The checkout_path input of the analyze action must be set to the path at which the repository that is being analysed is checked out at if it is not the workspace root. However, currently we do not perform any kind of validation of the checkout_path input to ensure that it actually points at a valid Git repository, which may lead to unexpected and difficult-to-observe results.

This PR makes the following changes:

• The init action persists the discovered repository root in the CodeQL Action configuration state, if any.
• The analyze action now performs the following validation on the checkout_path input value and warns if a check fails:
  • That checkout_path refers to a path in the work tree of a Git repository.
  • That checkout_path refers to the root of a Git repository.
  • That the repository root pointed at by checkout_path matches that stored by the init action, if any.

Risk assessment

For internal use only. Please select the risk level of this change:

• High risk: Changes are not fully under feature flags, have limited visibility and/or cannot be tested outside of production.

Which use cases does this change impact?

Workflow types:

• Advanced setup - Impacts users who have custom CodeQL workflows.
• Managed - Impacts users with dynamic workflows (Default Setup, Code Quality, ...).

Products:

• Code Scanning - The changes impact analyses when analysis-kinds: code-scanning.
• Code Quality - The changes impact analyses when analysis-kinds: code-quality.
• Other first-party - The changes impact other first-party analyses.
• Third-party analyses - The changes affect the upload-sarif action.

Environments:

• Dotcom - Impacts CodeQL workflows on github.com and/or GitHub Enterprise Cloud with Data Residency.
• GHES - Impacts CodeQL workflows on GitHub Enterprise Server.

How did/will you validate this change?

• Unit tests - I am depending on unit test coverage (i.e. tests in .test.ts files).
• End-to-end tests - I am depending on PR checks (i.e. tests in pr-checks).

If something goes wrong after this change is released, what are the mitigation and rollback strategies?

• Feature flags - All new or changed code paths can be fully disabled with corresponding feature flags.
• Rollback - Change can only be disabled by rolling back the release or releasing a new version with a fix.

How will you know if something goes wrong after this change is released?

• Telemetry - I rely on existing telemetry or have made changes to the telemetry.
  • Dashboards - I will watch relevant dashboards for issues after the release. Consider whether this requires this change to be released at a particular time rather than as part of a regular release.
  • Alerts - New or existing monitors will trip if something goes wrong with this change.

Are there any special considerations for merging or releasing this change?

• No special considerations - This change can be merged at any time.

Merge / deployment checklist

• Confirm this change is backwards compatible with existing workflows.
• Consider adding a changelog entry for this change.
• Confirm the readme and docs have been updated if necessary.