chore(libdd-ffe): bump pyo3 to 0.29 by vlad-scherbich · Pull Request #2491 · DataDog/libdatadog

vlad-scherbich · 2026-09-09T13:52:02Z

What does this PR do?

dd-trace-py cannot resolve pyo3 0.29 while libdd-ffe pins 0.28, because both crates links = "python". 0.29 raises CPython STABLE_ABI max to 3.15.

Motivation

Migrating dd-trace-py to Python v3.15

Additional Notes

https://datadoghq.atlassian.net/browse/PROF-14084

dd-trace-py cannot resolve pyo3 0.29 while libdd-ffe pins 0.28, because both crates links = "python". 0.29 raises CPython STABLE_ABI max to 3.15.

github-actions · 2026-09-09T13:54:02Z

📚 Documentation Check Results

⚠️ 387 documentation warning(s) found

📦 `libdd-ffe` - 387 warning(s)

Updated: 2026-09-09 21:43:52 UTC | Commit: af38991 | missing-docs job results

Copilot

🟢 Approval recommended

The change is a straightforward dependency bump with consistent lockfile updates and no remaining conflicting pyo3 versions in the workspace.

Pull request overview

This PR updates libdd-ffe’s optional Python integration to use pyo3 0.29, aligning the workspace on a single links = "python" version and enabling compatibility with CPython stable ABI up to 3.15.

Changes:

Bump libdd-ffe’s optional pyo3 dependency from 0.28 to 0.29.
Regenerate Cargo.lock to reflect the resolved pyo3 0.29.x dependency set.

File summaries

File	Description
libdd-ffe/Cargo.toml	Updates the `pyo3` dependency version constraint for the `libdd-ffe` crate.
Cargo.lock	Updates lockfile entries for `pyo3` and related crates to the resolved 0.29.2 versions.

Review details

Files reviewed: 1/2 changed files
Comments generated: 0
Review effort level: Lite

💡 Add a code-review agent skill or configure MCP servers for context-aware, tailored reviews. Learn more in the docs.

github-actions · 2026-09-09T13:55:56Z

🔒 Cargo Deny Results

⚠️ 2 issue(s) found, showing only errors (advisories, bans, sources)

📦 `libdd-ffe` - 2 error(s)

Show output

error[unmaintained]: Bincode is unmaintained
   ┌─ /home/runner/work/libdatadog/libdatadog/Cargo.lock:21:1
   │
21 │ bincode 1.3.3 registry+https://github.com/rust-lang/crates.io-index
   │ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ unmaintained advisory detected
   │
   ├ ID: RUSTSEC-2025-0141
   ├ Advisory: https://rustsec.org/advisories/RUSTSEC-2025-0141
   ├ Due to a doxxing and harassment incident, the bincode team has taken the decision to cease development permanently.
     
     The team considers version 1.3.3 a complete version of bincode that is not in need of any updates.
     
     ## Alternatives to consider
     
     * [wincode](https://crates.io/crates/wincode)
     * [postcard](https://crates.io/crates/postcard)
     * [bitcode](https://crates.io/crates/bitcode)
     * [rkyv](https://crates.io/crates/rkyv)
   ├ Announcement: https://git.sr.ht/~stygianentity/bincode/tree/v3.0/item/README.md
   ├ Solution: No safe upgrade is available!
   ├ bincode v1.3.3
     └── (dev) libdd-ffe v2.0.0

error[unsound]: Potential use-after-free due to lack of panic safety in `LruCache::pop()`
    ┌─ /home/runner/work/libdatadog/libdatadog/Cargo.lock:131:1
    │
131 │ lru 0.16.4 registry+https://github.com/rust-lang/crates.io-index
    │ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ unsound advisory detected
    │
    ├ ID: RUSTSEC-2026-0253
    ├ Advisory: https://rustsec.org/advisories/RUSTSEC-2026-0253
    ├ `LruCache::pop()` in `lru` was not panic-safe. If the `Drop` implementation of a stored key panics during `pop()`, `self.detach()` is never called, leaving dangling pointers in the internal doubly-linked list.
      
      A subsequent cache operation that triggers eviction can then dereference these dangling pointers:
      - The node is freed from the map, but remains linked in the LRU list due to the skipped `detach()` call
      - When a new insertion causes eviction, the LRU traversal encounters the dangling pointer
      - This results in a write to already-freed memory during the eviction process
      
      ## Impact
      
      - **CWE-416 (Use-After-Free):** memory corruption when subsequent cache operations access freed node pointers in the linked list
      - **CWE-415 (Double Free):** potential heap corruption when the same memory is freed multiple times
      
      Both types of undefined behavior can be invoked in safe Rust, but only if unwinding panics are enabled and `std::panic::catch_unwind` is used with key types that have potentially-panicking `Drop` implementations.
      
      ## Fix
      
      Fixed in `lru` 0.18.2 by detaching the node from the linked list before freeing it and dropping the key ([lru-rs#238](https://github.com/jeromefroe/lru-rs/pull/238)).
    ├ Announcement: https://github.com/jeromefroe/lru-rs/pull/238
    ├ Solution: Upgrade to >=0.18.2 (try `cargo update -p lru`)
    ├ lru v0.16.4
      └── libdd-ffe v2.0.0

advisories FAILED, bans ok, sources ok

Updated: 2026-09-09 21:45:49 UTC | Commit: af38991 | dependency-check job results

datadog-datadog-prod-us1 · 2026-09-09T14:04:45Z

✅ All CI checks and tests passed.

🎉 All green!

🧪 All tests passed
❄️ No new flaky tests detected

🎯 Code Coverage (details)
• Patch Coverage: 100.00%
• Overall Coverage: 77.61% (-0.06%)

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

🔗 Commit SHA: f8c5034 | Docs | View more details | Give us feedback!}

dd-octo-sts · 2026-09-09T14:11:15Z

Artifact Size Benchmark Report

aarch64-alpine-linux-musl

Artifact	Baseline	Commit	Change
/aarch64-alpine-linux-musl/lib/libdatadog_profiling.a	91.37 MB	91.37 MB	0% (0 B) 👌
/aarch64-alpine-linux-musl/lib/libdatadog_profiling.so	8.45 MB	8.45 MB	0% (0 B) 👌

aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu

Artifact	Baseline	Commit	Change
/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/libdatadog_profiling.a	102.71 MB	102.71 MB	0% (0 B) 👌
/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/libdatadog_profiling.so	11.38 MB	11.38 MB	0% (0 B) 👌

libdatadog-x64-windows

Artifact	Baseline	Commit	Change
/libdatadog-x64-windows/debug/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.dll	27.36 MB	27.36 MB	0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x64-windows/debug/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib	96.08 KB	96.08 KB	0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x64-windows/debug/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.pdb	185.93 MB	185.95 MB	+.01% (+24.00 KB) 🔍
/libdatadog-x64-windows/debug/static/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib	804.20 MB	804.20 MB	0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x64-windows/release/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.dll	9.03 MB	9.03 MB	0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x64-windows/release/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib	96.08 KB	96.08 KB	0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x64-windows/release/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.pdb	26.26 MB	26.26 MB	0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x64-windows/release/static/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib	52.70 MB	52.70 MB	0% (0 B) 👌

libdatadog-x86-windows

Artifact	Baseline	Commit	Change
/libdatadog-x86-windows/debug/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.dll	23.80 MB	23.80 MB	0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x86-windows/debug/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib	97.58 KB	97.58 KB	0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x86-windows/debug/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.pdb	190.73 MB	190.71 MB	-0% (-16.00 KB) 👌
/libdatadog-x86-windows/debug/static/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib	792.13 MB	792.13 MB	0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x86-windows/release/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.dll	6.96 MB	6.96 MB	0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x86-windows/release/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib	97.58 KB	97.58 KB	0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x86-windows/release/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.pdb	28.21 MB	28.21 MB	0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x86-windows/release/static/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib	49.74 MB	49.74 MB	0% (0 B) 👌

x86_64-alpine-linux-musl

Artifact	Baseline	Commit	Change
/x86_64-alpine-linux-musl/lib/libdatadog_profiling.a	81.56 MB	81.56 MB	0% (0 B) 👌
/x86_64-alpine-linux-musl/lib/libdatadog_profiling.so	9.42 MB	9.42 MB	0% (0 B) 👌

x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu

Artifact	Baseline	Commit	Change
/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/libdatadog_profiling.a	97.38 MB	97.38 MB	0% (0 B) 👌
/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/libdatadog_profiling.so	11.48 MB	11.48 MB	0% (0 B) 👌

pr-commenter · 2026-09-09T14:20:46Z

Benchmarks

Comparison

Benchmark execution time: 2026-09-09 17:35:13

Comparing candidate commit f8c5034 in PR branch vlad/pyo3-0.29 with baseline commit d0cf2b4 in branch main.

📊 Benchmarking dashboard

Found 0 performance improvements and 0 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 156 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 ----------------------------------'

Benchmark execution time: 2026-09-09 17:29:44

Comparing candidate commit f8c5034 in PR branch vlad/pyo3-0.29 with baseline commit d0cf2b4 in branch main.

📊 Benchmarking dashboard

Found 4 performance improvements and 9 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 153 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:alloc_free/system/4096

🟩 execution_time [-11.788ns; -11.620ns] or [-11.108%; -10.950%]

scenario:datadog_sample_span/multiple_rules_last_match/wall_time

🟥 execution_time [+9.682ns; +9.776ns] or [+4.921%; +4.968%]

scenario:no_profiler/short_circuit/16

🟩 execution_time [-1.816ns; -1.738ns] or [-6.355%; -6.082%]

scenario:profiler_attached/fast_path_system/16

🟩 execution_time [-1.715ns; -1.657ns] or [-5.755%; -5.564%]

scenario:profiler_attached/fast_path_system/4096

🟥 execution_time [+4.899ns; +5.054ns] or [+5.274%; +5.441%]

scenario:profiler_attached/slow_path_noop/16

🟥 execution_time [+12.575ns; +12.607ns] or [+19.667%; +19.715%]

scenario:profiler_attached/slow_path_noop/256

🟥 execution_time [+12.605ns; +12.636ns] or [+19.708%; +19.757%]

scenario:profiler_attached/slow_path_noop/4096

🟥 execution_time [+12.734ns; +12.772ns] or [+19.805%; +19.865%]

scenario:profiler_attached/slow_path_noop/64

🟥 execution_time [+12.588ns; +12.629ns] or [+19.685%; +19.748%]

scenario:profiler_attached/slow_path_noop/65536

🟥 execution_time [+13.292ns; +13.332ns] or [+19.432%; +19.491%]

scenario:profiler_attached/slow_path_system/4096

🟩 execution_time [-9.995ns; -9.838ns] or [-6.417%; -6.316%]

scenario:trace_buffer/2_senders/no_delay

🟥 execution_time [+138.072µs; +152.502µs] or [+8.598%; +9.497%]
🟥 throughput [-98351.493op/s; -88788.967op/s] or [-8.768%; -7.915%]

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/parent_not_sampled_short_circuit/allocated_bytes

unstable execution_time [-0.000ns; +0.000ns] or [+553.811%; -554.830%]

scenario:datadog_sample_span/parent_sampled_short_circuit/allocated_bytes

unstable execution_time [-0.000ns; +0.000ns] or [+555.350%; -555.554%]

scenario:glob_matcher/ascii_case_insensitive_match/allocated_bytes

unstable execution_time [-0.000ns; +0.000ns] or [+556.848%; -556.259%]

scenario:glob_matcher/ascii_exact_match/allocated_bytes

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

scenario:glob_matcher/ascii_exact_miss/allocated_bytes

unstable execution_time [-0.000ns; +0.000ns] or [+552.087%; -554.021%]

scenario:glob_matcher/ascii_wildcard_backtrack_match/allocated_bytes

unstable execution_time [-0.000ns; +0.000ns] or [+556.503%; -556.096%]

scenario:glob_matcher/ascii_wildcard_heavy_backtrack/allocated_bytes

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

scenario:glob_matcher/ascii_wildcard_question_match/allocated_bytes

unstable execution_time [-0.000ns; +0.000ns] or [+574.388%; -564.601%]

scenario:glob_matcher/ascii_wildcard_star_match/allocated_bytes

unstable execution_time [-0.000ns; +0.000ns] or [+557.278%; -556.462%]

scenario:glob_matcher/star_short_circuit/allocated_bytes

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

Candidate

Omitted due to size.

Baseline

Omitted due to size.

yannham

Sorry for the latency, but could we wait for #2476 first to land? Otherwise it's a bit of a moving target 😅

vlad-scherbich · 2026-09-10T13:57:12Z

Sorry for the latency, but could we wait for #2476 first to land? Otherwise it's a bit of a moving target 😅

@yannham No problem, it's not super urgent for us. Just to be clear, will your PR already handle this version update? Or we merge this PR after your PR lands?

yannham · 2026-09-10T14:00:18Z

My PR doesn't handle the version bump (it's already large, so I'd prefer to not include it as well). I can take care of updating this PR once this is done, and then we'll have to merge it. Thanks 🙏

chore(libdd-ffe): bump pyo3 to 0.29

282b390

dd-trace-py cannot resolve pyo3 0.29 while libdd-ffe pins 0.28, because both crates links = "python". 0.29 raises CPython STABLE_ABI max to 3.15.

vlad-scherbich requested review from a team as code owners September 9, 2026 13:52

vlad-scherbich requested review from dd-oleksii and greghuels and a lite review from Copilot and removed request for a team September 9, 2026 13:52

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of vlad-scherbich September 9, 2026 13:52 View session

Copilot AI reviewed Sep 9, 2026

View reviewed changes

VianneyRuhlmann approved these changes Sep 9, 2026

View reviewed changes

Update license

f8c5034

gh-worker-dd-devflow-36fce6 Bot added mergequeue-status: waiting mergequeue-status: removed and removed mergequeue-status: waiting labels Sep 9, 2026

yannham requested changes Sep 10, 2026

View reviewed changes

Uh oh!

Conversation

vlad-scherbich commented Sep 9, 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

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Sep 9, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

📚 Documentation Check Results

📦 libdd-ffe - 387 warning(s)

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

🟢 Approval recommended

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Sep 9, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

🔒 Cargo Deny Results

📦 libdd-ffe - 2 error(s)

Uh oh!

datadog-datadog-prod-us1 Bot commented Sep 9, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

dd-octo-sts Bot commented Sep 9, 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 Sep 9, 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

Explanation

More details about the CI and significant changes

scenario:alloc_free/system/4096

scenario:datadog_sample_span/multiple_rules_last_match/wall_time

scenario:no_profiler/short_circuit/16

scenario:profiler_attached/fast_path_system/16

scenario:profiler_attached/fast_path_system/4096

scenario:profiler_attached/slow_path_noop/16

scenario:profiler_attached/slow_path_noop/256

scenario:profiler_attached/slow_path_noop/4096

scenario:profiler_attached/slow_path_noop/64

scenario:profiler_attached/slow_path_noop/65536

scenario:profiler_attached/slow_path_system/4096

scenario:trace_buffer/2_senders/no_delay

Unstable benchmarks

scenario:datadog_sample_span/parent_not_sampled_short_circuit/allocated_bytes

scenario:datadog_sample_span/parent_sampled_short_circuit/allocated_bytes

scenario:glob_matcher/ascii_case_insensitive_match/allocated_bytes

scenario:glob_matcher/ascii_exact_match/allocated_bytes

scenario:glob_matcher/ascii_exact_miss/allocated_bytes

scenario:glob_matcher/ascii_wildcard_backtrack_match/allocated_bytes

scenario:glob_matcher/ascii_wildcard_heavy_backtrack/allocated_bytes

scenario:glob_matcher/ascii_wildcard_question_match/allocated_bytes

scenario:glob_matcher/ascii_wildcard_star_match/allocated_bytes

scenario:glob_matcher/star_short_circuit/allocated_bytes

Candidate

Baseline

Uh oh!

yannham left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

vlad-scherbich commented Sep 10, 2026

Uh oh!

yannham commented Sep 10, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

vlad-scherbich commented Sep 9, 2026 •

edited

Loading

github-actions Bot commented Sep 9, 2026 •

edited

Loading

📦 `libdd-ffe` - 387 warning(s)

github-actions Bot commented Sep 9, 2026 •

edited

Loading

📦 `libdd-ffe` - 2 error(s)

datadog-datadog-prod-us1 Bot commented Sep 9, 2026 •

edited

Loading

dd-octo-sts Bot commented Sep 9, 2026 •

edited

Loading

pr-commenter Bot commented Sep 9, 2026 •

edited

Loading