Skip to content

Conversation

@IGN-Styly
Copy link
Member

@IGN-Styly IGN-Styly commented Aug 3, 2025

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Chores
    • Updated the workflow to use the official GitHub action for caching Rust dependencies.
    • Simplified Rust toolchain update steps and improved workflow naming and runner selection.

@coderabbitai
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Aug 3, 2025

Warning

Rate limit exceeded

@IGN-Styly has exceeded the limit for the number of commits or files that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 10 minutes and 51 seconds before requesting another review.

⌛ How to resolve this issue?

After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit.

🚦 How do rate limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization.

Our paid plans have higher rate limits than the trial, open-source and free plans. In all cases, we re-allow further reviews after a brief timeout.

Please see our FAQ for further information.

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between d67da9c and 731dc2b.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • .github/workflows/rust.yml (1 hunks)

Walkthrough

The GitHub Actions workflow for Rust was renamed and updated to use the official actions/cache@v4 for caching Cargo dependencies instead of a third-party action. The runner was changed to ubuntu-latest, explicit permissions and environment variables were removed, and Rust toolchain update commands were consolidated.

Changes

Cohort / File(s) Change Summary
GitHub Actions Workflow Update
.github/workflows/rust.yml
Renamed workflow and updated runner; replaced third-party cache action with official actions/cache@v4; removed explicit permissions and environment variables; consolidated Rust toolchain update commands.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~6 minutes

Poem

In the warren where workflows run fast,
A rabbit swapped caches at last.
From Swatinem to Actions, the change is complete,
With toolchain commands now obsolete.
The CI hops lighter, dependencies in tow—
Oh, how the carrots of progress do grow! 🥕

✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Post copyable unit tests in a comment
  • Commit unit tests in branch dev

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
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Explain this complex logic.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai explain this code block.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and explain its main purpose.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Support

Need help? Create a ticket on our support page for assistance with any issues or questions.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate sequence diagram to generate a sequence diagram of the changes in this PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate unit tests to generate unit tests for this PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a 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

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between d3e0f42 and bf1df1d.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • .github/workflows/rust.yml (1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 actionlint (1.7.7)
.github/workflows/rust.yml

34-34: missing input "key" which is required by action "actions/cache@v4". all required inputs are "key", "path"

(action)


34-34: missing input "path" which is required by action "actions/cache@v4". all required inputs are "key", "path"

(action)

⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (1)
  • GitHub Check: Analyze (rust)

Comment on lines 11 to 25
name: Rust project - latest
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
strategy:
matrix:
toolchain:
- stable
- beta
- nightly

steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v4

- name: Install Protoc
uses: arduino/setup-protoc@v3
env:
repo-token: ${{ secrets.GITHUB_TOKEN }}

- uses: Swatinem/rust-cache@v2

- run: rustup update ${{ matrix.toolchain }} && rustup default ${{ matrix.toolchain }}

- name: Build
run: cargo build --verbose

- name: Run tests
run: cargo test --verbose
- name: Cache Cargo dependencies
uses: actions/cache@v4
- run: cargo build --verbose
- run: cargo test --verbose

Check warning

Code scanning / CodeQL

Workflow does not contain permissions Medium

Actions job or workflow does not limit the permissions of the GITHUB_TOKEN. Consider setting an explicit permissions block, using the following as a minimal starting point: {contents: read}

Copilot Autofix

AI 5 months ago

To fix the problem, explicitly set the permissions key in the workflow file to restrict the GITHUB_TOKEN to the minimum required privileges. For a typical Rust build and test workflow that only checks out code and runs tests, contents: read is sufficient. This can be set at the workflow level (applies to all jobs) or at the job level (applies only to the specified job). The best practice is to set it at the workflow level unless a job requires different permissions. The change should be made near the top of the file, after the name and before on.


Suggested changeset 1
.github/workflows/rust.yml

Autofix patch

Autofix patch
Run the following command in your local git repository to apply this patch
cat << 'EOF' | git apply
diff --git a/.github/workflows/rust.yml b/.github/workflows/rust.yml
--- a/.github/workflows/rust.yml
+++ b/.github/workflows/rust.yml
@@ -1,2 +1,4 @@
 name: Rust
+permissions:
+  contents: read
 
EOF
@@ -1,2 +1,4 @@
name: Rust
permissions:
contents: read

Copilot is powered by AI and may make mistakes. Always verify output.
Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actionable comments posted: 0

♻️ Duplicate comments (2)
.github/workflows/rust.yml (2)

10-13: Add an explicit permissions block for least-privilege execution

The workflow currently runs with the default wide-open GITHUB_TOKEN permissions. A minimal permissions block (e.g. { contents: read }) is recommended and flagged by CodeQL.

   build_and_test:
     name: Rust project - latest
     runs-on: ubuntu-latest
+    permissions:
+      contents: read

24-29: Cache configuration is incomplete – include target/ and make the key toolchain-aware

actions/cache@v4 is now wired, but:

  1. Only ~/.cargo is cached; this omits the target/ directory that stores compiled artefacts and usually delivers the biggest speed-up.
  2. The cache key is identical for stable, beta, and nightly, so the first job to upload wins and later jobs may restore an incompatible target/ even if you add it later.

Suggested fix:

-      - name: Cache Cargo dependencies
-        uses: actions/cache@v4
-        with:
-          path: ~/.cargo
-          key: ${{ runner.os }}-cargo-${{ hashFiles('**/Cargo.lock') }}
+      - name: Cache Cargo dependencies
+        uses: actions/cache@v4
+        with:
+          path: |
+            ~/.cargo/registry
+            ~/.cargo/git
+            target
+          key: ${{ runner.os }}-cargo-${{ matrix.toolchain }}-${{ hashFiles('**/Cargo.lock') }}
+          restore-keys: |
+            ${{ runner.os }}-cargo-${{ matrix.toolchain }}-

This mirrors what Swatinem/rust-cache did out-of-the-box and avoids cross-toolchain clashes.

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
.github/workflows/rust.yml (1)

29-30: Lock dependency graph during CI builds

Passing --locked ensures the build uses the checked-in Cargo.lock and fails if it’s out of sync with Cargo.toml, preventing accidental drift.

-      - run: cargo build --verbose
-      - run: cargo test --verbose
+      - run: cargo build --locked --verbose
+      - run: cargo test  --locked --verbose
📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between bf1df1d and d67da9c.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • .github/workflows/rust.yml (1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 GitHub Check: CodeQL
.github/workflows/rust.yml

[warning] 11-30: Workflow does not contain permissions
Actions job or workflow does not limit the permissions of the GITHUB_TOKEN. Consider setting an explicit permissions block, using the following as a minimal starting point: {{contents: read}}

⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (1)
  • GitHub Check: Analyze (rust)

@IGN-Styly IGN-Styly merged commit d4ea7f9 into main Aug 3, 2025
7 checks passed
@IGN-Styly IGN-Styly deleted the dev branch August 14, 2025 13:50
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