fix(ascend): guard nil Requests in MutateAdmission

[keshav9926]

What this PR does / why we need it

MutateAdmission in the ascend backend writes the trimmed memory quantity
into ctr.Resources.Requests unconditionally. When a container declares only
limits (no requests block), Requests is a nil map and the write panics
(assignment to entry in nil map) inside the admission webhook.

This initializes Requests before the write, mirroring the guard the kunlun
backend already uses for the identical write
(pkg/device/kunlun/vdevice.go), and the pattern merged for mthreads in
#2254. After this, no backend under pkg/device/ writes to
Resources.Requests unguarded.

Also adds Test_MutateAdmission_NilRequests: two regression cases (memory
limit without a requests block; count-only without a requests block), both of
which panic on master today.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes

Fixes #2415

Special notes for your reviewer

The existing Test_MutateAdmission never hits this path with nil Requests:
the only case reaching the write is the only fixture that explicitly sets a
Requests block. The new test covers exactly the gap.

AI assistance disclosure

This PR was developed with AI assistance (Claude); the bug was found by an
automated audit of unguarded map writes across pkg/device/, and the fix and
tests were human-reviewed before submission.

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Bug Fixes

  • Fixed pod admission when resource requests are missing but memory limits are specified.
  • Memory requests are now populated correctly without errors or crashes, including when default card allocation applies.
  • Improved handling for pods that define only memory limits.

• Tests

  • Added coverage for admission scenarios with absent resource requests.
  • Verified both explicit memory limits and default card allocation behavior.

[hami-robot]

Welcome @keshav9926! It looks like this is your first PR to Project-HAMi/HAMi 🎉

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: 6728615d-2959-45ce-b81d-e4d5800abaa3

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between c5e99b6 and 6b8752b.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• pkg/device/ascend/device.go
• pkg/device/ascend/device_test.go

🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)

• pkg/device/ascend/device_test.go
• pkg/device/ascend/device.go

---

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

MutateAdmission now initializes nil resource request maps before assigning memory requests. Regression tests cover explicit memory limits and the default full-card allocation.

Changes

Ascend admission mutation

Layer / File(s)	Summary
Handle missing resource requests pkg/device/ascend/device.go, pkg/device/ascend/device_test.go	MutateAdmission initializes nil request maps before writing memory requests. Tests verify explicit-limit handling and fallback to MemoryAllocatable.

Estimated code review effort: 2 (Simple) | ~10 minutes

Possibly related PRs

• Project-HAMi/HAMi#2176 — Both changes initialize nil request maps before writing derived memory requests.
• Project-HAMi/HAMi#2254 — Both changes fix nil-map panics in device admission mutation.
• Project-HAMi/HAMi#2026 — Both changes modify Ascend MutateAdmission and its admission tests.

Suggested reviewers: archlitchi

Poem

I’m a rabbit guarding requests in a map,
No nil holes remain in the admission trap.
Limits guide memory, defaults fill the card,
Tests watch the paths and keep errors barred.
Hop, hop—Ascend mutation is safe!

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5

✅ Passed checks (5 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title clearly describes the nil Requests guard added to Ascend MutateAdmission.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	The changes initialize nil Requests before writing memory and add regression tests, satisfying issue #2415.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	All code and test changes directly address the nil Requests panic described in issue #2415.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests

---

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

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}

[archlitchi]

please sync with master to pass the CI

[coderabbitai]

Note

GitHub couldn't provide a complete incremental comparison for this pull request, so CodeRabbit is performing a full review instead. This review may take a little longer.

[keshav9926]

Done — rebased onto current master (now based on c5e99b6). Thanks for taking a look @archlitchi!

[Shouren]

/lgtm

[hami-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: keshav9926, Shouren

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Details

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [Shouren]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	64.10% <100.00%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️

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

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
pkg/device/ascend/device.go	84.75% <100.00%> (+0.07%)	⬆️

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

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