Skip to content

Conversation

@g-r-a-n-t
Copy link
Collaborator

No description provided.

Copy link

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

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: be5c9ae73a

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".

Comment on lines +471 to +475
// Dispatch new work, but only for the current highest-priority class.
while in_flight.len() < max_concurrency
&& max_unresolved_priority.is_some()
&& active_priority.as_ref() == max_unresolved_priority.as_ref()
{

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

P1 Badge Enforce priority when dispatching async node work

With max_concurrency > 1, this loop computes max_unresolved_priority only once, then keeps dispatching even after the highest-priority node is removed. That allows lower-priority nodes to be resolved while higher-priority work is still in flight, despite the comment. In the ingot graph this can surface real errors: IngotDescriptor::ByNameVersion only resolves after a higher-priority local node installs its alias, but if it gets dispatched early it immediately returns NoResolvedIngotByMetadata (resolve_ingot_location in crates/resolver/src/ingot.rs). Sync resolution never hits that path because it strictly processes higher priority first. Recomputing the max or checking the popped node’s priority against active_priority before dispatch would avoid these false failures.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

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.

1 participant