refactor(libdd-common)!: preparatory cleanup for restructure by Aaalibaba42 · Pull Request #2722 · DataDog/libdatadog

Aaalibaba42 · 2026-10-23T15:11:38Z

What does this PR do?

Declutter libdd-common before further refactor are possible, per epic APMSP-4094

Motivation

Plan to move libdd-common into other crates need first a cleanup pass.

Additional Notes

Will impact some consumers of this crates, most notably dd-trace-php, a comment was recorded in the ticket.

You might want to review commit by commit, instead of looking at the whole change at once, as it may seem erratic all at once

How to test the change?

chatgpt-codex-connector · 2026-10-23T15:11:55Z

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review	Status	Commit	Review trigger
📝 Code Review	✅ Completed 2026-10-23T15:55:37.149641Z	`13426bc`	Draft marked ready

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to 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" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

chatgpt-codex-connector

💡 Codex Review

https://github.com/DataDog/libdatadog/blob/45fc6930028ec0c1e278276fcf5f8112ba994169/libdd-common/src/config.rs#L29-L31
Preserve the published URI parser API

For downstream crates that call libdd_common::config::parse_env::uri, deleting this public function turns an otherwise source-compatible libdd-common update into a compile failure. The change is presented as a non-breaking refactor, so either retain/deprecate the function or classify the corresponding release as breaking.

AGENTS.md reference: AGENTS.md:L116-L119

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".

datadog-prod-us1-3 · 2026-10-23T15:19:37Z

🎉 All green!

🧪 All tests passed
❄️ No new flaky tests detected

🎯 Code Coverage (details)
• Patch Coverage: 0.00%
• Overall Coverage: 82.91% (+0.11%)

_{This comment will be updated automatically if new data arrives.

🔗 Commit SHA: bdfcaf4 | Docs | View more details | Give us feedback!}

Aaalibaba42 · 2026-10-23T15:42:53Z

@codex review

chatgpt-codex-connector · 2026-10-23T15:45:55Z

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. More of your lovely PRs please.

Reviewed commit: 13426bca85

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".

dd-octo-sts · 2026-10-23T15:47:43Z

Artifact Size Benchmark Report

aarch64-alpine-linux-musl

Artifact	Baseline	Commit	Change
/aarch64-alpine-linux-musl/lib/libdatadog_profiling.so	9.15 MB	9.08 MB	--.68% (-64.00 KB) 💪
/aarch64-alpine-linux-musl/lib/libdatadog_profiling.a	96.75 MB	96.68 MB	--.06% (-64.10 KB) 💪

aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu

Artifact	Baseline	Commit	Change
/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/libdatadog_profiling.so	12.37 MB	12.37 MB	-0% (-1.20 KB) 👌
/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/libdatadog_profiling.a	107.11 MB	107.11 MB	+0% (+3.21 KB) 👌

libdatadog-x64-windows

Artifact	Baseline	Commit	Change
/libdatadog-x64-windows/debug/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.dll	29.60 MB	29.50 MB	--.35% (-106.50 KB) 💪
/libdatadog-x64-windows/debug/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib	99.67 KB	99.67 KB	0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x64-windows/debug/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.pdb	194.61 MB	191.92 MB	--1.38% (-2.68 MB) 💪
/libdatadog-x64-windows/debug/static/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib	821.01 MB	797.93 MB	--2.81% (-23.07 MB) 💪
/libdatadog-x64-windows/release/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.dll	9.70 MB	9.70 MB	+.01% (+1.00 KB) 🔍
/libdatadog-x64-windows/release/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib	99.67 KB	99.67 KB	0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x64-windows/release/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.pdb	27.68 MB	27.66 MB	--.08% (-24.00 KB) 💪
/libdatadog-x64-windows/release/static/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib	55.71 MB	55.67 MB	--.06% (-36.56 KB) 💪

libdatadog-x86-windows

Artifact	Baseline	Commit	Change
/libdatadog-x86-windows/debug/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.dll	26.05 MB	25.99 MB	--.21% (-58.50 KB) 💪
/libdatadog-x86-windows/debug/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib	101.22 KB	101.22 KB	0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x86-windows/debug/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.pdb	199.99 MB	197.56 MB	--1.21% (-2.42 MB) 💪
/libdatadog-x86-windows/debug/static/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib	806.92 MB	784.58 MB	--2.76% (-22.33 MB) 💪
/libdatadog-x86-windows/release/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.dll	7.49 MB	7.49 MB	--.01% (-1.50 KB) 💪
/libdatadog-x86-windows/release/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib	101.22 KB	101.22 KB	0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x86-windows/release/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.pdb	29.76 MB	29.75 MB	--.05% (-16.00 KB) 💪
/libdatadog-x86-windows/release/static/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib	52.59 MB	52.57 MB	--.03% (-20.92 KB) 💪

x86_64-alpine-linux-musl

Artifact	Baseline	Commit	Change
/x86_64-alpine-linux-musl/lib/libdatadog_profiling.a	86.67 MB	86.65 MB	--.01% (-16.88 KB) 💪
/x86_64-alpine-linux-musl/lib/libdatadog_profiling.so	10.13 MB	10.13 MB	--.03% (-4.00 KB) 💪

x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu

Artifact	Baseline	Commit	Change
/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/libdatadog_profiling.a	102.15 MB	102.14 MB	-0% (-2.33 KB) 👌
/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/libdatadog_profiling.so	12.24 MB	12.24 MB	--.01% (-1.32 KB) 💪

pr-commenter · 2026-10-23T15:50:01Z

Benchmarks

Comparison

Benchmark execution time: 2026-10-27 14:08:19

Comparing candidate commit bdfcaf4 in PR branch jwiriath/APMSP-4095-prep-cleanup with baseline commit 0ea359a in branch main.

📊 Benchmarking dashboard

Found 11 performance improvements and 21 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 117 metrics, 10 unstable metrics.

Explanation

This is an A/B test comparing a candidate commit's performance against that of a baseline commit. Performance changes are noted in the tables below as:

🟩 = significantly better candidate vs. baseline
🟥 = significantly worse candidate vs. baseline

We compute a confidence interval (CI) over the relative difference of means between metrics from the candidate and baseline commits, considering the baseline as the reference.

If the CI is entirely outside the configured SIGNIFICANT_IMPACT_THRESHOLD (or the deprecated UNCONFIDENCE_THRESHOLD), the change is considered significant.

Feel free to reach out to #apm-benchmarking-platform on Slack if you have any questions.

More details about the CI and significant changes

You can imagine this CI as a range of values that is likely to contain the true difference of means between the candidate and baseline commits.

CIs of the difference of means are often centered around 0%, because often changes are not that big:

---------------------------------(------|---^--------)-------------------------------->
                              -0.6%    0%  0.3%     +1.2%
                                 |          |        |
         lower bound of the CI --'          |        |
sample mean (center of the CI) -------------'        |
         upper bound of the CI ----------------------'

As described above, a change is considered significant if the CI is entirely outside the configured SIGNIFICANT_IMPACT_THRESHOLD (or the deprecated UNCONFIDENCE_THRESHOLD).

For instance, for an execution time metric, this confidence interval indicates a significantly worse performance:

----------------------------------------|---------|---(---------^---------)---------->
                                       0%        1%  1.3%      2.2%      3.1%
                                                  |   |         |         |
       significant impact threshold --------------'   |         |         |
                      lower bound of CI --------------'         |         |
       sample mean (center of the CI) --------------------------'         |
                      upper bound of CI ----------------------------------'

scenario:agentless_encoding/common_http/20x5

🟩 execution_time [-8.383µs; -8.148µs] or [-7.203%; -7.001%]
🟩 throughput [+64739.008op/s; +66741.703op/s] or [+7.534%; +7.768%]

scenario:agentless_encoding/http_with_span_links/20x5

🟩 execution_time [-9.295µs; -9.222µs] or [-7.047%; -6.992%]
🟩 throughput [+57005.577op/s; +57472.692op/s] or [+7.519%; +7.580%]

scenario:credit_card/is_card_number/x371413321323331

🟥 execution_time [+401.129ns; +403.446ns] or [+6.637%; +6.675%]
🟥 throughput [-10354988.693op/s; -10296077.802op/s] or [-6.258%; -6.223%]

scenario:credit_card/is_card_number_no_luhn/x371413321323331

🟥 execution_time [+400.815ns; +403.885ns] or [+6.632%; +6.682%]
🟥 throughput [-10367194.508op/s; -10286327.137op/s] or [-6.266%; -6.217%]

scenario:msgpack_encoder::v04::write_to_slice_from_v04

🟩 execution_time [-26.031µs; -25.152µs] or [-4.235%; -4.092%]

scenario:sql/obfuscate_sql_string

🟥 execution_time [+12.129µs; +12.376µs] or [+4.235%; +4.322%]

scenario:vec_map/as_deduped_map/already_deduped/8

🟥 execution_time [+2.667ns; +2.748ns] or [+19.924%; +20.534%]

scenario:vec_map/as_deduped_map/needs_dedup_1_in_10/128

🟩 execution_time [-162.938ns; -155.929ns] or [-6.723%; -6.434%]

scenario:vec_map/as_deduped_map/needs_dedup_1_in_10/8

🟥 execution_time [+8.384ns; +8.619ns] or [+4.629%; +4.759%]

scenario:vec_map/as_deduped_map/needs_dedup_1_in_2/128

🟩 execution_time [-168.266ns; -165.297ns] or [-5.288%; -5.194%]

scenario:vec_map/contains_key/128

🟥 execution_time [+675.021ns; +692.235ns] or [+4.500%; +4.614%]
🟥 throughput [-376537.805op/s; -367232.710op/s] or [-4.413%; -4.304%]

scenario:vec_map/contains_key/64

🟥 execution_time [+237.775ns; +243.044ns] or [+6.045%; +6.179%]
🟥 throughput [-947180.031op/s; -927097.035op/s] or [-5.821%; -5.698%]

scenario:vec_map/contains_key/8

🟥 execution_time [+3.779ns; +4.011ns] or [+5.355%; +5.683%]
🟥 throughput [-6116652.941op/s; -5752311.885op/s] or [-5.396%; -5.074%]

scenario:vec_map/get_hit/64

🟥 execution_time [+1.702µs; +1.728µs] or [+46.769%; +47.488%]
🟥 throughput [-5660860.047op/s; -5601521.200op/s] or [-32.191%; -31.854%]

scenario:vec_map/get_hit/8

🟥 execution_time [+19.056ns; +19.189ns] or [+35.931%; +36.184%]
🟥 throughput [-40153180.758op/s; -39809206.237op/s] or [-26.617%; -26.389%]

scenario:vec_map/get_mut/128

🟥 execution_time [+1.632µs; +1.988µs] or [+11.573%; +14.101%]
🟥 throughput [-1133912.860op/s; -957202.389op/s] or [-12.462%; -10.520%]

scenario:vec_map/get_mut/64

🟥 execution_time [+471.897ns; +557.904ns] or [+12.364%; +14.618%]
🟥 throughput [-2183197.073op/s; -1842268.508op/s] or [-12.994%; -10.965%]

scenario:vec_map/iter/128

🟩 execution_time [-6.298ns; -6.162ns] or [-5.670%; -5.548%]
🟩 throughput [+67751370.103op/s; +69204410.498op/s] or [+5.879%; +6.005%]

scenario:vec_map/iter/8

🟩 execution_time [-0.588ns; -0.570ns] or [-8.118%; -7.880%]
🟩 throughput [+94604379.786op/s; +97693881.914op/s] or [+8.559%; +8.838%]

Unstable benchmarks

These benchmarks have a confidence interval too wide to call a change; treat them as noise rather than signal.

scenario:span_pool/allocated_bytes/1x10/pooled

unstable execution_time [-892.118ns; +396.682ns] or [-59.210%; +26.328%]
unstable throughput [-37338657.853op/s; +122449683.500op/s] or [-488.300%; +1601.347%]

scenario:span_pool/allocated_bytes/20x100/pooled

unstable execution_time [-51.778µs; +163.058µs] or [-3.606%; +11.355%]
unstable throughput [-133852.637op/s; +55211.125op/s] or [-9.599%; +3.960%]

scenario:span_pool_v1/allocated_bytes/1x10/pooled

unstable execution_time [-1018.877ns; +549.497ns] or [-56.304%; +30.366%]
unstable throughput [-57389.038op/s; +11751290.704op/s] or [-0.959%; +196.448%]

scenario:span_pool_v1/allocated_bytes/20x100/pooled

unstable execution_time [-21.217µs; +137.257µs] or [-1.593%; +10.306%]
unstable throughput [-147473.113op/s; +23823.616op/s] or [-9.785%; +1.581%]

scenario:vec_map/get_mut/8

unstable execution_time [-0.807ns; +10.297ns] or [-0.897%; +11.443%]
unstable throughput [-10840675.411op/s; +575735.668op/s] or [-11.581%; +0.615%]

Benchmark execution time: 2026-10-27 14:12:03

Comparing candidate commit bdfcaf4 in PR branch jwiriath/APMSP-4095-prep-cleanup with baseline commit 0ea359a in branch main.

📊 Benchmarking dashboard

Found 2 performance improvements and 4 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 89 metrics, 0 unstable metrics.

Explanation

This is an A/B test comparing a candidate commit's performance against that of a baseline commit. Performance changes are noted in the tables below as:

🟩 = significantly better candidate vs. baseline
🟥 = significantly worse candidate vs. baseline

We compute a confidence interval (CI) over the relative difference of means between metrics from the candidate and baseline commits, considering the baseline as the reference.

If the CI is entirely outside the configured SIGNIFICANT_IMPACT_THRESHOLD (or the deprecated UNCONFIDENCE_THRESHOLD), the change is considered significant.

Feel free to reach out to #apm-benchmarking-platform on Slack if you have any questions.

More details about the CI and significant changes

You can imagine this CI as a range of values that is likely to contain the true difference of means between the candidate and baseline commits.

CIs of the difference of means are often centered around 0%, because often changes are not that big:

---------------------------------(------|---^--------)-------------------------------->
                              -0.6%    0%  0.3%     +1.2%
                                 |          |        |
         lower bound of the CI --'          |        |
sample mean (center of the CI) -------------'        |
         upper bound of the CI ----------------------'

As described above, a change is considered significant if the CI is entirely outside the configured SIGNIFICANT_IMPACT_THRESHOLD (or the deprecated UNCONFIDENCE_THRESHOLD).

For instance, for an execution time metric, this confidence interval indicates a significantly worse performance:

----------------------------------------|---------|---(---------^---------)---------->
                                       0%        1%  1.3%      2.2%      3.1%
                                                  |   |         |         |
       significant impact threshold --------------'   |         |         |
                      lower bound of CI --------------'         |         |
       sample mean (center of the CI) --------------------------'         |
                      upper bound of CI ----------------------------------'

scenario:flagevaluation_evp/coalescer/stress/10flags_1000users_250fields

🟥 execution_time [+15.084ms; +15.733ms] or [+8.057%; +8.403%]
🟥 throughput [-414.532op/s; -397.821op/s] or [-7.760%; -7.447%]

scenario:flagevaluation_evp/payloads/stress/10flags_1000users_250fields

🟥 execution_time [+11.291ms; +11.433ms] or [+6.223%; +6.302%]
🟥 throughput [-326.870op/s; -322.793op/s] or [-5.930%; -5.856%]

scenario:thread_cpu/alloc_free/system/4096

🟩 execution_time [-16.397ns; -16.260ns] or [-15.525%; -15.396%]

scenario:thread_cpu/profiler_attached/slow_path_system/4096

🟩 execution_time [-10.262ns; -10.104ns] or [-6.523%; -6.422%]

Benchmark execution time: 2026-10-27 14:17:26

Comparing candidate commit bdfcaf4 in PR branch jwiriath/APMSP-4095-prep-cleanup with baseline commit 0ea359a in branch main.

📊 Benchmarking dashboard

Found 0 performance improvements and 4 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 68 metrics, 24 unstable metrics.

Explanation

This is an A/B test comparing a candidate commit's performance against that of a baseline commit. Performance changes are noted in the tables below as:

🟩 = significantly better candidate vs. baseline
🟥 = significantly worse candidate vs. baseline

We compute a confidence interval (CI) over the relative difference of means between metrics from the candidate and baseline commits, considering the baseline as the reference.

If the CI is entirely outside the configured SIGNIFICANT_IMPACT_THRESHOLD (or the deprecated UNCONFIDENCE_THRESHOLD), the change is considered significant.

Feel free to reach out to #apm-benchmarking-platform on Slack if you have any questions.

More details about the CI and significant changes

You can imagine this CI as a range of values that is likely to contain the true difference of means between the candidate and baseline commits.

CIs of the difference of means are often centered around 0%, because often changes are not that big:

---------------------------------(------|---^--------)-------------------------------->
                              -0.6%    0%  0.3%     +1.2%
                                 |          |        |
         lower bound of the CI --'          |        |
sample mean (center of the CI) -------------'        |
         upper bound of the CI ----------------------'

As described above, a change is considered significant if the CI is entirely outside the configured SIGNIFICANT_IMPACT_THRESHOLD (or the deprecated UNCONFIDENCE_THRESHOLD).

For instance, for an execution time metric, this confidence interval indicates a significantly worse performance:

----------------------------------------|---------|---(---------^---------)---------->
                                       0%        1%  1.3%      2.2%      3.1%
                                                  |   |         |         |
       significant impact threshold --------------'   |         |         |
                      lower bound of CI --------------'         |         |
       sample mean (center of the CI) --------------------------'         |
                      upper bound of CI ----------------------------------'

scenario:datadog_sample_span/complex_rule_partial_match/wall_time

🟥 execution_time [+9.256ns; +9.621ns] or [+4.325%; +4.495%]

scenario:glob_matcher/ascii_case_insensitive_match/wall_time

🟥 execution_time [+3.535ns; +3.667ns] or [+12.920%; +13.402%]

scenario:glob_matcher/ascii_exact_match/wall_time

🟥 execution_time [+3.551ns; +3.731ns] or [+12.944%; +13.598%]

scenario:glob_matcher/ascii_exact_miss/wall_time

🟥 execution_time [+3.069ns; +3.118ns] or [+23.255%; +23.623%]

Unstable benchmarks

These benchmarks have a confidence interval too wide to call a change; treat them as noise rather than signal.

scenario:datadog_sample_span/complex_rule_matching/allocated_bytes

unstable execution_time [-0.000ns; +0.000ns] or [+555.735%; -555.735%]

scenario:datadog_sample_span/complex_rule_partial_match/allocated_bytes

unstable execution_time [-0.000ns; +0.000ns] or [+546.883%; -551.588%]

scenario:datadog_sample_span/many_attributes_tag_rule/allocated_bytes

unstable execution_time [-0.000ns; +0.000ns] or [+559.678%; -557.595%]

scenario:datadog_sample_span/multiple_rules_first_match/allocated_bytes

unstable execution_time [-0.000ns; +0.000ns] or [+555.735%; -555.735%]

scenario:datadog_sample_span/multiple_rules_last_match/allocated_bytes

unstable execution_time [-0.000ns; +0.000ns] or [+552.305%; -554.123%]

scenario:datadog_sample_span/name_pattern_rule_matching/allocated_bytes

unstable execution_time [-0.000ns; +0.000ns] or [+548.494%; -552.340%]

scenario:datadog_sample_span/name_pattern_rule_not_matching/allocated_bytes

unstable execution_time [-0.000ns; +0.000ns] or [+558.517%; -557.046%]

scenario:datadog_sample_span/parent_not_sampled_short_circuit/allocated_bytes

unstable execution_time [-0.000ns; +0.000ns] or [+555.182%; -555.475%]

scenario:datadog_sample_span/parent_sampled_short_circuit/allocated_bytes

unstable execution_time [-0.000ns; +0.000ns] or [+555.735%; -555.735%]

scenario:datadog_sample_span/resource_pattern_rule_matching/allocated_bytes

unstable execution_time [-0.000ns; +0.000ns] or [+552.108%; -554.031%]

scenario:datadog_sample_span/resource_pattern_rule_not_matching/allocated_bytes

unstable execution_time [-0.000ns; +0.000ns] or [+558.537%; -557.056%]

scenario:datadog_sample_span/root_span_no_rules/allocated_bytes

unstable execution_time [-0.000ns; +0.000ns] or [+553.748%; -554.800%]

scenario:datadog_sample_span/service_rule_matching/allocated_bytes

unstable execution_time [-0.000ns; +0.000ns] or [+552.305%; -554.123%]

scenario:datadog_sample_span/service_rule_not_matching/allocated_bytes

unstable execution_time [-0.000ns; +0.000ns] or [+549.049%; -552.599%]

scenario:datadog_sample_span/tag_rule_matching/allocated_bytes

unstable execution_time [-0.000ns; +0.000ns] or [+559.340%; -557.435%]

scenario:datadog_sample_span/tag_rule_not_matching/allocated_bytes

unstable execution_time [-0.000ns; +0.000ns] or [+555.735%; -555.735%]

scenario:glob_matcher/ascii_case_insensitive_match/allocated_bytes

unstable execution_time [-0.000ns; +0.000ns] or [+591.743%; -572.993%]

scenario:glob_matcher/ascii_exact_match/allocated_bytes

unstable execution_time [-0.000ns; +0.000ns] or [+592.262%; -573.246%]

scenario:glob_matcher/ascii_exact_miss/allocated_bytes

unstable execution_time [-0.000ns; +0.000ns] or [+667.285%; -610.803%]

scenario:glob_matcher/ascii_wildcard_backtrack_match/allocated_bytes

unstable execution_time [-0.000ns; +0.000ns] or [+554.959%; -555.370%]

scenario:glob_matcher/ascii_wildcard_heavy_backtrack/allocated_bytes

unstable execution_time [-0.000ns; +0.000ns] or [+557.454%; -556.545%]

scenario:glob_matcher/ascii_wildcard_question_match/allocated_bytes

unstable execution_time [-0.000ns; +0.000ns] or [+564.448%; -559.856%]

scenario:glob_matcher/ascii_wildcard_star_match/allocated_bytes

unstable execution_time [-0.000ns; +0.000ns] or [+566.019%; -560.602%]

scenario:glob_matcher/star_short_circuit/allocated_bytes

unstable execution_time [-0.000ns; +0.000ns] or [+554.967%; -555.374%]

Candidate

Omitted due to size.

Baseline

Omitted due to size.

…ed cstr! The cstr! macro was copied in only to build two fixed strings, validating them at runtime with a panic path. C string literals are checked at compile time. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

The release review skill and the libdd-common README still listed the cstr module and its macros. Point the skill at c"..." literals instead, which the workspace MSRV supports. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

Win32_System_Diagnostics_ToolHelp and Win32_System_Performance were used by test_utils and the rate limiter clock, which now live in tools and libdd-ipc. Both crates declare the features they need. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

The rate limiter moved to libdd-ipc. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

…rep-cleanup Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com> # Conflicts: # Cargo.lock # libdd-common/Cargo.toml # libdd-profiling/Cargo.toml

github-actions · 2026-10-24T16:06:57Z

Clippy Allow Annotation Report

Tracked Clippy allow annotations changed vs main: ⚠️ +1 (8 → 9)

Rule	Base	PR	Δ
panic	1	0	✅ -1
unwrap_used	7	9	⚠️ +2

By file and crate

By file

File	Base	PR	Δ
`libdd-common/src/cstr.rs`	1	0	✅ -1
`libdd-ipc/src/rate_limiter/shm.rs`	0	2	⚠️ +2

By crate

Crate	Base	PR	Δ
`libdd-ipc`	21	23	⚠️ +2

About This Report

This report tracks Clippy allow annotations for specific rules, showing how they've changed in this PR. Decreasing the number of these annotations generally improves code quality. Panic-inducing macros in particular should be avoided. In the future, this report may become a PR-blocking quality gate.

hoolioh

LGTM. However check with php team if we can remove cc_utils entirely, I believe they're using it in their repository. @morrisonlevi is that ok to port the same changes to dd-trace-php or should we leave cc_utils in libdd for now?

bwoebi · 2026-10-26T13:27:39Z

@hoolioh We don't use cc_utils directly in dd-trace-php. So no issue here.

…rep-cleanup

Aaalibaba42 · 2026-10-27T13:45:35Z

/merge

gh-worker-devflow-routing-ef8351 · 2026-10-27T13:45:40Z

View all feedbacks in Devflow UI.

2026-10-27 13:45:39 UTC ℹ️ Start processing command /merge

2026-10-27 13:45:46 UTC ℹ️ MergeQueue: Pull request is not mergeable yet

It will be processed automatically as soon as GitHub reports it as mergeable. View in MergeQueue UI.

Run /code blockers to see what is blocking it.
Run /remove to cancel it.

2026-10-27 15:01:11 UTC ℹ️ MergeQueue: merge request added to the queue

The expected merge time in main is approximately 44m (p90).

2026-10-27 15:41:23 UTC ℹ️ MergeQueue: This merge request was merged

Aaalibaba42 added 2 commits October 23, 2026 16:58

chore: remove dead code

e7bff2e

refactor: use tools/cc_utils in build script, drop it from libdd-common

45fc693

Aaalibaba42 requested review from a team as code owners October 23, 2026 15:11

github-actions Bot added common crashtracker labels Oct 23, 2026

Aaalibaba42 changed the title ~~refactor(libdd: preparatory cleanup for restructure~~ refactor(libdd-common): preparatory cleanup for restructure Oct 23, 2026

Aaalibaba42 marked this pull request as draft October 23, 2026 15:11

chore: inline cstr! macro, drop libdd-common dependancy

e78e0a3

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot reviewed Oct 23, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread libdd-crashtracker/Cargo.toml Outdated

Aaalibaba42 added 2 commits October 23, 2026 17:18

refactor: move LocalLimiter from libdd-common into libdd-ipc

3703a6b

chore: fmt

685b3a1

refactor: move bench_utils/test_utils out of libdd-common

346fe10

github-actions Bot added telemetry mini-agent sampling labels Oct 23, 2026

chore: remove unused dependancy

13426bc

Aaalibaba42 changed the title ~~refactor(libdd-common): preparatory cleanup for restructure~~ refactor(libdd-common)!: preparatory cleanup for restructure Oct 23, 2026

Aaalibaba42 marked this pull request as ready for review October 23, 2026 15:51

Aaalibaba42 requested a review from a team as a code owner October 23, 2026 15:51

morrisonlevi and others added 5 commits October 23, 2026 11:29

docs(libdd-common): drop the rate limiter from the README

3099080

The rate limiter moved to libdd-ipc. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/main' into jwiriath/APMSP-4095-p…

81ac98d

…rep-cleanup Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com> # Conflicts: # Cargo.lock # libdd-common/Cargo.toml # libdd-profiling/Cargo.toml

Aaalibaba42 added 2 commits October 26, 2026 11:06

refactor(ipc): split rate_limiter into local and shm submodules

bf2a1a1

refactor: drop cc_utils, use cc directly in build scripts

371663a

Aaalibaba42 requested a review from a team as a code owner October 26, 2026 10:29

chore: codeowner

033e925

github-actions Bot added the ci-build label Oct 26, 2026

hoolioh approved these changes Oct 26, 2026

View reviewed changes

paullegranddc approved these changes Oct 26, 2026

View reviewed changes

paullegranddc reviewed Oct 26, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread .claude/skills/release-proposal-pr-review-bumps/SKILL.md Outdated

docs: revove mention of cstr macro skill

2ad8bbb

anna-git approved these changes Oct 27, 2026

View reviewed changes

bwoebi approved these changes Oct 27, 2026

View reviewed changes

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/main' into jwiriath/APMSP-4095-p…

bdfcaf4

…rep-cleanup

gh-worker-dd-devflow-36fce6 Bot added mergequeue-status: waiting mergequeue-status: queued mergequeue-status: in_progress and removed mergequeue-status: waiting mergequeue-status: queued labels Oct 27, 2026

gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d Bot merged commit 87970b5 into main Oct 27, 2026
149 of 150 checks passed

gh-worker-dd-devflow-36fce6 Bot added mergequeue-status: done and removed mergequeue-status: in_progress labels Oct 27, 2026

gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d Bot deleted the jwiriath/APMSP-4095-prep-cleanup branch October 27, 2026 15:41

Conversation

Aaalibaba42 commented Oct 23, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

What does this PR do?

Motivation

Additional Notes

How to test the change?

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Oct 23, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codex Review Summary

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

💡 Codex Review

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

datadog-prod-us1-3 Bot commented Oct 23, 2026 • edited by datadog-official Bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Aaalibaba42 commented Oct 23, 2026

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Oct 23, 2026

Uh oh!

dd-octo-sts Bot commented Oct 23, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Artifact Size Benchmark Report

Uh oh!

pr-commenter Bot commented Oct 23, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Benchmarks

Comparison

Explanation

More details about the CI and significant changes

scenario:agentless_encoding/common_http/20x5

scenario:agentless_encoding/http_with_span_links/20x5

scenario:credit_card/is_card_number/x371413321323331

scenario:credit_card/is_card_number_no_luhn/x371413321323331

scenario:msgpack_encoder::v04::write_to_slice_from_v04

scenario:sql/obfuscate_sql_string

scenario:vec_map/as_deduped_map/already_deduped/8

scenario:vec_map/as_deduped_map/needs_dedup_1_in_10/128

scenario:vec_map/as_deduped_map/needs_dedup_1_in_10/8

scenario:vec_map/as_deduped_map/needs_dedup_1_in_2/128

scenario:vec_map/contains_key/128

scenario:vec_map/contains_key/64

scenario:vec_map/contains_key/8

scenario:vec_map/get_hit/64

scenario:vec_map/get_hit/8

scenario:vec_map/get_mut/128

scenario:vec_map/get_mut/64

scenario:vec_map/iter/128

scenario:vec_map/iter/8

Unstable benchmarks

scenario:span_pool/allocated_bytes/1x10/pooled

scenario:span_pool/allocated_bytes/20x100/pooled

scenario:span_pool_v1/allocated_bytes/1x10/pooled

scenario:span_pool_v1/allocated_bytes/20x100/pooled

scenario:vec_map/get_mut/8

Explanation

More details about the CI and significant changes

scenario:flagevaluation_evp/coalescer/stress/10flags_1000users_250fields

scenario:flagevaluation_evp/payloads/stress/10flags_1000users_250fields

scenario:thread_cpu/alloc_free/system/4096

scenario:thread_cpu/profiler_attached/slow_path_system/4096

Explanation

More details about the CI and significant changes

scenario:datadog_sample_span/complex_rule_partial_match/wall_time

scenario:glob_matcher/ascii_case_insensitive_match/wall_time

scenario:glob_matcher/ascii_exact_match/wall_time

scenario:glob_matcher/ascii_exact_miss/wall_time

Unstable benchmarks

scenario:datadog_sample_span/complex_rule_matching/allocated_bytes

scenario:datadog_sample_span/complex_rule_partial_match/allocated_bytes

scenario:datadog_sample_span/many_attributes_tag_rule/allocated_bytes

scenario:datadog_sample_span/multiple_rules_first_match/allocated_bytes

scenario:datadog_sample_span/multiple_rules_last_match/allocated_bytes

scenario:datadog_sample_span/name_pattern_rule_matching/allocated_bytes

scenario:datadog_sample_span/name_pattern_rule_not_matching/allocated_bytes

scenario:datadog_sample_span/parent_not_sampled_short_circuit/allocated_bytes

Aaalibaba42 commented Oct 23, 2026 •

edited

Loading

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Oct 23, 2026 •

edited

Loading

datadog-prod-us1-3 Bot commented Oct 23, 2026 •

edited by datadog-official Bot

Loading

dd-octo-sts Bot commented Oct 23, 2026 •

edited

Loading

pr-commenter Bot commented Oct 23, 2026 •

edited

Loading

github-actions Bot commented Oct 24, 2026 •

edited

Loading

gh-worker-devflow-routing-ef8351 Bot commented Oct 27, 2026 •

edited

Loading