========================================
+ Hits        33247    46402   +13155     
- Misses      10146    20030    +9884     

Flag	Coverage Δ
addons	?
netcore	69.86% <0.00%> (-6.82%)	⬇️
netfx	69.22% <0.00%> (-6.97%)	⬇️

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.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.