Repository navigation
build(deps): bump libc from 0.2.189 to 0.2.190 - #9010
dependabot[bot] wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
|
Important Review skippedBot user detected. To trigger a single review, invoke the ⚙️ Run configuration
You can disable this status message by setting the Use the checkbox below for a quick retry:
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. Comment |
Codex Review SummaryThis comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings. |
fanninpm
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Needs manual intervention due to CI failure when checking the x86_64-unknown-freebsd and aarch64-apple-ios targets.
|
@copilot make a proper patch please |
|
@youknowone The model You can try again without specifying a model (just If you want to contact GitHub about this error, please mention the following identifier so they can better serve you: |
5 similar comments
|
@youknowone The model You can try again without specifying a model (just If you want to contact GitHub about this error, please mention the following identifier so they can better serve you: |
|
@youknowone The model You can try again without specifying a model (just If you want to contact GitHub about this error, please mention the following identifier so they can better serve you: |
|
@youknowone The model You can try again without specifying a model (just If you want to contact GitHub about this error, please mention the following identifier so they can better serve you: |
|
@youknowone The model You can try again without specifying a model (just If you want to contact GitHub about this error, please mention the following identifier so they can better serve you: |
|
@youknowone The model You can try again without specifying a model (just If you want to contact GitHub about this error, please mention the following identifier so they can better serve you: |
|
@dependabot rebase |
3173332 to
9b34acd
Compare
Merging this PR will degrade performance by 0.84%
|
| Benchmark | BASE |
HEAD |
Efficiency | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ❌ | rustpython[loop_append.py] |
2.3 ms | 2.7 ms | -11.7% |
| ⚡ | rustpython[cmp.py] |
69.6 ms | 62.5 ms | +11.36% |
Tip
Investigate this regression by commenting @codspeedbot fix this regression on this PR, or directly use the CodSpeed MCP with your agent.
Comparing dependabot/cargo/libc-0.2.190 (9b34acd) with main (b429155)2
Footnotes
-
4 benchmarks were skipped, so the baseline results were used instead. If they were deleted from the codebase, click here and archive them to remove them from the performance reports. ↩
-
No successful run was found on
main(2a09ee0) during the generation of this report, so b429155 was used instead as the comparison base. There might be some changes unrelated to this pull request in this report. ↩
|
@codspeedbot explain performance differences |
Neither change comes from the libc bump. Both benchmarks are noisy, so this PR can be merged and the The PR only touches The report also uses an older base. CodSpeed had no result for ⚡
|
| main 1269277 | this PR | |
|---|---|---|
ExecutingFrame::run_until (self) |
429 µs | 423 µs |
Dict::_get_inner (self) |
123 µs | 201 µs |
Dict::lookup (self, from insert) |
60 µs | 165 µs |
PyMapping::_subscript + _ass_subscript (total) |
759 µs | 1065 µs |
The interpreter loop, int allocation, list.append and the libc/malloc functions cost about the same in both runs. All of the extra time is in the module globals dict lookups for i and obj (the loop runs at module level, so these are LOAD_NAME/STORE_NAME). The instruction count in those two dict functions roughly doubles, which points to longer hash probe chains, not slower code.
The cause is the benchmark setup. benches/microbenchmarks.rs uses Settings::default(), which leaves hash_seed = None, so every benchmark process picks a random string hash secret. Depending on the seed, the names in the globals dict collide more or less, and benchmarks like loop_append.py, loop_string.py, strings.py and cmp.py move by 10–17% between runs. The same thing has shown up on several earlier PRs.
Possible fix
Setting a fixed seed in the microbenchmark harness (settings.hash_seed = Some(0)) would stop these jumps, so results would only change when the code does.
Comment @codspeedbot pin the hash seed in the microbenchmark harness and I'll open a PR for it.
Summary
- Warming up the performance wizard...
- Inspect PR diff and CodSpeed runs — Only Cargo.lock changes (libc 0.2.189 → 0.2.190)
- Analyze loop_append.py and cmp.py changes — Both changes are measurement noise: the base run was an outlier, and globals-dict probe lengths depend on the random hash seed
- Reply with explanation — Reply with explanation
- Handling comment — Comment handling finished successfully
Learnings updated. See what CodSpeed remembers about this repository.
Was this response helpful? React with 👍 or 👎 to help us improve CodSpeedBot.
|
@codspeedbot pin the hash seed in the microbenchmark harness |
I opened #9126 to pin the hash seed: #9126 It's a separate PR so this dependabot branch only contains the libc bump. Change: one line in Not tested yet: I only checked formatting. The full benchmark build didn't finish in my environment, so I haven't compiled or run the change. The CodSpeed CI run on #9126 will be the first test. What to expect: that first CI run may still move those benchmarks once, because the fixed seed can collide differently than the random seed in the base run. After it merges, these benchmarks should only change when the code does.
Comment Summary
Was this response helpful? React with 👍 or 👎 to help us improve CodSpeedBot. |
9b34acd to
3685809
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 3685809863
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".
| [[package]] | ||
| name = "libc" | ||
| version = "0.2.189" | ||
| version = "0.2.190" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add the required AI-assistance trailer
This commit is authored by Codex, but its commit message contains no Assisted-by: AGENT_NAME:MODEL_VERSION trailer, so it does not satisfy the repository's mandatory disclosure policy for AI-assisted contributions. Add the required trailer before merging.
AGENTS.md reference: AGENTS.md:L20-L23
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
3685809 to
78d911f
Compare
|
@youknowone Clippy failure is from #9152. |
78d911f to
9f04385
Compare
Bumps [libc](https://github.com/rust-lang/libc) from 0.2.189 to 0.2.190. - [Release notes](https://github.com/rust-lang/libc/releases) - [Changelog](https://github.com/rust-lang/libc/blob/0.2.190/CHANGELOG.md) - [Commits](rust-lang/libc@0.2.189...0.2.190) --- updated-dependencies: - dependency-name: libc dependency-version: 0.2.190 dependency-type: direct:production update-type: version-update:semver-patch ... Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <support@github.com>
9f04385 to
5ce3455
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 5ce3455cbc
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".
| [[package]] | ||
| name = "libc" | ||
| version = "0.2.189" | ||
| version = "0.2.191" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pin libc to the release described by this update
The lockfile actually selects libc 0.2.191, while the commit title, dependency metadata, and included release notes all say this update is to 0.2.190. Consumers therefore build a different release from the one presented for review; either lock 0.2.190 with its matching checksum or update the change description and release review to 0.2.191.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
Bumps libc from 0.2.189 to 0.2.190.
Release notes
Sourced from libc's releases.
... (truncated)
Changelog
Sourced from libc's changelog.
... (truncated)
Commits
7b0ab55ci: Renamepublish_0.2.ymltorelease.yamlac85ddeci: Sync release permissions withmain8f8cd20libc: Release 0.2.190052c6e6changelog: Fix an incorrect commit linkea19fd7test: Remove explicitlibcversion6dbf3a2dragonfly: MoveINHERIT_ZEROto the freebsd module8a64766apple: addposix_spawn_file_actions_add(f)chdir(_np)28de514linux, netbsd: Give statvfs aDefaultimpla58a95fcygwin: ChangePOSIX_SPAWN_*flags toc_shortd175264apple:timeval32is exhaustive