Skip to content

Validate shared teardown result on graceful stop - #422

Open
luvs01 wants to merge 20 commits into
Devfrom
codex/fix-issue-with-graceful-stop-handling
Open

Validate shared teardown result on graceful stop#422
luvs01 wants to merge 20 commits into
Devfrom
codex/fix-issue-with-graceful-stop-handling

Conversation

@luvs01

@luvs01 luvs01 commented Sep 3, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Motivation

  • A graceful stop previously treated an HTTP-200 response and the child process exit as proof that the proxy performed its shared teardown, which can suppress the caller-side restore when the proxy actually reported success: false or returned a malformed result.
  • That conflation can leave native Codex or Grok still pointed at a stopped proxy while the CLI reports a successful stop, producing an operational integrity/availability regression.

Description

  • Parse and validate the structured /api/stop response body and require success: true plus the expected sharedTeardown value ("performed" or "deferred") before treating a graceful shutdown as fully successful. (Adds teardown-unconfirmed result.)
  • Introduce the teardown-unconfirmed GracefulStopResult and make stopProxy() treat it conservatively by avoiding a forced kill and returning false so the caller retains the responsibility to run and report its restore attempt.
  • Update unit tests and fixtures to include sharedTeardown in simulated responses and add regression cases asserting that process exit alone is not accepted as proof of success while an explicitly confirmed deferred teardown remains accepted.
  • Files changed: src/lib/process-control.ts, and updated tests under tests/ (focused graceful-stop and deferred-teardown coverage and related assertions).

Testing

  • ✅ Ran bun test tests/process-control-graceful.test.ts tests/stop-deferred-teardown.test.ts and the focused tests passed.
  • ✅ Ran bun run typecheck (TS typecheck) and it passed.
  • ⚠️ Ran bun test tests/process-control-graceful.test.ts tests/stop-deferred-teardown.test.ts tests/cli-management-auth.test.ts and the focused run encountered an environment limitation (node:zlib.zstdDecompressSync not present in older Bun), preventing one test file from executing in this environment.
  • ⚠️ Attempted bun run test for the full suite; the run completed many tests but the CI-like full run surfaced unrelated environment and concurrency failures in this sandbox and is not a blocker for this focused fix.

Codex Task

lidge-jun and others added 20 commits August 25, 2026 10:36
release: promote dev into main for v2.32.1
# Conflicts:
#	package.json
[WRONG BRANCH] merge dev into main for the v2.33.0 release
Promotes the dev integration line onto main. The resulting tree is byte-identical
to origin/dev, including package.json at 2.34.0.

The package.json conflict is resolved to dev's side, NOT to main's stale 2.33.0.
Earlier promotions (lidge-jun#2553, lidge-jun#2507) kept the target's version so the release bump
would land on its own "release: vX.Y.Z" commit. That is no longer legal: this very
delta adds tests/release-version-line.test.ts, which fails when the in-tree version
sits behind the highest release tag. With v2.34.0-preview.20260827 now published,
2.33.0 orders behind it, so a promotion carrying the stale line turns CI red on
every shard that runs the suite.

The consequence for the release step is that scripts/release.ts skips the bump
(release.ts:568, currentVersion === version), so v2.34.0 gets tagged on this merge
commit rather than on a separate release commit. The workflow creates the tag itself
after publishing and validates expected-sha against the checked-out commit, so the
tag still names exactly the audited tree.
[WRONG BRANCH] promote dev onto main for v2.34.0
[WRONG BRANCH] promote dev onto main for v2.35.0
[WRONG BRANCH] promote dev onto main for v2.36.0
[WRONG BRANCH] promote dev to main for the v2.37.0 release
[WRONG BRANCH] promote dev onto main for v2.38.0
[WRONG BRANCH] promote dev onto main for v2.39.0
…rkflow call (lidge-jun#3262)

Both v2.40.0 release dispatches (33615174183 preview, 33615177849 main) died
at startup_failure: a workflow_call cannot grant its callee more than the
calling job holds, and dev-version-bump.yml's job declares contents+pull-
requests write. lidge-jun#3129 wired the call but never dispatched a release, so this
is its first live run. The caller job now declares exactly the callee's two
permissions; no other job in release.yml gains anything.

Co-authored-by: jun <jun@lidge.dev>
(cherry picked from commit 7ce0ba5)
…400-relfix

release: carry the release.yml permissions fix onto main for v2.40.0
@chatgpt-codex-connector

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Sep 3, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review Summary

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

Review Status Commit Review trigger
📝 Code Review Completed 2026-09-03T06:18:38.363276Z 1664ab5 PR opened
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.

@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Sep 3, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Important

  • 🔍 Trigger review

This repository does not receive automatic reviews because it has fewer than 10 stars.

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: ASSERTIVE

Plan: Team

Run ID: 57015a56-3962-4018-b3b1-f887fdf65369


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

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

@github-actions github-actions Bot added the bug Something isn't working label Sep 3, 2026
@github-actions github-actions Bot changed the title Validate shared teardown result on graceful stop [WRONG BRANCH] Validate shared teardown result on graceful stop Sep 3, 2026
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Sep 3, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

✅ READY

  • all PR quality gates passed.

Hygiene

Deterministic PR hygiene checks passed.

@github-actions
github-actions Bot marked this pull request as draft September 3, 2026 06:20
@luvs01 luvs01 changed the title [WRONG BRANCH] Validate shared teardown result on graceful stop Validate shared teardown result on graceful stop Sep 3, 2026
@luvs01
luvs01 changed the base branch from main to dev September 3, 2026 06:21
@github-actions
github-actions Bot marked this pull request as ready for review September 3, 2026 06:27
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

aardvark bug Something isn't working codex

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants