-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
Replace lockfree with lock_freedom #2
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
WalkthroughThe dependency Changes
Estimated code review effort🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~3 minutes
Poem
Pre-merge checks and finishing touches✅ Passed checks (3 passed)
✨ Finishing touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Tip 📝 Customizable high-level summaries are now available in beta!You can now customize how CodeRabbit generates the high-level summary in your pull requests — including its content, structure, tone, and formatting.
Example instruction:
Note: This feature is currently in beta for Pro-tier users, and pricing will be announced later. Comment |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actionable comments posted: 1
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
Cargo.toml(1 hunks)docs/implementation.md(1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (1)
Cargo.toml (1)
44-44: The externallockfreecrate is unused; review concerns are not applicable.Verification shows that the external
lockfree0.5 crate was never actually used in the codebase. All references to "lockfree" are to the internal module insrc/lockfree.rs, which contains custom implementations (LockFreePageCache, LockFreeIoQueue, etc.). No code imports or calls the external crate's API, and there are no feature-gated compilation paths depending on it.Since the dependency was dormant, replacing it with
lock_freedom0.1.1 has no practical impact. The concerns about API compatibility and resolving compilation issues do not apply.Likely an incorrect or invalid review comment.
| crossbeam-queue = "0.3" | ||
| crossbeam-utils = "0.8" | ||
| lockfree = "0.5" | ||
| lock_freedom = "0.1" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Update documentation to match Cargo.toml version specification.
The documentation specifies lock_freedom = "0.1", but Cargo.toml specifies version "0.1.1". For clarity and consistency, update the documentation to reflect the exact version constraint.
-lock_freedom = "0.1"
+lock_freedom = "0.1.1"📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| lock_freedom = "0.1" | |
| lock_freedom = "0.1.1" |
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
In docs/implementation.md around line 503, the documented dependency version is
shown as lock_freedom = "0.1" which does not match Cargo.toml's "0.1.1"; update
the documentation to use the exact version string used in Cargo.toml
(lock_freedom = "0.1.1") so the docs and manifest are consistent.
|
ping @niklabh |
c.f. rustsec/advisory-db#2461
Note I wasnt able to compile on either my macos intel or linux intel, even when trying to disable features and only enable the lockfree feature. I can write up issues about these if you would find that useful.
Summary by CodeRabbit
✏️ Tip: You can customize this high-level summary in your review settings.