Skip to content

ci: extend the concurrency guard to CodeQL - #1235

Merged
vringar merged 1 commit into
masterfrom
ci/codeql-concurrency
Sep 7, 2026
Merged

vringar merged 1 commit into
masterfrom
ci/codeql-concurrency

Conversation

@vringar

@vringar vringar commented Sep 6, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

#1233 gave run-tests.yaml a concurrency group but left CodeQL uncovered, so a
force-push during review still leaves the superseded analysis holding runners.
Same triggers, same block, byte for byte.

Also contracts the comment in both files.

Copilot AI lite review requested due to automatic review settings September 6, 2026 20:25

Copilot AI 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.

Warning

Copilot couldn't run its full agentic review because it didn't start before the timeout. Make sure your repository has a runner available, or add a copilot-code-review.yml file specifying one with the runs-on attribute. See the docs for more details.

Pull request overview

Extends the existing CI concurrency guard to the CodeQL workflow so that superseded PR runs are cancelled and don’t keep consuming runners, while keeping non-PR triggers fully parallel.

Changes:

  • Add the same concurrency group/cancellation behavior to .github/workflows/codeql-analysis.yml.
  • Replace the long explanatory concurrency comment in run-tests.yaml with a shorter “what it’s for” comment, and add the same comment to CodeQL.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.

File Description
.github/workflows/run-tests.yaml Updates the concurrency comment to a shorter description of intent.
.github/workflows/codeql-analysis.yml Adds concurrency grouping + PR cancellation to prevent redundant CodeQL runs from holding runners.

💡 Add a code-review agent skill or configure MCP servers for context-aware, tailored reviews. Learn more in the docs.

Comment on lines +24 to +25
# on PRs only run the latest changes, everything else should run and also run
# in parallel. no queuing
Comment on lines +13 to +14
# on PRs only run the latest changes, everything else should run and also run
# in parallel. no queuing
CodeQL runs on every pull request and had no concurrency group, so a
force-push during review left the superseded analysis holding runners
alongside the test matrix. Give it the same group as the test workflow.

Contract the comment in both files to a single line describing the intent
rather than the mechanism.
@vringar
vringar force-pushed the ci/codeql-concurrency branch from 3737d39 to 89a1612 Compare September 6, 2026 21:44
@codecov

codecov Bot commented Sep 6, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 62.34%. Comparing base (14745c4) to head (89a1612).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #1235   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   62.34%   62.34%           
=======================================
  Files          40       40           
  Lines        3930     3930           
=======================================
  Hits         2450     2450           
  Misses       1480     1480           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

@vringar
vringar added this pull request to the merge queue Sep 7, 2026
Merged via the queue into master with commit f655dfa Sep 7, 2026
15 checks passed
@vringar
vringar deleted the ci/codeql-concurrency branch September 7, 2026 09:04
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