Skip to content

Fix carrier starvation in scope diagnostics - #13063

Merged
amarziali merged 4 commits into
masterfrom
andrea.marziali/fix-scope-diagnostics-carrier-deadlock
Oct 27, 2026
Merged

amarziali merged 4 commits into
masterfrom
andrea.marziali/fix-scope-diagnostics-carrier-deadlock

Conversation

@amarziali

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

What Does This Do

Scope diagnostic callbacks could block virtual-thread carriers on a monitor held by an unmounted virtual thread, stalling the application and producing misleading leakage failures.

In this PR we queue events without acquiring the diagnostic monitor and consume them during reporting and recording-window changes.

Motivation

Additional Notes

Contributor Checklist

Jira ticket: [PROJ-IDENT]

@amarziali
amarziali requested a review from a team as a code owner October 26, 2026 18:30
@amarziali amarziali added type: bug fix Bug fix comp: testing Testing tag: no release notes Changes to exclude from release notes labels Oct 26, 2026
@chatgpt-codex-connector

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Oct 26, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review Status Commit Review trigger
📝 Code Review ✅ Completed 2026-10-26T20:09:06.162491Z 94557e0 Manual request
🔒 Security Review ✅ Completed 2026-10-26T20:08:48.062337Z 94557e0 Manual request
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to 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" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 06fbaf0ed9

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to 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 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

@datadog-official datadog-official Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Bits Code Review: FAIL

Sustained diagnostic event traffic can keep queue draining from finishing, hanging quiescence checks and recording shutdown despite the configured timeout.

Open Bits AI session

🤖 Bits Code Review · Commit 06fbaf0

@amarziali

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@DataDog review

@datadog-official datadog-official Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Bits Code Review: PASS

More details

No reportable defect was identified in queued-event ordering, recording-window isolation, or quiescence wake-ups. Confidence is limited to source inspection; runtime behavior was not exercised.

Was this helpful? React 👍 or 👎

Open Bits AI session

🤖 Bits Code Review · Commit 0911528

@amarziali
amarziali enabled auto-merge October 26, 2026 18:51
@dd-octo-sts

dd-octo-sts Bot commented Oct 26, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🟢 Java Benchmark SLOs — All performance SLOs passed

Suite Status
Startup 🟢 pass

SLO thresholds are defined here based on automatically generated metrics. A warning is raised when results are within 5% of the threshold.

PR vs. master results
Scenario Candidate master Δ (95% CI of mean)
startup:insecure-bank:iast:Agent 13.94 s 13.92 s [-0.7%; +1.0%] (no difference)
startup:insecure-bank:tracing:Agent 12.91 s 12.97 s [-1.3%; +0.4%] (no difference)
startup:petclinic:appsec:Agent 17.09 s 17.06 s [-0.6%; +1.0%] (no difference)
startup:petclinic:iast:Agent 16.84 s 16.74 s [-3.8%; +5.0%] (no difference)
startup:petclinic:profiling:Agent 16.62 s 16.64 s [-1.3%; +1.1%] (no difference)
startup:petclinic:sca:Agent 17.15 s 16.98 s [+0.1%; +1.9%] (maybe worse)
startup:petclinic:tracing:Agent 16.03 s 16.21 s [-2.0%; -0.2%] (maybe better)

Commit: 69bbf76b · CI Pipeline · Benchmarking Platform UI


Load and DaCapo benchmarks can be triggered manually in the GitLab pipeline. Results will appear in the Benchmarking Platform UI after completion.

@amarziali

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@codex review

@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🛡️ Codex Security Review · Automatically triggered

Security review completed. No security issues were found in this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 94557e0be5

View security finding report

Only the user who started this review can view the report in Codex.

ℹ️ About Codex security reviews in GitHub

This is an experimental Codex feature. Security reviews are triggered when:

  • You comment "@codex security review"
  • A regular code review gets triggered (for example, "@codex review" or when a PR is opened), and you’re opted in so security review runs alongside code review

Once complete, Codex will leave suggestions, or a comment if no findings are found.

@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Bravo.

Reviewed commit: 94557e0be5

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to 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 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

@datadog-official

This comment has been minimized.

@dougqh dougqh left a comment •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good overall - Claude & I added a few comments throughout, but nothing major.

@amarziali
amarziali disabled auto-merge October 27, 2026 07:57
@amarziali
amarziali merged commit 2f3f5cc into master Oct 27, 2026
607 checks passed
@amarziali
amarziali deleted the andrea.marziali/fix-scope-diagnostics-carrier-deadlock branch October 27, 2026 08:19
@github-actions github-actions Bot added this to the 1.69.0 milestone Oct 27, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

comp: testing Testing tag: no release notes Changes to exclude from release notes type: bug fix Bug fix

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants