Skip to content

ci: give non-PR code quality runs distinct concurrency groups#1894

Open
arham766 wants to merge 1 commit into
NVIDIA:mainfrom
arham766:ci-code-quality-concurrency
Open

ci: give non-PR code quality runs distinct concurrency groups#1894
arham766 wants to merge 1 commit into
NVIDIA:mainfrom
arham766:ci-code-quality-concurrency

Conversation

@arham766

@arham766 arham766 commented Jul 2, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

What does this PR do?

Type of change: Bug fix

The concurrency group used github.event.pull_request.number with no fallback, so every nightly and manually dispatched run shared the literal group Code Quality- with cancel-in-progress: true — a manual dispatch cancels an in-flight nightly and vice versa. Adds the || github.sha fallback already used by unit_tests.yml.

Usage

N/A — CI workflow configuration change.

Testing

Matches the existing pattern in unit_tests.yml line-for-line. YAML validated.

Before your PR is "Ready for review"

  • Is this change backward compatible?: ✅
  • If you copied code from any other sources or added a new PIP dependency, did you follow guidance in CONTRIBUTING.md: N/A
  • Did you write any new necessary tests?: N/A (workflow config; validated as described above)
  • Did you update Changelog?: N/A (CI-only change)
  • Did you get Claude approval on this PR?: N/A (external contributor; cannot trigger /claude review)

Additional Information

Part of #1890 (item 4).

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Chores
    • Improved workflow concurrency handling so automated runs are grouped and canceled more reliably across pull request, manual, and scheduled triggers.

Without the github.sha fallback (already used by unit_tests.yml), every
nightly and manually dispatched run shares the literal group
'Code Quality-' with cancel-in-progress enabled, so a manual dispatch
cancels an in-flight nightly run and vice versa.

Signed-off-by: arham766 <arhamislam766@yahoo.com>
@arham766 arham766 requested a review from a team as a code owner July 2, 2026 21:28
@arham766 arham766 requested a review from kevalmorabia97 July 2, 2026 21:28
@copy-pr-bot

copy-pr-bot Bot commented Jul 2, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

This pull request requires additional validation before any workflows can run on NVIDIA's runners.

Pull request vetters can view their responsibilities here.

Contributors can view more details about this message here.

@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Jul 2, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Review Change Stack

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Enterprise

Run ID: 05e08661-1f5f-42a5-8170-78dac18970f2

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 4b9225b and 49aed56.

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

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The concurrency group key in the code_quality GitHub Actions workflow was modified to combine the workflow name with either the pull request number or the commit SHA, replacing the previous PR-number-only grouping.

Changes

Workflow Concurrency Configuration

Layer / File(s) Summary
Update concurrency group key
.github/workflows/code_quality.yml
Changed the concurrency.group value to ${{ github.workflow }}-${{ github.event.pull_request.number || github.sha }}, adding a fallback to the commit SHA when no PR number exists.

Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~2 minutes

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 6
✅ Passed checks (6 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Description Check ✅ Passed Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check ✅ Passed The title accurately summarizes the CI workflow change to separate non-PR code quality concurrency groups.
Docstring Coverage ✅ Passed No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
Linked Issues check ✅ Passed Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check ✅ Passed Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Security Anti-Patterns ✅ Passed No changed modelopt/examples code adds unsafe load/eval patterns; trust_remote_code stays caller-configurable, and new deps are permissive.
✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.

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