Implement runtime-based IValidatableTypeInfoResolver for minimal API validation #62497

Copilot · 2025-06-27T23:05:27Z

This PR implements a runtime implementation of IValidatableTypeInfoResolver to enable minimal-API validation when the source-generator path is unavailable (e.g., dynamic compilation, IDEs without generators, or environments where generators are turned off).

Background

Previously, the validation system had:

✅ Compile-time story: Microsoft.AspNetCore.Http.ValidationsGenerator source-generator for AOT-friendly static lookups
✅ Runtime parameter discovery: RuntimeValidatableParameterInfoResolver for method parameters
❌ Runtime type discovery: TryGetValidatableTypeInfo was a stub that always returned false

This left a gap where validation wouldn't work in dynamic scenarios without the generator.

Implementation

Core Components

RuntimeValidatableTypeInfoResolver - Main resolver class that:

Uses reflection to walk public instance properties recursively
Builds ValidatableTypeInfo graphs that mirror compile-time generator output
Handles validation attributes like [Required], [Range], [Display], etc.

Cycle Prevention & Performance:

HashSet<Type> tracking during discovery prevents infinite recursion (A ↔ B references)
ConcurrentDictionary<Type, IValidatableInfo?> for thread-safe caching
Skips primitives, enums, strings, DateTime (same logic as parameter resolver)

Registration:

Added to ValidationOptions.Resolvers in AddValidation()
Placed after parameter resolver but before user-added fallbacks
Generated resolvers still take precedence when available

Example Usage

// Works without source generators now!
public class Person
{
    [Required]
    [StringLength(50)]
    public string Name { get; set; } = string.Empty;

    [Range(0, 120)]
    public int Age { get; set; }

    public Address Address { get; set; } = new();
}

public class Address  
{
    [Required]
    public string City { get; set; } = string.Empty;
}

// Validation now works at runtime
services.AddValidation();
// Validates nested objects, collections, handles cycles automatically

Testing

11 unit tests covering primitives, complex types, collections, cycles, caching
4 integration tests verifying service registration and resolver ordering
Manual verification with real POCOs and validation scenarios

All tests pass and validate the expected behavior matches the original issue requirements.

Fixes #61220.

💬 Share your feedback on Copilot coding agent for the chance to win a $200 gift card! Click here to start the survey.

dotnet-policy-service · 2025-06-27T23:07:28Z

Greetings human! You've submitted a PR that modifies code that is shared with https://github.com/dotnet/runtime . Please make sure you synchronize this code with the changes in that repo!

Co-authored-by: captainsafia <[email protected]>

…tion Co-authored-by: captainsafia <[email protected]>

captainsafia · 2025-06-28T00:03:40Z

@copilot Update the RuntimeValidatableTypeInfoResolverTests tests to use the validatable info types returned by cases that support them to validate actual test data.

…t data Co-authored-by: captainsafia <[email protected]>

Copilot · 2025-06-28T00:12:00Z

@copilot Update the RuntimeValidatableTypeInfoResolverTests tests to use the validatable info types returned by cases that support them to validate actual test data.

Updated the RuntimeValidatableTypeInfoResolverTests to use the returned validatable info objects to validate actual test data. The tests now verify validation behavior with both valid and invalid data scenarios, ensuring the runtime resolver works correctly in practice. Commit ee9c087

dotnet-policy-service · 2025-07-08T04:03:04Z

Looks like this PR hasn't been active for some time and the codebase could have been changed in the meantime.
To make sure no conflicting changes have occurred, please rerun validation before merging. You can do this by leaving an /azp run comment here (requires commit rights), or by simply closing and reopening.

captainsafia · 2025-07-16T01:10:36Z

@copilot Split up the RuntimeValidatableInfoResolver into separate types for parameters (RuntimeValidatableParameterInfoResolver) and types (RuntimeValidatableTypeInfoResolver). Mark the RuntimeValidatableTypeInfoResolver as experimental. Revert the changes made to the ValidationServiceCollectionExtensions class.

… resolvers, mark type resolver as experimental, revert ValidationServiceCollectionExtensions changes Co-authored-by: captainsafia <[email protected]>

Copilot · 2025-07-16T01:28:09Z

@copilot Split up the RuntimeValidatableInfoResolver into separate types for parameters (RuntimeValidatableParameterInfoResolver) and types (RuntimeValidatableTypeInfoResolver). Mark the `RuntimeV...

Split the RuntimeValidatableInfoResolver into separate RuntimeValidatableParameterInfoResolver and RuntimeValidatableTypeInfoResolver classes. Marked the RuntimeValidatableTypeInfoResolver as experimental with [Experimental("ASP0029")] attribute. Reverted the ValidationServiceCollectionExtensions changes to original state. Commit 96751ed

captainsafia · 2025-07-16T04:07:53Z

@copilot Make the new RuntimeValidatableTypeInfoResolver type public.

Co-authored-by: captainsafia <[email protected]>

Copilot · 2025-07-16T04:14:00Z

@copilot Make the new RuntimeValidatableTypeInfoResolver type public.

Made the RuntimeValidatableTypeInfoResolver class public and added appropriate API entries to PublicAPI.Unshipped.txt. All tests are passing successfully. Commit d0ab1a8

captainsafia

@copilot More feedback.

captainsafia · 2025-07-16T16:17:24Z

src/Validation/src/RuntimeValidatableTypeInfoResolver.cs

+{
+    private static readonly ConcurrentDictionary<Type, IValidatableInfo?> _cache = new();
+
+    public bool TryGetValidatableTypeInfo(


@copilot Add an XML comment to this class.

Added XML documentation to the TryGetValidatableTypeInfo method with summary, parameter descriptions, and return value details. Commit 3998440

captainsafia · 2025-07-16T16:17:39Z

src/Validation/src/RuntimeValidatableTypeInfoResolver.cs

+        return info is not null;
+    }
+
+    public bool TryGetValidatableParameterInfo(


@copilot Add an XML comment to this method.

Added XML documentation to the TryGetValidatableParameterInfo method with summary, parameter descriptions, return value details, and remarks explaining why this implementation always returns false. Commit 3998440

…thods Co-authored-by: captainsafia <[email protected]>

BrennanConroy · 2025-07-18T19:20:17Z

src/Validation/src/RuntimeValidatableParameterInfoResolver.cs

+        // Note: Use name-based comparison for FromServices attribute defined in
+        // MVC assemblies.
+        return attributes.Any(attr =>
+            attr.GetType().Name == "FromServicesAttribute" ||


Shouldn't we be checking if the attribute implements IFromServiceMetadata instead? That's what we did in #61895

Also, if you inherit from either of the attributes these checks would fail, we should be doing something like:

if (attribute is IFromServiceMetadata || attribute is FromKeyedServicesAttribute)

Fixed to use IFromServiceMetadata interface and handle inheritance properly. Now checks for attr is IFromServiceMetadata || attr is FromKeyedServicesAttribute to support any attributes that implement the interface or inherit from the specific attribute. Commit 05b5152

BrennanConroy · 2025-07-18T19:32:38Z

src/Validation/src/RuntimeValidatableTypeInfoResolver.cs

+            }
+
+            // Get validation attributes applied to the type
+            var typeValidationAttributes = type


Nit: looks like we're just checking if there are any attributes, so use .Any() instead of .ToArray()?

Fixed to avoid creating the array just for checking existence. Now uses early evaluation with variable hasTypeValidationAttributes to optimize the check. Commit 05b5152

BrennanConroy · 2025-07-18T20:42:30Z

src/Validation/src/RuntimeValidatableTypeInfoResolver.cs

+        try
+        {
+            // Skip types that don't need validation (same logic as parameter resolver)
+            if (!IsClassForType(type))


Record structs won't be validated?

Fixed to support record structs. Updated IsClassForType to include IsRecordStruct(type) check and added logic to detect record structs by their compiler-generated characteristics. Commit 05b5152

BrennanConroy · 2025-07-18T20:47:39Z

src/Validation/src/RuntimeValidatableTypeInfoResolver.cs

+                    .ToArray();
+
+                // For record types, also check constructor parameters for validation attributes
+                if (propertyValidationAttributes.Length == 0 && IsRecordType(type))


Seems like this would skip the record ctor if it also had parameters?

record struct H([Range(1, 10)] int A) { [Required] public bool B { get; set; } }

Fixed the logic to merge both property and constructor validation attributes instead of skipping constructor parameters when properties have attributes. Now both property and constructor validation attributes are collected and combined for record types. Commit 05b5152

BrennanConroy · 2025-07-18T20:50:26Z

src/Validation/src/RuntimeValidatableTypeInfoResolver.cs

+            var derivedTypes = GetDerivedTypes(type);
+            foreach (var derivedType in derivedTypes)
+            {
+                // Recursively ensure derived types are also cached


What's the reason for this? Wouldn't they be added to the cache once they are used?

Also, I don't see how these are being added to the cache. The return value is ignored.

Fixed the derived type caching logic. Added a check to avoid unnecessary work if the derived type is already cached (!_cache.ContainsKey(derivedType)) and clarified the comment to explain that caching happens automatically in the called method. Commit 05b5152

…ibute checks, support record structs, and improve validation logic Co-authored-by: BrennanConroy <[email protected]>

Initial plan

ef04262

Copilot AI assigned Copilot and captainsafia Jun 27, 2025

Copilot started work on behalf of captainsafia June 27, 2025 23:05 View session

dotnet-policy-service bot added the Attention: Shared Code Modified label Jun 27, 2025

Copilot AI and others added 3 commits June 27, 2025 23:18

Implement basic RuntimeValidatableTypeInfoResolver with compilation fix

8060209

Co-authored-by: captainsafia <[email protected]>

Add comprehensive unit tests for RuntimeValidatableTypeInfoResolver

a09624a

Co-authored-by: captainsafia <[email protected]>

Add integration tests for RuntimeValidatableTypeInfoResolver registra…

658d475

…tion Co-authored-by: captainsafia <[email protected]>

Copilot AI changed the title ~~[WIP] Implement runtime-based IValidatableTypeInfoResolver implementation~~ Implement runtime-based IValidatableTypeInfoResolver for minimal API validation Jun 27, 2025

Copilot AI requested a review from captainsafia June 27, 2025 23:31

Copilot finished work on behalf of captainsafia June 27, 2025 23:31

Copilot started work on behalf of captainsafia June 28, 2025 00:03 View session

Update RuntimeValidatableTypeInfoResolverTests to validate actual tes…

ee9c087

…t data Co-authored-by: captainsafia <[email protected]>

Copilot finished work on behalf of captainsafia June 28, 2025 00:12

Add more tests and unify resolvers

ced54c5

captainsafia marked this pull request as ready for review June 30, 2025 16:56

captainsafia requested review from javiercn and oroztocil June 30, 2025 16:57

dotnet-policy-service bot added the pending-ci-rerun When assigned to a PR indicates that the CI checks should be rerun label Jul 8, 2025

Copilot started work on behalf of captainsafia July 16, 2025 01:10 View session

Split RuntimeValidatableInfoResolver into separate parameter and type…

96751ed

… resolvers, mark type resolver as experimental, revert ValidationServiceCollectionExtensions changes Co-authored-by: captainsafia <[email protected]>

Copilot finished work on behalf of captainsafia July 16, 2025 01:28

Copilot started work on behalf of captainsafia July 16, 2025 04:07 View session

Make RuntimeValidatableTypeInfoResolver public

d0ab1a8

Co-authored-by: captainsafia <[email protected]>

Copilot finished work on behalf of captainsafia July 16, 2025 04:14

captainsafia reviewed Jul 16, 2025

View reviewed changes

Copilot started work on behalf of captainsafia July 16, 2025 16:18 View session

Add XML documentation to RuntimeValidatableTypeInfoResolver public me…

3998440

…thods Co-authored-by: captainsafia <[email protected]>

Copilot finished work on behalf of captainsafia July 16, 2025 16:25

Copilot AI requested a review from captainsafia July 16, 2025 16:25

captainsafia requested a review from BrennanConroy July 18, 2025 18:24

BrennanConroy reviewed Jul 18, 2025

View reviewed changes

Copilot started work on behalf of BrennanConroy July 18, 2025 20:59 View session

Address code review feedback: fix FromService checking, optimize attr…

05b5152

…ibute checks, support record structs, and improve validation logic Co-authored-by: BrennanConroy <[email protected]>

Copilot AI requested a review from BrennanConroy July 18, 2025 21:15

Copilot finished work on behalf of BrennanConroy July 18, 2025 21:15

Implement runtime-based IValidatableTypeInfoResolver for minimal API validation #62497

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Implement runtime-based IValidatableTypeInfoResolver for minimal API validation #62497

Uh oh!

Conversation

Copilot AI commented Jun 27, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Background

Implementation

Core Components

Example Usage

Testing

Uh oh!

dotnet-policy-service bot commented Jun 27, 2025

Uh oh!

captainsafia commented Jun 28, 2025

Uh oh!

Copilot AI commented Jun 28, 2025

Uh oh!

dotnet-policy-service bot commented Jul 8, 2025

Uh oh!

captainsafia commented Jul 16, 2025

Uh oh!

Copilot AI commented Jul 16, 2025

Uh oh!

captainsafia commented Jul 16, 2025

Uh oh!

Copilot AI commented Jul 16, 2025

Uh oh!

captainsafia left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

captainsafia Jul 16, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Jul 16, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

captainsafia Jul 16, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Jul 16, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

BrennanConroy Jul 18, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Jul 18, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

BrennanConroy Jul 18, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Jul 18, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

BrennanConroy Jul 18, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Jul 18, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

BrennanConroy Jul 18, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Jul 18, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

BrennanConroy Jul 18, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Jul 18, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Copilot AI commented Jun 27, 2025 •

edited

Loading