Skip to content

[pull] canary from vercel:canary #59

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Apr 14, 2025
Merged

[pull] canary from vercel:canary #59

merged 2 commits into from
Apr 14, 2025

Conversation

pull[bot]
Copy link

@pull pull bot commented Apr 14, 2025

See Commits and Changes for more details.


Created by pull[bot] (v2.0.0-alpha.1)

Can you help keep this open source service alive? 💖 Please sponsor : )

bgw and others added 2 commits April 13, 2025 20:53
…nt tasks in more places (#77760)

Currently, we only do this check when a transient task is created for the first time.

However (e.g. assuming buggy implementations of `TaskInput`, use of `turbo_tasks::State`, etc) it's possible that a persistent function does not create a transient task, but does read from cached data.

In these cases, you wouldn't see the issue in development or in most e2e tests. Instead, you'd see panics after cache eviction (not yet on-by-default) or a restart of turbopack (as we cannot persistently cache transient tasks).

This tries to catch such potential issues earlier, so that we can catch them before they get to users.

This codepath is hot, but the check is very cheap: it's just checking the upper bit of two `u32`s.
@pull pull bot added the ⤵️ pull label Apr 14, 2025
@pull pull bot merged commit 9db9b6f into code:canary Apr 14, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants