Skip to content

feat(trace-utils)!: add from_string to span text#2011

Open
VianneyRuhlmann wants to merge 7 commits into
mainfrom
vianney/mutable-span-text
Open

feat(trace-utils)!: add from_string to span text#2011
VianneyRuhlmann wants to merge 7 commits into
mainfrom
vianney/mutable-span-text

Conversation

@VianneyRuhlmann
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

What does this PR do?

Make the span fields mutable by requiring From on SpanText and switching SpanSlice to use Cow

Motivation

Needed to apply normalization on the span, required by trace filters.

Additional Notes

Anything else we should know when reviewing?

How to test the change?

Describe here in detail how the change can be validated.

@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

github-actions Bot commented May 18, 2026

📚 Documentation Check Results

⚠️ 2473 documentation warning(s) found

📦 libdd-data-pipeline - 1033 warning(s)

📦 libdd-sampling - 178 warning(s)

📦 libdd-trace-stats - 694 warning(s)

📦 libdd-trace-utils - 568 warning(s)


Updated: 2026-05-19 17:35:34 UTC | Commit: ad7f61a | missing-docs job results

@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

github-actions Bot commented May 18, 2026

Clippy Allow Annotation Report

Comparing clippy allow annotations between branches:

  • Base Branch: origin/main
  • PR Branch: origin/vianney/mutable-span-text

Summary by Rule

Rule Base Branch PR Branch Change
expect_used 2 2 No change (0%)
unwrap_used 1 1 No change (0%)
Total 3 3 No change (0%)

Annotation Counts by File

File Base Branch PR Branch Change
libdd-trace-stats/src/stats_exporter.rs 1 1 No change (0%)
libdd-trace-utils/src/msgpack_encoder/v04/mod.rs 2 2 No change (0%)

Annotation Stats by Crate

Crate Base Branch PR Branch Change
clippy-annotation-reporter 5 5 No change (0%)
datadog-ffe-ffi 1 1 No change (0%)
datadog-ipc 21 21 No change (0%)
datadog-live-debugger 6 6 No change (0%)
datadog-live-debugger-ffi 10 10 No change (0%)
datadog-profiling-replayer 4 4 No change (0%)
datadog-remote-config 3 3 No change (0%)
datadog-sidecar 57 57 No change (0%)
libdd-common 13 13 No change (0%)
libdd-common-ffi 12 12 No change (0%)
libdd-data-pipeline 5 5 No change (0%)
libdd-ddsketch 2 2 No change (0%)
libdd-dogstatsd-client 1 1 No change (0%)
libdd-profiling 13 13 No change (0%)
libdd-telemetry 20 20 No change (0%)
libdd-tinybytes 4 4 No change (0%)
libdd-trace-normalization 2 2 No change (0%)
libdd-trace-obfuscation 3 8 ⚠️ +5 (+166.7%)
libdd-trace-stats 1 1 No change (0%)
libdd-trace-utils 15 15 No change (0%)
Total 198 203 ⚠️ +5 (+2.5%)

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.

@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

github-actions Bot commented May 18, 2026

🔒 Cargo Deny Results

⚠️ 17 issue(s) found, showing only errors (advisories, bans, sources)

📦 libdd-data-pipeline - 5 error(s)

Show output
error[unsound]: Rand is unsound with a custom logger using `rand::rng()`
    ┌─ /home/runner/work/libdatadog/libdatadog/Cargo.lock:212:1
    │
212 │ rand 0.8.5 registry+https://github.com/rust-lang/crates.io-index
    │ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ unsound advisory detected
    │
    ├ ID: RUSTSEC-2026-0097
    ├ Advisory: https://rustsec.org/advisories/RUSTSEC-2026-0097
    ├ It has been reported (by @lopopolo) that the `rand` library is [unsound](https://rust-lang.github.io/unsafe-code-guidelines/glossary.html#soundness-of-code--of-a-library) (i.e. that safe code using the public API can cause Undefined Behaviour) when all the following conditions are met:
      
      - The `log` and `thread_rng` features are enabled
      - A [custom logger](https://docs.rs/log/latest/log/#implementing-a-logger) is defined
      - The custom logger accesses `rand::rng()` (previously `rand::thread_rng()`) and calls any `TryRng` (previously `RngCore`) methods on `ThreadRng`
      - The `ThreadRng` (attempts to) reseed while called from the custom logger (this happens every 64 kB of generated data)
      - Trace-level logging is enabled or warn-level logging is enabled and the random source (the `getrandom` crate) is unable to provide a new seed
      
      `TryRng` (previously `RngCore`) methods for `ThreadRng` use `unsafe` code to cast `*mut BlockRng<ReseedingCore>` to `&mut BlockRng<ReseedingCore>`. When all the above conditions are met this results in an aliased mutable reference, violating the Stacked Borrows rules. Miri is able to detect this violation in sample code. Since construction of [aliased mutable references is Undefined Behaviour](https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/nomicon/references.html), the behaviour of optimized builds is hard to predict.
    ├ Announcement: https://github.com/rust-random/rand/pull/1763
    ├ Solution: Upgrade to >=0.10.1 OR <0.10.0, >=0.9.3 OR <0.9.0, >=0.8.6 (try `cargo update -p rand`)
    ├ rand v0.8.5
      ├── libdd-common v4.1.0
      │   ├── libdd-capabilities-impl v2.0.0
      │   │   ├── libdd-data-pipeline v4.0.0
      │   │   ├── libdd-shared-runtime v1.0.0
      │   │   │   ├── libdd-data-pipeline v4.0.0 (*)
      │   │   │   ├── libdd-telemetry v5.0.0
      │   │   │   │   └── libdd-data-pipeline v4.0.0 (*)
      │   │   │   └── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0
      │   │   │       └── libdd-data-pipeline v4.0.0 (*)
      │   │   ├── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0 (*)
      │   │   └── libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0
      │   │       ├── libdd-data-pipeline v4.0.0 (*)
      │   │       ├── libdd-trace-obfuscation v3.0.0
      │   │       │   └── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0 (*)
      │   │       ├── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0 (*)
      │   │       └── (dev) libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0 (*)
      │   ├── libdd-data-pipeline v4.0.0 (*)
      │   ├── libdd-dogstatsd-client v3.0.0
      │   │   └── libdd-data-pipeline v4.0.0 (*)
      │   ├── libdd-shared-runtime v1.0.0 (*)
      │   ├── libdd-telemetry v5.0.0 (*)
      │   ├── libdd-trace-obfuscation v3.0.0 (*)
      │   ├── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0 (*)
      │   └── libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0 (*)
      ├── (dev) libdd-data-pipeline v4.0.0 (*)
      ├── (dev) libdd-trace-normalization v2.0.0
      │   └── libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0 (*)
      ├── (dev) libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0 (*)
      ├── libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0 (*)
      └── proptest v1.5.0
          └── (dev) libdd-tinybytes v1.1.1
              ├── libdd-data-pipeline v4.0.0 (*)
              ├── (dev) libdd-tinybytes v1.1.1 (*)
              └── libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0 (*)

error[vulnerability]: Name constraints for URI names were incorrectly accepted
    ┌─ /home/runner/work/libdatadog/libdatadog/Cargo.lock:236:1
    │
236 │ rustls-webpki 0.103.10 registry+https://github.com/rust-lang/crates.io-index
    │ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ security vulnerability detected
    │
    ├ ID: RUSTSEC-2026-0098
    ├ Advisory: https://rustsec.org/advisories/RUSTSEC-2026-0098
    ├ Name constraints for URI names were ignored and therefore accepted.
      
      Note this library does not provide an API for asserting URI names, and URI name constraints are otherwise not implemented.  URI name constraints are now rejected unconditionally.
      
      Since name constraints are restrictions on otherwise properly-issued certificates, this bug is reachable only after signature verification and requires misissuance to exploit.
      
      This vulnerability is identified as [GHSA-965h-392x-2mh5](https://github.com/rustls/webpki/security/advisories/GHSA-965h-392x-2mh5). Thank you to @1seal for the report.
    ├ Solution: Upgrade to >=0.103.12, <0.104.0-alpha.1 OR >=0.104.0-alpha.6 (try `cargo update -p rustls-webpki`)
    ├ rustls-webpki v0.103.10
      └── rustls v0.23.37
          ├── hyper-rustls v0.27.7
          │   └── libdd-common v4.1.0
          │       ├── libdd-capabilities-impl v2.0.0
          │       │   ├── libdd-data-pipeline v4.0.0
          │       │   ├── libdd-shared-runtime v1.0.0
          │       │   │   ├── libdd-data-pipeline v4.0.0 (*)
          │       │   │   ├── libdd-telemetry v5.0.0
          │       │   │   │   └── libdd-data-pipeline v4.0.0 (*)
          │       │   │   └── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0
          │       │   │       └── libdd-data-pipeline v4.0.0 (*)
          │       │   ├── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0 (*)
          │       │   └── libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0
          │       │       ├── libdd-data-pipeline v4.0.0 (*)
          │       │       ├── libdd-trace-obfuscation v3.0.0
          │       │       │   └── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0 (*)
          │       │       ├── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0 (*)
          │       │       └── (dev) libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0 (*)
          │       ├── libdd-data-pipeline v4.0.0 (*)
          │       ├── libdd-dogstatsd-client v3.0.0
          │       │   └── libdd-data-pipeline v4.0.0 (*)
          │       ├── libdd-shared-runtime v1.0.0 (*)
          │       ├── libdd-telemetry v5.0.0 (*)
          │       ├── libdd-trace-obfuscation v3.0.0 (*)
          │       ├── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0 (*)
          │       └── libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0 (*)
          ├── libdd-common v4.1.0 (*)
          └── tokio-rustls v0.26.0
              ├── hyper-rustls v0.27.7 (*)
              └── libdd-common v4.1.0 (*)

error[vulnerability]: Name constraints were accepted for certificates asserting a wildcard name
    ┌─ /home/runner/work/libdatadog/libdatadog/Cargo.lock:236:1
    │
236 │ rustls-webpki 0.103.10 registry+https://github.com/rust-lang/crates.io-index
    │ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ security vulnerability detected
    │
    ├ ID: RUSTSEC-2026-0099
    ├ Advisory: https://rustsec.org/advisories/RUSTSEC-2026-0099
    ├ Permitted subtree name constraints for DNS names were accepted for certificates asserting a wildcard name.
      
      This was incorrect because, given a name constraint of `accept.example.com`, `*.example.com` could feasibly allow a name of `reject.example.com` which is outside the constraint.
      This is very similar to [CVE-2025-61727](https://go.dev/issue/76442).
      
      Since name constraints are restrictions on otherwise properly-issued certificates, this bug is reachable only after signature verification and requires misissuance to exploit.
      
      This vulnerability is identified as [GHSA-xgp8-3hg3-c2mh](https://github.com/rustls/webpki/security/advisories/GHSA-xgp8-3hg3-c2mh). Thank you to @1seal for the report.
    ├ Solution: Upgrade to >=0.103.12, <0.104.0-alpha.1 OR >=0.104.0-alpha.6 (try `cargo update -p rustls-webpki`)
    ├ rustls-webpki v0.103.10
      └── rustls v0.23.37
          ├── hyper-rustls v0.27.7
          │   └── libdd-common v4.1.0
          │       ├── libdd-capabilities-impl v2.0.0
          │       │   ├── libdd-data-pipeline v4.0.0
          │       │   ├── libdd-shared-runtime v1.0.0
          │       │   │   ├── libdd-data-pipeline v4.0.0 (*)
          │       │   │   ├── libdd-telemetry v5.0.0
          │       │   │   │   └── libdd-data-pipeline v4.0.0 (*)
          │       │   │   └── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0
          │       │   │       └── libdd-data-pipeline v4.0.0 (*)
          │       │   ├── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0 (*)
          │       │   └── libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0
          │       │       ├── libdd-data-pipeline v4.0.0 (*)
          │       │       ├── libdd-trace-obfuscation v3.0.0
          │       │       │   └── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0 (*)
          │       │       ├── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0 (*)
          │       │       └── (dev) libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0 (*)
          │       ├── libdd-data-pipeline v4.0.0 (*)
          │       ├── libdd-dogstatsd-client v3.0.0
          │       │   └── libdd-data-pipeline v4.0.0 (*)
          │       ├── libdd-shared-runtime v1.0.0 (*)
          │       ├── libdd-telemetry v5.0.0 (*)
          │       ├── libdd-trace-obfuscation v3.0.0 (*)
          │       ├── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0 (*)
          │       └── libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0 (*)
          ├── libdd-common v4.1.0 (*)
          └── tokio-rustls v0.26.0
              ├── hyper-rustls v0.27.7 (*)
              └── libdd-common v4.1.0 (*)

error[vulnerability]: Reachable panic in certificate revocation list parsing
    ┌─ /home/runner/work/libdatadog/libdatadog/Cargo.lock:236:1
    │
236 │ rustls-webpki 0.103.10 registry+https://github.com/rust-lang/crates.io-index
    │ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ security vulnerability detected
    │
    ├ ID: RUSTSEC-2026-0104
    ├ Advisory: https://rustsec.org/advisories/RUSTSEC-2026-0104
    ├ A panic was reachable when parsing certificate revocation lists via [`BorrowedCertRevocationList::from_der`]
      or [`OwnedCertRevocationList::from_der`].  This was the result of mishandling a syntactically valid empty
      `BIT STRING` appearing in the `onlySomeReasons` element of a `IssuingDistributionPoint` CRL extension.
      
      This panic is reachable prior to a CRL's signature being verified.
      
      Applications that do not use CRLs are not affected.
      
      Thank you to @tynus3 for the report.
    ├ Solution: Upgrade to >=0.103.13, <0.104.0-alpha.1 OR >=0.104.0-alpha.7 (try `cargo update -p rustls-webpki`)
    ├ rustls-webpki v0.103.10
      └── rustls v0.23.37
          ├── hyper-rustls v0.27.7
          │   └── libdd-common v4.1.0
          │       ├── libdd-capabilities-impl v2.0.0
          │       │   ├── libdd-data-pipeline v4.0.0
          │       │   ├── libdd-shared-runtime v1.0.0
          │       │   │   ├── libdd-data-pipeline v4.0.0 (*)
          │       │   │   ├── libdd-telemetry v5.0.0
          │       │   │   │   └── libdd-data-pipeline v4.0.0 (*)
          │       │   │   └── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0
          │       │   │       └── libdd-data-pipeline v4.0.0 (*)
          │       │   ├── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0 (*)
          │       │   └── libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0
          │       │       ├── libdd-data-pipeline v4.0.0 (*)
          │       │       ├── libdd-trace-obfuscation v3.0.0
          │       │       │   └── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0 (*)
          │       │       ├── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0 (*)
          │       │       └── (dev) libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0 (*)
          │       ├── libdd-data-pipeline v4.0.0 (*)
          │       ├── libdd-dogstatsd-client v3.0.0
          │       │   └── libdd-data-pipeline v4.0.0 (*)
          │       ├── libdd-shared-runtime v1.0.0 (*)
          │       ├── libdd-telemetry v5.0.0 (*)
          │       ├── libdd-trace-obfuscation v3.0.0 (*)
          │       ├── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0 (*)
          │       └── libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0 (*)
          ├── libdd-common v4.1.0 (*)
          └── tokio-rustls v0.26.0
              ├── hyper-rustls v0.27.7 (*)
              └── libdd-common v4.1.0 (*)

error[vulnerability]: Denial of Service via Stack Exhaustion
    ┌─ /home/runner/work/libdatadog/libdatadog/Cargo.lock:276:1
    │
276 │ time 0.3.41 registry+https://github.com/rust-lang/crates.io-index
    │ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ security vulnerability detected
    │
    ├ ID: RUSTSEC-2026-0009
    ├ Advisory: https://rustsec.org/advisories/RUSTSEC-2026-0009
    ├ ## Impact
      
      When user-provided input is provided to any type that parses with the RFC 2822 format, a denial of
      service attack via stack exhaustion is possible. The attack relies on formally deprecated and
      rarely-used features that are part of the RFC 2822 format used in a malicious manner. Ordinary,
      non-malicious input will never encounter this scenario.
      
      ## Patches
      
      A limit to the depth of recursion was added in v0.3.47. From this version, an error will be returned
      rather than exhausting the stack.
      
      ## Workarounds
      
      Limiting the length of user input is the simplest way to avoid stack exhaustion, as the amount of
      the stack consumed would be at most a factor of the length of the input.
    ├ Announcement: https://github.com/time-rs/time/blob/main/CHANGELOG.md#0347-2026-02-05
    ├ Solution: Upgrade to >=0.3.47 (try `cargo update -p time`)
    ├ time v0.3.41
      └── tracing-appender v0.2.3
          └── libdd-log v1.0.0
              └── (dev) libdd-data-pipeline v4.0.0

advisories FAILED, bans ok, sources ok

📦 libdd-sampling - 4 error(s)

Show output
error[unsound]: Rand is unsound with a custom logger using `rand::rng()`
   ┌─ /home/runner/work/libdatadog/libdatadog/Cargo.lock:94:1
   │
94 │ rand 0.8.5 registry+https://github.com/rust-lang/crates.io-index
   │ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ unsound advisory detected
   │
   ├ ID: RUSTSEC-2026-0097
   ├ Advisory: https://rustsec.org/advisories/RUSTSEC-2026-0097
   ├ It has been reported (by @lopopolo) that the `rand` library is [unsound](https://rust-lang.github.io/unsafe-code-guidelines/glossary.html#soundness-of-code--of-a-library) (i.e. that safe code using the public API can cause Undefined Behaviour) when all the following conditions are met:
     
     - The `log` and `thread_rng` features are enabled
     - A [custom logger](https://docs.rs/log/latest/log/#implementing-a-logger) is defined
     - The custom logger accesses `rand::rng()` (previously `rand::thread_rng()`) and calls any `TryRng` (previously `RngCore`) methods on `ThreadRng`
     - The `ThreadRng` (attempts to) reseed while called from the custom logger (this happens every 64 kB of generated data)
     - Trace-level logging is enabled or warn-level logging is enabled and the random source (the `getrandom` crate) is unable to provide a new seed
     
     `TryRng` (previously `RngCore`) methods for `ThreadRng` use `unsafe` code to cast `*mut BlockRng<ReseedingCore>` to `&mut BlockRng<ReseedingCore>`. When all the above conditions are met this results in an aliased mutable reference, violating the Stacked Borrows rules. Miri is able to detect this violation in sample code. Since construction of [aliased mutable references is Undefined Behaviour](https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/nomicon/references.html), the behaviour of optimized builds is hard to predict.
   ├ Announcement: https://github.com/rust-random/rand/pull/1763
   ├ Solution: Upgrade to >=0.10.1 OR <0.10.0, >=0.9.3 OR <0.9.0, >=0.8.6 (try `cargo update -p rand`)
   ├ rand v0.8.5
     └── (dev) libdd-common v4.1.0
         └── (dev) libdd-sampling v1.0.0

error[vulnerability]: Name constraints for URI names were incorrectly accepted
    ┌─ /home/runner/work/libdatadog/libdatadog/Cargo.lock:107:1
    │
107 │ rustls-webpki 0.103.10 registry+https://github.com/rust-lang/crates.io-index
    │ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ security vulnerability detected
    │
    ├ ID: RUSTSEC-2026-0098
    ├ Advisory: https://rustsec.org/advisories/RUSTSEC-2026-0098
    ├ Name constraints for URI names were ignored and therefore accepted.
      
      Note this library does not provide an API for asserting URI names, and URI name constraints are otherwise not implemented.  URI name constraints are now rejected unconditionally.
      
      Since name constraints are restrictions on otherwise properly-issued certificates, this bug is reachable only after signature verification and requires misissuance to exploit.
      
      This vulnerability is identified as [GHSA-965h-392x-2mh5](https://github.com/rustls/webpki/security/advisories/GHSA-965h-392x-2mh5). Thank you to @1seal for the report.
    ├ Solution: Upgrade to >=0.103.12, <0.104.0-alpha.1 OR >=0.104.0-alpha.6 (try `cargo update -p rustls-webpki`)
    ├ rustls-webpki v0.103.10
      └── rustls v0.23.37
          ├── hyper-rustls v0.27.7
          │   └── libdd-common v4.1.0
          │       └── (dev) libdd-sampling v1.0.0
          ├── libdd-common v4.1.0 (*)
          └── tokio-rustls v0.26.0
              ├── hyper-rustls v0.27.7 (*)
              └── libdd-common v4.1.0 (*)

error[vulnerability]: Name constraints were accepted for certificates asserting a wildcard name
    ┌─ /home/runner/work/libdatadog/libdatadog/Cargo.lock:107:1
    │
107 │ rustls-webpki 0.103.10 registry+https://github.com/rust-lang/crates.io-index
    │ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ security vulnerability detected
    │
    ├ ID: RUSTSEC-2026-0099
    ├ Advisory: https://rustsec.org/advisories/RUSTSEC-2026-0099
    ├ Permitted subtree name constraints for DNS names were accepted for certificates asserting a wildcard name.
      
      This was incorrect because, given a name constraint of `accept.example.com`, `*.example.com` could feasibly allow a name of `reject.example.com` which is outside the constraint.
      This is very similar to [CVE-2025-61727](https://go.dev/issue/76442).
      
      Since name constraints are restrictions on otherwise properly-issued certificates, this bug is reachable only after signature verification and requires misissuance to exploit.
      
      This vulnerability is identified as [GHSA-xgp8-3hg3-c2mh](https://github.com/rustls/webpki/security/advisories/GHSA-xgp8-3hg3-c2mh). Thank you to @1seal for the report.
    ├ Solution: Upgrade to >=0.103.12, <0.104.0-alpha.1 OR >=0.104.0-alpha.6 (try `cargo update -p rustls-webpki`)
    ├ rustls-webpki v0.103.10
      └── rustls v0.23.37
          ├── hyper-rustls v0.27.7
          │   └── libdd-common v4.1.0
          │       └── (dev) libdd-sampling v1.0.0
          ├── libdd-common v4.1.0 (*)
          └── tokio-rustls v0.26.0
              ├── hyper-rustls v0.27.7 (*)
              └── libdd-common v4.1.0 (*)

error[vulnerability]: Reachable panic in certificate revocation list parsing
    ┌─ /home/runner/work/libdatadog/libdatadog/Cargo.lock:107:1
    │
107 │ rustls-webpki 0.103.10 registry+https://github.com/rust-lang/crates.io-index
    │ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ security vulnerability detected
    │
    ├ ID: RUSTSEC-2026-0104
    ├ Advisory: https://rustsec.org/advisories/RUSTSEC-2026-0104
    ├ A panic was reachable when parsing certificate revocation lists via [`BorrowedCertRevocationList::from_der`]
      or [`OwnedCertRevocationList::from_der`].  This was the result of mishandling a syntactically valid empty
      `BIT STRING` appearing in the `onlySomeReasons` element of a `IssuingDistributionPoint` CRL extension.
      
      This panic is reachable prior to a CRL's signature being verified.
      
      Applications that do not use CRLs are not affected.
      
      Thank you to @tynus3 for the report.
    ├ Solution: Upgrade to >=0.103.13, <0.104.0-alpha.1 OR >=0.104.0-alpha.7 (try `cargo update -p rustls-webpki`)
    ├ rustls-webpki v0.103.10
      └── rustls v0.23.37
          ├── hyper-rustls v0.27.7
          │   └── libdd-common v4.1.0
          │       └── (dev) libdd-sampling v1.0.0
          ├── libdd-common v4.1.0 (*)
          └── tokio-rustls v0.26.0
              ├── hyper-rustls v0.27.7 (*)
              └── libdd-common v4.1.0 (*)

advisories FAILED, bans ok, sources ok

📦 libdd-trace-stats - 4 error(s)

Show output
error[unsound]: Rand is unsound with a custom logger using `rand::rng()`
    ┌─ /home/runner/work/libdatadog/libdatadog/Cargo.lock:189:1
    │
189 │ rand 0.8.5 registry+https://github.com/rust-lang/crates.io-index
    │ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ unsound advisory detected
    │
    ├ ID: RUSTSEC-2026-0097
    ├ Advisory: https://rustsec.org/advisories/RUSTSEC-2026-0097
    ├ It has been reported (by @lopopolo) that the `rand` library is [unsound](https://rust-lang.github.io/unsafe-code-guidelines/glossary.html#soundness-of-code--of-a-library) (i.e. that safe code using the public API can cause Undefined Behaviour) when all the following conditions are met:
      
      - The `log` and `thread_rng` features are enabled
      - A [custom logger](https://docs.rs/log/latest/log/#implementing-a-logger) is defined
      - The custom logger accesses `rand::rng()` (previously `rand::thread_rng()`) and calls any `TryRng` (previously `RngCore`) methods on `ThreadRng`
      - The `ThreadRng` (attempts to) reseed while called from the custom logger (this happens every 64 kB of generated data)
      - Trace-level logging is enabled or warn-level logging is enabled and the random source (the `getrandom` crate) is unable to provide a new seed
      
      `TryRng` (previously `RngCore`) methods for `ThreadRng` use `unsafe` code to cast `*mut BlockRng<ReseedingCore>` to `&mut BlockRng<ReseedingCore>`. When all the above conditions are met this results in an aliased mutable reference, violating the Stacked Borrows rules. Miri is able to detect this violation in sample code. Since construction of [aliased mutable references is Undefined Behaviour](https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/nomicon/references.html), the behaviour of optimized builds is hard to predict.
    ├ Announcement: https://github.com/rust-random/rand/pull/1763
    ├ Solution: Upgrade to >=0.10.1 OR <0.10.0, >=0.9.3 OR <0.9.0, >=0.8.6 (try `cargo update -p rand`)
    ├ rand v0.8.5
      ├── (dev) libdd-common v4.1.0
      │   ├── libdd-capabilities-impl v2.0.0
      │   │   ├── libdd-shared-runtime v1.0.0
      │   │   │   └── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0
      │   │   ├── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0 (*)
      │   │   └── libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0
      │   │       ├── libdd-trace-obfuscation v3.0.0
      │   │       │   └── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0 (*)
      │   │       ├── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0 (*)
      │   │       └── (dev) libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0 (*)
      │   ├── libdd-shared-runtime v1.0.0 (*)
      │   ├── libdd-trace-obfuscation v3.0.0 (*)
      │   ├── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0 (*)
      │   └── libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0 (*)
      ├── (dev) libdd-trace-normalization v2.0.0
      │   └── libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0 (*)
      ├── (dev) libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0 (*)
      ├── libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0 (*)
      └── proptest v1.5.0
          └── (dev) libdd-tinybytes v1.1.1
              ├── (dev) libdd-tinybytes v1.1.1 (*)
              └── libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0 (*)

error[vulnerability]: Name constraints for URI names were incorrectly accepted
    ┌─ /home/runner/work/libdatadog/libdatadog/Cargo.lock:213:1
    │
213 │ rustls-webpki 0.103.10 registry+https://github.com/rust-lang/crates.io-index
    │ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ security vulnerability detected
    │
    ├ ID: RUSTSEC-2026-0098
    ├ Advisory: https://rustsec.org/advisories/RUSTSEC-2026-0098
    ├ Name constraints for URI names were ignored and therefore accepted.
      
      Note this library does not provide an API for asserting URI names, and URI name constraints are otherwise not implemented.  URI name constraints are now rejected unconditionally.
      
      Since name constraints are restrictions on otherwise properly-issued certificates, this bug is reachable only after signature verification and requires misissuance to exploit.
      
      This vulnerability is identified as [GHSA-965h-392x-2mh5](https://github.com/rustls/webpki/security/advisories/GHSA-965h-392x-2mh5). Thank you to @1seal for the report.
    ├ Solution: Upgrade to >=0.103.12, <0.104.0-alpha.1 OR >=0.104.0-alpha.6 (try `cargo update -p rustls-webpki`)
    ├ rustls-webpki v0.103.10
      └── rustls v0.23.37
          ├── hyper-rustls v0.27.7
          │   └── libdd-common v4.1.0
          │       ├── libdd-capabilities-impl v2.0.0
          │       │   ├── libdd-shared-runtime v1.0.0
          │       │   │   └── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0
          │       │   ├── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0 (*)
          │       │   └── libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0
          │       │       ├── libdd-trace-obfuscation v3.0.0
          │       │       │   └── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0 (*)
          │       │       ├── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0 (*)
          │       │       └── (dev) libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0 (*)
          │       ├── libdd-shared-runtime v1.0.0 (*)
          │       ├── libdd-trace-obfuscation v3.0.0 (*)
          │       ├── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0 (*)
          │       └── libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0 (*)
          ├── libdd-common v4.1.0 (*)
          └── tokio-rustls v0.26.0
              ├── hyper-rustls v0.27.7 (*)
              └── libdd-common v4.1.0 (*)

error[vulnerability]: Name constraints were accepted for certificates asserting a wildcard name
    ┌─ /home/runner/work/libdatadog/libdatadog/Cargo.lock:213:1
    │
213 │ rustls-webpki 0.103.10 registry+https://github.com/rust-lang/crates.io-index
    │ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ security vulnerability detected
    │
    ├ ID: RUSTSEC-2026-0099
    ├ Advisory: https://rustsec.org/advisories/RUSTSEC-2026-0099
    ├ Permitted subtree name constraints for DNS names were accepted for certificates asserting a wildcard name.
      
      This was incorrect because, given a name constraint of `accept.example.com`, `*.example.com` could feasibly allow a name of `reject.example.com` which is outside the constraint.
      This is very similar to [CVE-2025-61727](https://go.dev/issue/76442).
      
      Since name constraints are restrictions on otherwise properly-issued certificates, this bug is reachable only after signature verification and requires misissuance to exploit.
      
      This vulnerability is identified as [GHSA-xgp8-3hg3-c2mh](https://github.com/rustls/webpki/security/advisories/GHSA-xgp8-3hg3-c2mh). Thank you to @1seal for the report.
    ├ Solution: Upgrade to >=0.103.12, <0.104.0-alpha.1 OR >=0.104.0-alpha.6 (try `cargo update -p rustls-webpki`)
    ├ rustls-webpki v0.103.10
      └── rustls v0.23.37
          ├── hyper-rustls v0.27.7
          │   └── libdd-common v4.1.0
          │       ├── libdd-capabilities-impl v2.0.0
          │       │   ├── libdd-shared-runtime v1.0.0
          │       │   │   └── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0
          │       │   ├── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0 (*)
          │       │   └── libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0
          │       │       ├── libdd-trace-obfuscation v3.0.0
          │       │       │   └── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0 (*)
          │       │       ├── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0 (*)
          │       │       └── (dev) libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0 (*)
          │       ├── libdd-shared-runtime v1.0.0 (*)
          │       ├── libdd-trace-obfuscation v3.0.0 (*)
          │       ├── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0 (*)
          │       └── libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0 (*)
          ├── libdd-common v4.1.0 (*)
          └── tokio-rustls v0.26.0
              ├── hyper-rustls v0.27.7 (*)
              └── libdd-common v4.1.0 (*)

error[vulnerability]: Reachable panic in certificate revocation list parsing
    ┌─ /home/runner/work/libdatadog/libdatadog/Cargo.lock:213:1
    │
213 │ rustls-webpki 0.103.10 registry+https://github.com/rust-lang/crates.io-index
    │ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ security vulnerability detected
    │
    ├ ID: RUSTSEC-2026-0104
    ├ Advisory: https://rustsec.org/advisories/RUSTSEC-2026-0104
    ├ A panic was reachable when parsing certificate revocation lists via [`BorrowedCertRevocationList::from_der`]
      or [`OwnedCertRevocationList::from_der`].  This was the result of mishandling a syntactically valid empty
      `BIT STRING` appearing in the `onlySomeReasons` element of a `IssuingDistributionPoint` CRL extension.
      
      This panic is reachable prior to a CRL's signature being verified.
      
      Applications that do not use CRLs are not affected.
      
      Thank you to @tynus3 for the report.
    ├ Solution: Upgrade to >=0.103.13, <0.104.0-alpha.1 OR >=0.104.0-alpha.7 (try `cargo update -p rustls-webpki`)
    ├ rustls-webpki v0.103.10
      └── rustls v0.23.37
          ├── hyper-rustls v0.27.7
          │   └── libdd-common v4.1.0
          │       ├── libdd-capabilities-impl v2.0.0
          │       │   ├── libdd-shared-runtime v1.0.0
          │       │   │   └── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0
          │       │   ├── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0 (*)
          │       │   └── libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0
          │       │       ├── libdd-trace-obfuscation v3.0.0
          │       │       │   └── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0 (*)
          │       │       ├── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0 (*)
          │       │       └── (dev) libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0 (*)
          │       ├── libdd-shared-runtime v1.0.0 (*)
          │       ├── libdd-trace-obfuscation v3.0.0 (*)
          │       ├── libdd-trace-stats v3.0.0 (*)
          │       └── libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0 (*)
          ├── libdd-common v4.1.0 (*)
          └── tokio-rustls v0.26.0
              ├── hyper-rustls v0.27.7 (*)
              └── libdd-common v4.1.0 (*)

advisories FAILED, bans ok, sources ok

📦 libdd-trace-utils - 4 error(s)

Show output
error[unsound]: Rand is unsound with a custom logger using `rand::rng()`
    ┌─ /home/runner/work/libdatadog/libdatadog/Cargo.lock:177:1
    │
177 │ rand 0.8.5 registry+https://github.com/rust-lang/crates.io-index
    │ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ unsound advisory detected
    │
    ├ ID: RUSTSEC-2026-0097
    ├ Advisory: https://rustsec.org/advisories/RUSTSEC-2026-0097
    ├ It has been reported (by @lopopolo) that the `rand` library is [unsound](https://rust-lang.github.io/unsafe-code-guidelines/glossary.html#soundness-of-code--of-a-library) (i.e. that safe code using the public API can cause Undefined Behaviour) when all the following conditions are met:
      
      - The `log` and `thread_rng` features are enabled
      - A [custom logger](https://docs.rs/log/latest/log/#implementing-a-logger) is defined
      - The custom logger accesses `rand::rng()` (previously `rand::thread_rng()`) and calls any `TryRng` (previously `RngCore`) methods on `ThreadRng`
      - The `ThreadRng` (attempts to) reseed while called from the custom logger (this happens every 64 kB of generated data)
      - Trace-level logging is enabled or warn-level logging is enabled and the random source (the `getrandom` crate) is unable to provide a new seed
      
      `TryRng` (previously `RngCore`) methods for `ThreadRng` use `unsafe` code to cast `*mut BlockRng<ReseedingCore>` to `&mut BlockRng<ReseedingCore>`. When all the above conditions are met this results in an aliased mutable reference, violating the Stacked Borrows rules. Miri is able to detect this violation in sample code. Since construction of [aliased mutable references is Undefined Behaviour](https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/nomicon/references.html), the behaviour of optimized builds is hard to predict.
    ├ Announcement: https://github.com/rust-random/rand/pull/1763
    ├ Solution: Upgrade to >=0.10.1 OR <0.10.0, >=0.9.3 OR <0.9.0, >=0.8.6 (try `cargo update -p rand`)
    ├ rand v0.8.5
      ├── (dev) libdd-common v4.1.0
      │   ├── libdd-capabilities-impl v2.0.0
      │   │   └── libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0
      │   │       └── (dev) libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0 (*)
      │   └── libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0 (*)
      ├── (dev) libdd-trace-normalization v2.0.0
      │   └── libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0 (*)
      ├── libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0 (*)
      └── proptest v1.5.0
          └── (dev) libdd-tinybytes v1.1.1
              ├── (dev) libdd-tinybytes v1.1.1 (*)
              └── libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0 (*)

error[vulnerability]: Name constraints for URI names were incorrectly accepted
    ┌─ /home/runner/work/libdatadog/libdatadog/Cargo.lock:199:1
    │
199 │ rustls-webpki 0.103.10 registry+https://github.com/rust-lang/crates.io-index
    │ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ security vulnerability detected
    │
    ├ ID: RUSTSEC-2026-0098
    ├ Advisory: https://rustsec.org/advisories/RUSTSEC-2026-0098
    ├ Name constraints for URI names were ignored and therefore accepted.
      
      Note this library does not provide an API for asserting URI names, and URI name constraints are otherwise not implemented.  URI name constraints are now rejected unconditionally.
      
      Since name constraints are restrictions on otherwise properly-issued certificates, this bug is reachable only after signature verification and requires misissuance to exploit.
      
      This vulnerability is identified as [GHSA-965h-392x-2mh5](https://github.com/rustls/webpki/security/advisories/GHSA-965h-392x-2mh5). Thank you to @1seal for the report.
    ├ Solution: Upgrade to >=0.103.12, <0.104.0-alpha.1 OR >=0.104.0-alpha.6 (try `cargo update -p rustls-webpki`)
    ├ rustls-webpki v0.103.10
      └── rustls v0.23.37
          ├── hyper-rustls v0.27.7
          │   └── libdd-common v4.1.0
          │       ├── libdd-capabilities-impl v2.0.0
          │       │   └── libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0
          │       │       └── (dev) libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0 (*)
          │       └── libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0 (*)
          ├── libdd-common v4.1.0 (*)
          └── tokio-rustls v0.26.0
              ├── hyper-rustls v0.27.7 (*)
              └── libdd-common v4.1.0 (*)

error[vulnerability]: Name constraints were accepted for certificates asserting a wildcard name
    ┌─ /home/runner/work/libdatadog/libdatadog/Cargo.lock:199:1
    │
199 │ rustls-webpki 0.103.10 registry+https://github.com/rust-lang/crates.io-index
    │ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ security vulnerability detected
    │
    ├ ID: RUSTSEC-2026-0099
    ├ Advisory: https://rustsec.org/advisories/RUSTSEC-2026-0099
    ├ Permitted subtree name constraints for DNS names were accepted for certificates asserting a wildcard name.
      
      This was incorrect because, given a name constraint of `accept.example.com`, `*.example.com` could feasibly allow a name of `reject.example.com` which is outside the constraint.
      This is very similar to [CVE-2025-61727](https://go.dev/issue/76442).
      
      Since name constraints are restrictions on otherwise properly-issued certificates, this bug is reachable only after signature verification and requires misissuance to exploit.
      
      This vulnerability is identified as [GHSA-xgp8-3hg3-c2mh](https://github.com/rustls/webpki/security/advisories/GHSA-xgp8-3hg3-c2mh). Thank you to @1seal for the report.
    ├ Solution: Upgrade to >=0.103.12, <0.104.0-alpha.1 OR >=0.104.0-alpha.6 (try `cargo update -p rustls-webpki`)
    ├ rustls-webpki v0.103.10
      └── rustls v0.23.37
          ├── hyper-rustls v0.27.7
          │   └── libdd-common v4.1.0
          │       ├── libdd-capabilities-impl v2.0.0
          │       │   └── libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0
          │       │       └── (dev) libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0 (*)
          │       └── libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0 (*)
          ├── libdd-common v4.1.0 (*)
          └── tokio-rustls v0.26.0
              ├── hyper-rustls v0.27.7 (*)
              └── libdd-common v4.1.0 (*)

error[vulnerability]: Reachable panic in certificate revocation list parsing
    ┌─ /home/runner/work/libdatadog/libdatadog/Cargo.lock:199:1
    │
199 │ rustls-webpki 0.103.10 registry+https://github.com/rust-lang/crates.io-index
    │ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ security vulnerability detected
    │
    ├ ID: RUSTSEC-2026-0104
    ├ Advisory: https://rustsec.org/advisories/RUSTSEC-2026-0104
    ├ A panic was reachable when parsing certificate revocation lists via [`BorrowedCertRevocationList::from_der`]
      or [`OwnedCertRevocationList::from_der`].  This was the result of mishandling a syntactically valid empty
      `BIT STRING` appearing in the `onlySomeReasons` element of a `IssuingDistributionPoint` CRL extension.
      
      This panic is reachable prior to a CRL's signature being verified.
      
      Applications that do not use CRLs are not affected.
      
      Thank you to @tynus3 for the report.
    ├ Solution: Upgrade to >=0.103.13, <0.104.0-alpha.1 OR >=0.104.0-alpha.7 (try `cargo update -p rustls-webpki`)
    ├ rustls-webpki v0.103.10
      └── rustls v0.23.37
          ├── hyper-rustls v0.27.7
          │   └── libdd-common v4.1.0
          │       ├── libdd-capabilities-impl v2.0.0
          │       │   └── libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0
          │       │       └── (dev) libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0 (*)
          │       └── libdd-trace-utils v4.0.0 (*)
          ├── libdd-common v4.1.0 (*)
          └── tokio-rustls v0.26.0
              ├── hyper-rustls v0.27.7 (*)
              └── libdd-common v4.1.0 (*)

advisories FAILED, bans ok, sources ok

Updated: 2026-05-19 17:37:25 UTC | Commit: ad7f61a | dependency-check job results

/// Note: Borrow<str> is not required by the derived traits, but allows to access HashMap elements
/// from a static str and check if the string is empty.
pub trait SpanText: Debug + Eq + Hash + Borrow<str> + Serialize + Default {
pub trait SpanText: Debug + Eq + Hash + Borrow<str> + Serialize + Default + From<String> {
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What does this trait bound add? I can't see that it's necessary.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It allows to store new strings in the span e.g. an normalized/obfuscated version of a value. Otherwise SpanText instance can only be created from static str.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If that's the case, then maybe there should be code in the PR that needs it, since everything compiles fine without that trait bound.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It's needed by @Eldolfin work on the trace filters. It seemed cleaner to do this change separately to be able to discuss it

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@yannham yannham left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just trying to understand the blast radius: who is using the now cow-based SpanSlice implementation in practice? Is it only for tests, or do others have to pay the cow tax? Maybe it's unavoidable, because any SDK has do deal with the filter/normalization issue anyway?

@VianneyRuhlmann
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

VianneyRuhlmann commented May 19, 2026

iirc we only use it in the trace_utils decoder when decoding from a slice which is done by python and is going to be used by ruby. All sdks may need to use normalization/obfuscation but not all customers will (for now only those using trace filters). I can add an extra trait SpanOwnedData to opt-in into the CowSpan when we need to apply normalization.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@yannham yannham left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I see, thanks. I don't think it's worth the effort anyway, since we're moving towards native spans, and it's not clear that Cow has any measurable impact (it does double the size of &str, but whether that makes any difference...).

@datadog-datadog-prod-us1
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

datadog-datadog-prod-us1 Bot commented May 19, 2026

Tests

🎉 All green!

🧪 All tests passed
❄️ No new flaky tests detected

🎯 Code Coverage (details)
Patch Coverage: 100.00%
Overall Coverage: 72.71% (+0.03%)

This comment will be updated automatically if new data arrives.
🔗 Commit SHA: 3f09f0b | Docs | Datadog PR Page | Give us feedback!

Comment thread libdd-trace-utils/src/span/mod.rs
@VianneyRuhlmann VianneyRuhlmann changed the title feat(trace-utils): add from_string to span text feat(trace-utils)!: add from_string to span text May 19, 2026
@codecov-commenter
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 72.71%. Comparing base (29bb36d) to head (3f09f0b).
⚠️ Report is 4 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #2011      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   72.67%   72.71%   +0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         452      452              
  Lines       74889    74946      +57     
==========================================
+ Hits        54427    54494      +67     
+ Misses      20462    20452      -10     
Components Coverage Δ
libdd-crashtracker 65.29% <ø> (-0.02%) ⬇️
libdd-crashtracker-ffi 37.56% <ø> (ø)
libdd-alloc 98.77% <ø> (ø)
libdd-data-pipeline 85.90% <100.00%> (-0.11%) ⬇️
libdd-data-pipeline-ffi 73.93% <ø> (+2.88%) ⬆️
libdd-common 79.81% <ø> (ø)
libdd-common-ffi 74.41% <ø> (ø)
libdd-telemetry 73.34% <ø> (ø)
libdd-telemetry-ffi 31.36% <ø> (ø)
libdd-dogstatsd-client 82.64% <ø> (ø)
datadog-ipc 76.22% <ø> (+1.46%) ⬆️
libdd-profiling 81.69% <ø> (+0.02%) ⬆️
libdd-profiling-ffi 64.79% <ø> (+0.27%) ⬆️
libdd-sampling 97.46% <100.00%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️
datadog-sidecar 28.87% <ø> (-0.35%) ⬇️
datdog-sidecar-ffi 8.56% <ø> (-1.70%) ⬇️
spawn-worker 48.86% <ø> (ø)
libdd-tinybytes 93.16% <ø> (ø)
libdd-trace-normalization 81.71% <ø> (ø)
libdd-trace-obfuscation 87.30% <ø> (-0.10%) ⬇️
libdd-trace-protobuf 68.25% <ø> (ø)
libdd-trace-utils 89.60% <100.00%> (+0.01%) ⬆️
libdd-tracer-flare 86.88% <ø> (ø)
libdd-log 74.83% <ø> (ø)
🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@Eldolfin Eldolfin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@dd-octo-sts
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

dd-octo-sts Bot commented May 19, 2026

Artifact Size Benchmark Report

aarch64-alpine-linux-musl
Artifact Baseline Commit Change
/aarch64-alpine-linux-musl/lib/libdatadog_profiling.a 81.83 MB 81.89 MB +.08% (+70.50 KB) 🔍
/aarch64-alpine-linux-musl/lib/libdatadog_profiling.so 7.57 MB 7.57 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu
Artifact Baseline Commit Change
/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/libdatadog_profiling.a 98.02 MB 98.15 MB +.12% (+125.82 KB) 🔍
/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/libdatadog_profiling.so 10.01 MB 10.02 MB +.03% (+4.04 KB) 🔍
libdatadog-x64-windows
Artifact Baseline Commit Change
/libdatadog-x64-windows/debug/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.dll 24.48 MB 24.49 MB +.04% (+11.00 KB) 🔍
/libdatadog-x64-windows/debug/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib 79.87 KB 79.87 KB 0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x64-windows/debug/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.pdb 180.23 MB 180.35 MB +.06% (+120.00 KB) 🔍
/libdatadog-x64-windows/debug/static/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib 914.09 MB 914.50 MB +.04% (+427.89 KB) 🔍
/libdatadog-x64-windows/release/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.dll 7.73 MB 7.74 MB +.13% (+11.00 KB) 🔍
/libdatadog-x64-windows/release/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib 79.87 KB 79.87 KB 0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x64-windows/release/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.pdb 23.16 MB 23.19 MB +.13% (+32.00 KB) 🔍
/libdatadog-x64-windows/release/static/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib 45.36 MB 45.41 MB +.11% (+53.19 KB) 🔍
libdatadog-x86-windows
Artifact Baseline Commit Change
/libdatadog-x86-windows/debug/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.dll 21.10 MB 21.11 MB +.04% (+10.00 KB) 🔍
/libdatadog-x86-windows/debug/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib 81.11 KB 81.11 KB 0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x86-windows/debug/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.pdb 184.44 MB 184.60 MB +.08% (+160.00 KB) 🔍
/libdatadog-x86-windows/debug/static/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib 900.36 MB 900.77 MB +.04% (+427.21 KB) 🔍
/libdatadog-x86-windows/release/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.dll 5.99 MB 6.00 MB +.12% (+7.50 KB) 🔍
/libdatadog-x86-windows/release/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib 81.11 KB 81.11 KB 0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x86-windows/release/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.pdb 24.80 MB 24.83 MB +.12% (+32.00 KB) 🔍
/libdatadog-x86-windows/release/static/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib 42.85 MB 42.90 MB +.11% (+49.16 KB) 🔍
x86_64-alpine-linux-musl
Artifact Baseline Commit Change
/x86_64-alpine-linux-musl/lib/libdatadog_profiling.a 72.93 MB 73.00 MB +.09% (+70.28 KB) 🔍
/x86_64-alpine-linux-musl/lib/libdatadog_profiling.so 8.42 MB 8.43 MB +.13% (+12.00 KB) 🔍
x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Artifact Baseline Commit Change
/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/libdatadog_profiling.a 90.71 MB 90.83 MB +.12% (+117.15 KB) 🔍
/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/libdatadog_profiling.so 10.06 MB 10.07 MB +.07% (+7.33 KB) 🔍

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.

6 participants