Moving the conditional out of the for_each

[wpbeckwith]

Description

Currently by having the conditional check in the for_each terraform will fail to plan with the dreaded "Error: Invalid for_each argument" error. This happens even if you are not trying to use the module provided role. Moving the conditional check out allows terraform to plan successfully.

Motivation and Context

#2337

Breaking Changes

No

How Has This Been Tested?

• I have updated at least one of the examples/* to demonstrate and validate my change(s)
• I have tested and validated these changes using one or more of the provided examples/* projects

I have added the following to the bottom of the examples/eks_managed_node_group/main.tf

module "foo_mng" {
  source  = "../../modules/eks-managed-node-group"

  name            = "foo"
  cluster_name    = "foo"
  cluster_version = "1.24"
  create_iam_role = false
  iam_role_arn    = "arn:aws:iam::123456789012:role/foo-eks-node-group"

 cluster_primary_security_group_id = module.eks.node_security_group_id

  subnet_ids             = module.vpc.private_subnets
  min_size               = 1
  desired_size           = 1
  max_size               = 1
  instance_types         = ["t3.large"]
}

With the above, the example continues to plan successfully. In my env, the PR change allows me to successfully plan and create a cluster while the previous code caused a for_each plan failure.

• I have executed pre-commit run -a on my pull request

[bryantbiggs]

This is not the correct way

[wpbeckwith]

What is not the correct way? I forked the repo, made a change and then opened a PR to send the change back. What's incorrect?

[bryantbiggs]

The current implementation is the correct form. This form raises issues with inconsistent types

[wpbeckwith]

Not trying to be extra dense, but I'm not following. Can you clarify a bit more what you mean by the "This form raises issues with inconsistent types"? The PR does not change any types, so that's what is confusing.

[wpbeckwith]

Regardless, I see reading back on the PR while the code may be correct I have since created a better example of the issue in repo https://github.com/wpbeckwith/terraform-aws-eks-2337. So a more accurate PR should be created.

[sanarena]

This patch worked for me, I will be using this patch until official AWS module fix this issue. @bryantbiggs

[github-actions]

I'm going to lock this pull request because it has been closed for 30 days ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active issues. If you have found a problem that seems related to this change, please open a new issue and complete the issue template so we can capture all the details necessary to investigate further.