Skip to content

Bump crossbeam-epoch from 0.9.18 to 0.9.20#98

Open
cakebaker wants to merge 1 commit into
uutils:mainfrom
cakebaker:bump_crossbeam_epoch
Open

Bump crossbeam-epoch from 0.9.18 to 0.9.20#98
cakebaker wants to merge 1 commit into
uutils:mainfrom
cakebaker:bump_crossbeam_epoch

Conversation

@cakebaker

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Fixes #97

@codecov

codecov Bot commented Jul 7, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 85.07%. Comparing base (3f5db7d) to head (1c780cf).
⚠️ Report is 47 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main      #98      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   78.64%   85.07%   +6.42%     
==========================================
  Files          13       15       +2     
  Lines        2585     3490     +905     
  Branches      230      246      +16     
==========================================
+ Hits         2033     2969     +936     
+ Misses        552      520      -32     
- Partials        0        1       +1     
Flag Coverage Δ
macos_latest 84.95% <ø> (+7.31%) ⬆️
ubuntu_latest 84.55% <ø> (+6.37%) ⬆️
windows_latest 17.33% <ø> (+2.63%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ 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.

@codspeed-hq

codspeed-hq Bot commented Jul 7, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Merging this PR will not alter performance

✅ 20 untouched benchmarks
⏩ 9 skipped benchmarks1


Comparing cakebaker:bump_crossbeam_epoch (1c780cf) with main (b19bff4)

Open in CodSpeed

Footnotes

  1. 9 benchmarks were skipped, so the baseline results were used instead. If they were deleted from the codebase, click here and archive them to remove them from the performance reports.

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.

RUSTSEC-2026-0204: Invalid pointer dereference in fmt::Pointer impl for Atomic and Shared when the underlying pointer is invalid

1 participant