Skip to content

ci(config): give macOS Test (tokio) step 30m budget (was 15m)#255

Merged
pilotspacex-byte merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
ci/bump-macos-test-timeout
Jul 9, 2026
Merged

ci(config): give macOS Test (tokio) step 30m budget (was 15m)#255
pilotspacex-byte merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
ci/bump-macos-test-timeout

Conversation

@pilotspacex-byte

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Problem

The macOS Test (tokio) step's timeout-minutes budget includes compilation. On a cold or rebased cache, ~11m compile + ~8m test suite exceeds 15m and trips a wall-clock timeout — with zero actual test failures (every test that executed passed). This is a false-negative red, not a real failure, and it repeatedly bit rebased stacked branches (extra vector-crate recompile pushes compile past the edge).

Fix

Bump the macOS Test (tokio) step to 30m, matching the Windows Test step's existing headroom. No code or test change — purely a CI budget adjustment.

Evidence

  • Failing runs show The action 'Test (tokio)' has timed out after 15 minutes with no panic/assertion/test failure.
  • Linux Check + all other checks green on the same commits.
  • macOS is a dev-only target per CLAUDE.md; Linux is authoritative.

The macOS `Test (tokio)` step's timeout-minutes budget includes the
compile phase. On a cold or rebased cache, ~11m compiling + ~8m running
the suite exceeds 15m and trips a wall-clock timeout while every test
that executed passed — a false-negative red, not a real failure. This
bit rebased stacked branches (extra vector-crate recompile) repeatedly.

Bump the step to 30m, matching the Windows Test step's headroom. No code
or test change; purely a CI budget adjustment.

author: Tin Dang
@qodo-code-review

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Qodo reviews are paused for this user.

Troubleshooting steps vary by plan Learn more →

On a Teams plan?
Reviews resume once this user has a paid seat and their Git account is linked in Qodo.
Link Git account →

Using GitHub Enterprise Server, GitLab Self-Managed, or Bitbucket Data Center?
These require an Enterprise plan - Contact us
Contact us →

@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Jul 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Warning

Review limit reached

@pilotspacex-byte, you've reached your PR review limit, so we couldn't start this review.

Next review available in: 59 minutes

Enable usage-based reviews in Billing to review now. Otherwise, wait until the next included review is available.
You're only billed for reviews past your plan's rate limits ($0.25/file).

How can I continue?

After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews.

How do review limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability.

For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window.

Please refer docs for additional details.

Review details
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: f9c42f13-b22b-470c-b45f-727cd5047741

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between f9ad681 and 1f6457a.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)
  • .github/workflows/ci.yml
  • CHANGELOG.md
✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Commit unit tests in branch ci/bump-macos-test-timeout

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.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.

@pilotspacex-byte
pilotspacex-byte merged commit 416787b into main Jul 9, 2026
10 checks passed
pilotspacex-byte added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 14, 2026
…sed] + resolve PR #TBD placeholders (#330)

The v0.6.0 tag (355f68d, 2026-07-10) absorbed several PRs that merged after
the v0.6.0 release PR itself but before the tag was cut. Their changelog
entries were left under [Unreleased], understating what shipped in the
tagged v0.6.0 binary.

Audit (task #65, v0.7.0 roll-up prep) identified 23 sections whose PR merge
commits are verified ancestors of v0.6.0 via `git merge-base --is-ancestor`:
PR #248 (FastScan SIMD, SQ8 default, TQ ADC L2 fix, EF_RUNTIME FT.CONFIG,
RERANK_MULT+EXACT_BEAM, CLI/moon.conf tuning defaults), PR #250 (13
production-hardening sections), PR #251 (COLD-segment reload off event
loop), PR #254 (roadmap docs suite), PR #255 (CI macOS 30m), PR #256 (v0.6.0
ledger closure). Moved verbatim to a new subsection at the top of [0.6.0],
with a note explaining the absorption. Sections from PR #252, #253, and
#257-#263 were verified NOT ancestors of v0.6.0 and correctly remain in
[Unreleased].

Also resolves the "PR #TBD" placeholders left by those sections (now #248,
#257, #261) now that the real PR numbers are known.

Section-count invariant holds (306 before, 306 after); content unchanged
except for the PR-number substitutions.

author: Tin Dang

Co-authored-by: Tin Dang <tindang.ht97@gmail.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants