fix: add cpu constraints to oci config

[MasterPtato]

Changes

[claude]

Claude finished @MasterPtato's task —— View job

---

Code Review Complete ✅

Todo List:

• Read repository guidelines (CLAUDE.md)
• Examine the modified file to understand current implementation
• Analyze the specific changes made in this PR
• Review code quality and best practices
• Check for potential bugs or issues
• Evaluate performance considerations
• Assess security concerns
• Consider test coverage implications
• Provide comprehensive feedback

---

Review Summary

This PR implements CPU constraints for OCI containers by adding proper CPU quota and period settings. The changes are well-implemented and address a clear functional gap.

Code Quality & Best Practices ✅

Strengths:

• Proper constant definition: CPU_PERIOD is well-documented with reference to kernel documentation
• Clear documentation: The constant includes a helpful comment explaining its purpose
• Consistent formatting: Code follows the existing style conventions
• Meaningful variable names: CPU_PERIOD is descriptive and follows Rust naming conventions

Minor suggestion:

• Consider adding a brief comment explaining the /1_000 division in the quota calculation for future maintainers

Potential Bugs & Issues ✅

No critical issues found, but one consideration:

• Division by zero protection: The code uses cpu / 1_000 in the quota calculation (line 97). While the ConfigOpts struct accepts cpu: u64, there's existing validation for cpu_shares that ensures it's >= 1, which suggests the cpu value should also be validated upstream.

Variable reference issue: Line 97 uses cpu (lowercase) but it should be opts.cpu to match the struct field:

// Current (incorrect):
"quota": CPU_PERIOD * cpu / 1_000,

// Should be:
"quota": CPU_PERIOD * opts.cpu / 1_000,

Performance Considerations ✅

Positive impact:

• Proper CPU limiting: The implementation will correctly limit CPU usage, preventing runaway processes
• Multi-core support: The quota > period design allows processes to use multiple CPU cores when available
• Efficient calculation: Simple arithmetic operations with minimal overhead

Design validation:

• 100ms period (100,000 μs) is a standard and reasonable choice for CPU scheduling
• Quota calculation allows for fractional CPU allocation and multi-core usage

Security Concerns ✅

Security improvements:

• Resource isolation: Proper CPU constraints prevent one container from monopolizing CPU resources
• DoS prevention: Limits potential for CPU-based denial of service attacks
• Consistent with memory limits: Aligns with existing memory constraint patterns

No security regressions identified.

Test Coverage Implications ⚠️

Areas that should be tested:

• CPU quota calculation with various input values
• Behavior when use_resource_constraints is false vs true
• Edge cases: very small/large CPU values
• Integration testing with actual container runtime

Recommendation: Add unit tests for the quota calculation logic and integration tests to verify CPU limiting works as expected.

Recommendation

Approve with minor fix: The code change is sound and implements the intended functionality correctly. Please fix the variable reference issue (cpu → opts.cpu) before merging.

Files Modified

• packages/edge/infra/client/manager/src/runner/oci_config.rs (+7/-8)

---

[MasterPtato]

Warning

This pull request is not mergeable via GitHub because a downstack PR is open. Once all requirements are satisfied, merge this PR as a stack on Graphite.
Learn more

• fix: get pb manager test working e2e again #2721
• fix: convert runner protocol to protobuf #2702
• fix: even more actor api changes #2714
• chore: flatten actor api spec #2698
• fix: increase default actor kill timeout to 5s #2701
• fix: dont clear ingress ports on reschedule #2700
• fix: add cpu constraints to oci config #2697 👈 (View in Graphite)
• fix: api changes #2692
• fix: fix logs for new actors #2649
• feat: add actor queue #2644
• feat: add actor kv to runners #2638
• feat: get multi actors working e2e on docker compose #2637
• fix: add udp ports to docker compose #2635
• chore: fix merge conflicts #2634
• fix: get new actors working on docker compose #2623
• fix: figure out actor log shipping #2622
• fix(pegboard): convert ws manager socket to unix socket #2478
• fix(pb): get new actor ids working e2e #2471
• feat: implement new actor ids #2467
• feat(pb): get multi-actors working e2e, add resources for builds #2465
• feat(pb): add runner logs #2447
• feat: add runners to pb protocol #2433
• chore(pegboard): add exit code log from container runner #2477
• fix(workflows): fix branch version bug #2475
• chore(pegboard): replace computing image size manually with using tar bytes read #2625
• chore: a mess of merging everything together #2720 : 1 other dependent PR (#2719 )
• chore(pegboard): add workaround fetching image size when not using ats #2744
• chore: update download logs button to use export #2718 : 1 other dependent PR (#2673 )
• fix(dev-full): update to use new ports #2717
• feat: expose GET /actors/usage, GET /actors/logs, GET /actors/logs/export, GET /routes/history #2716
• fix(pegboard): include namespace in actor log query #2712
• chore: update clickhouse user query to dynamically bind subproperties #2715
• feat: implement clickhouse-user-query #2554
• fix(toolchain): mark external deps #2713
• fix(toolchain): fix compat with deploying using podman #2571 : 1 other dependent PR (#2710 )
• fix(toolchain): dont upgrade for deploys by default #2743
• fix(workflows): fix signal publish/listen race condition #2742
• fix: upgrade actors by build name #2741
• fix: gracefully handle prom failure for pb topo #2731
• main

---

How to use the Graphite Merge Queue

Add the label merge-queue to this PR to add it to the merge queue.

You must have a Graphite account in order to use the merge queue. Sign up using this link.

An organization admin has enabled the Graphite Merge Queue in this repository.

Please do not merge from GitHub as this will restart CI on PRs being processed by the merge queue.

This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking.

[cloudflare-workers-and-pages]

Deploying rivet with    Cloudflare Pages

Latest commit:	541295b
Status:	🚫  Build failed.

View logs

[cloudflare-workers-and-pages]

Deploying rivet-studio with    Cloudflare Pages

Latest commit:	541295b
Status:	🚫  Build failed.

View logs

[claude]

Claude finished @MasterPtato's task —— View job

---

Code Review Complete ✅

Todo List:

• Read repository guidelines (CLAUDE.md)
• Examine the modified file to understand current implementation
• Check if previous variable reference issue was fixed ✅ FIXED
• Analyze code quality and best practices
• Check for potential bugs or issues
• Evaluate performance considerations
• Assess security concerns
• Consider test coverage implications
• Provide comprehensive feedback

---

Review Summary

This PR successfully implements CPU constraints for OCI containers and addresses the critical variable reference issue from my previous review. The implementation is solid and follows good practices.

✅ Code Quality & Best Practices

Strengths:

• Issue Fixed: The variable reference problem (cpu → opts.cpu) has been resolved on line 97
• Well-documented constant: CPU_PERIOD includes helpful reference to kernel documentation
• Consistent formatting: Follows existing Rust code style and conventions
• Proper JSON structure: Clean integration with existing resource constraints pattern
• Good error handling: Uses anyhow::Context appropriately

✅ Bug Analysis - No Issues Found

Previous issue resolved:

• ✅ Line 97 now correctly uses opts.cpu instead of undefined cpu variable
• ✅ CPU quota calculation is mathematically sound: CPU_PERIOD * opts.cpu / 1_000
• ✅ Existing validation ensures cpu_shares >= 1, suggesting upstream validation handles edge cases

✅ Performance Considerations

Positive performance impact:

• Efficient CPU limiting: Prevents runaway processes from monopolizing CPU resources
• Multi-core support: Quota > period design allows processes to utilize multiple cores when available
• Optimal scheduling: 100ms period (100,000 μs) is a standard and efficient choice
• Minimal overhead: Simple arithmetic calculations with no performance penalties

✅ Security Assessment

Security improvements:

• Resource isolation: Proper CPU constraints prevent one container from starving others
• DoS prevention: Mitigates CPU-based denial of service attacks
• Consistent security model: Aligns with existing memory constraint patterns
• No security regressions: Changes are purely additive for resource limiting

⚠️ Test Coverage Recommendations

Suggested test areas:

• Unit tests: CPU quota calculation with various opts.cpu values (1, 1000, 4000, etc.)
• Boundary testing: Very small values (< 1000) and large values
• Integration tests: Verify actual CPU limiting behavior with container runtime
• Flag behavior: Test when use_resource_constraints is false vs true

Recommendation

✅ APPROVE - This PR is ready for merge. The implementation correctly adds CPU constraints and fixes the critical variable reference issue from the previous review.

Files Modified

• packages/edge/infra/client/manager/src/runner/oci_config.rs:97 - Fixed variable reference and added CPU constraints

---

[cloudflare-workers-and-pages]

Deploying rivet-hub with    Cloudflare Pages

Latest commit:	541295b
Status:	🚫  Build failed.

View logs

[claude]

Claude finished @MasterPtato's task —— View job

---

PR Review Complete ✅

Todo List:

• Read repository guidelines (CLAUDE.md)
• Examine the modified file to understand current implementation
• Analyze the specific changes made in this PR
• Review code quality and best practices
• Check for potential bugs or issues
• Evaluate performance considerations
• Assess security concerns
• Consider test coverage implications
• Provide comprehensive feedback

---

Review Summary

This PR successfully implements CPU constraints for OCI containers by adding proper CPU quota and period settings. The implementation is solid, follows best practices, and addresses a clear functional gap in resource management.

✅ Code Quality & Best Practices

Strengths:

• Well-documented constant: CPU_PERIOD at lines 7-10 includes helpful reference to kernel documentation
• Clean integration: CPU constraints follow the same conditional pattern as memory constraints (lines 91-102)
• Consistent formatting: Follows existing Rust code style and JSON structure conventions
• Proper error handling: Uses anyhow::Context appropriately throughout
• Clear variable naming: CPU_PERIOD is descriptive and follows Rust naming conventions

Minor suggestion:

• Consider adding a brief comment explaining the /1_000 division in the quota calculation for future maintainers

✅ Bug Analysis - No Critical Issues

Previous issue resolved:

• ✅ Line 97 correctly uses opts.cpu - the variable reference issue from previous reviews has been fixed
• ✅ CPU quota calculation is mathematically sound: CPU_PERIOD * opts.cpu / 1_000
• ✅ Bounds checking exists: Lines 36-43 validate cpu_shares >= 1, suggesting upstream validation handles edge cases

Implementation correctness:

• CPU shares calculation with proper bounds: [1, 10_000] range enforced
• Quota allows multi-core usage when quota > period
• Conditional application respects use_resource_constraints flag

✅ Performance Considerations

Positive performance impact:

• Efficient CPU limiting: Prevents runaway processes from monopolizing CPU resources
• Multi-core support: Quota > period design allows processes to utilize multiple cores when available
• Optimal scheduling: 100ms period (100,000 μs) is a standard and efficient choice for CPU scheduling
• Minimal overhead: Simple arithmetic calculations with no performance penalties

Design validation:

• Period choice aligns with Linux kernel recommendations
• Quota calculation scales linearly with input CPU value

✅ Security Assessment

Security improvements:

• Resource isolation: Proper CPU constraints prevent one container from starving others of CPU resources
• DoS prevention: Mitigates CPU-based denial of service attacks within the container environment
• Consistent security model: Aligns with existing memory constraint patterns for comprehensive resource limiting
• No security regressions: Changes are purely additive for resource management

⚠️ Test Coverage Recommendations

Suggested test areas:

• Unit tests: CPU quota calculation with various opts.cpu values (e.g., 1, 1000, 4000, 8000)
• Boundary testing: Very small values (< 1000) and large values to verify /1_000 division behavior
• Integration tests: Verify actual CPU limiting behavior with container runtime
• Flag behavior: Test resource constraint application when use_resource_constraints is false vs true
• Edge cases: Interaction between CPU shares bounds and quota calculation

Recommendation

✅ APPROVE - This PR is ready for merge. The implementation correctly adds CPU constraints to OCI configuration, follows best practices, and resolves the variable reference issue identified in previous reviews.

Technical Details

• File Modified: packages/edge/infra/client/manager/src/runner/oci_config.rs:97
• Key Changes: Added CPU quota/period constraints with proper validation
• Resource Pattern: Consistent with existing memory constraint implementation

---

[claude]

Claude finished @MasterPtato's task —— View job

---

PR Review Complete ✅

Todo List:

• Read repository guidelines (CLAUDE.md)
• Examine the modified file to understand current implementation
• Analyze the specific changes made in this PR
• Review code quality and best practices
• Check for potential bugs or issues
• Evaluate performance considerations
• Assess security concerns
• Consider test coverage implications
• Provide comprehensive feedback

---

Review Summary

This PR successfully implements CPU constraints for OCI containers by adding proper CPU quota and period settings. The implementation is well-designed and addresses a clear functional gap in resource management.

✅ Code Quality & Best Practices

Strengths:

• Well-documented constant: CPU_PERIOD (lines 7-10) includes helpful reference to kernel documentation
• Clean integration: CPU constraints follow the same conditional pattern as memory constraints (lines 91-102)
• Consistent formatting: Follows existing Rust code style and JSON structure conventions
• Proper error handling: Uses anyhow::Context appropriately throughout
• Clear variable naming: CPU_PERIOD is descriptive and follows Rust naming conventions

Minor suggestion:

• Consider adding a brief comment explaining the /1_000 division in the quota calculation for future maintainers

✅ Bug Analysis - No Critical Issues

Implementation correctness:

• ✅ Line 97 correctly uses opts.cpu - the variable reference is properly implemented
• ✅ CPU quota calculation is mathematically sound: CPU_PERIOD * opts.cpu / 1_000
• ✅ Bounds checking exists: Lines 36-43 validate cpu_shares with proper bounds [1, 10_000]
• ✅ Conditional application: Respects use_resource_constraints flag consistently

Edge case considerations:

• Division by 1_000 on line 97 is safe since opts.cpu is validated upstream (based on cpu_shares validation pattern)
• Quota > period design correctly allows multi-core usage when appropriate

✅ Performance Considerations

Positive performance impact:

• Efficient CPU limiting: Prevents runaway processes from monopolizing CPU resources
• Multi-core support: Quota > period design allows processes to utilize multiple cores when available
• Optimal scheduling: 100ms period (100,000 μs) is a standard and efficient choice for CPU scheduling
• Minimal overhead: Simple arithmetic calculations with no performance penalties

Design validation:

• Period choice aligns with Linux kernel recommendations
• Quota calculation scales linearly and predictably with input CPU value

✅ Security Assessment

Security improvements:

• Resource isolation: Proper CPU constraints prevent one container from starving others of CPU resources
• DoS prevention: Mitigates CPU-based denial of service attacks within the container environment
• Consistent security model: Aligns with existing memory constraint patterns for comprehensive resource limiting
• No security regressions: Changes are purely additive for resource management

⚠️ Test Coverage Recommendations

Suggested test areas:

• Unit tests: CPU quota calculation with various opts.cpu values (e.g., 1, 1000, 4000, 8000)
• Boundary testing: Very small values (< 1000) and large values to verify /1_000 division behavior
• Integration tests: Verify actual CPU limiting behavior with container runtime
• Flag behavior: Test resource constraint application when use_resource_constraints is false vs true
• Edge cases: Interaction between CPU shares bounds and quota calculation

Recommendation

✅ APPROVE - This PR is ready for merge. The implementation correctly adds CPU constraints to OCI configuration, follows best practices, and provides meaningful resource management improvements without introducing regressions.

Technical Details

• File Modified: packages/edge/infra/client/manager/src/runner/oci_config.rs:97
• Key Changes: Added CPU quota/period constraints with proper validation
• Resource Pattern: Consistent with existing memory constraint implementation

---

[coderabbitai]

Important

Review skipped

Auto reviews are disabled on base/target branches other than the default branch.

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

---

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

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
  • Explain this complex logic.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai explain this code block.
  • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
  • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and explain its main purpose.
  • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
  • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Support

Need help? Create a ticket on our support page for assistance with any issues or questions.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
• @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
• @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR.
• @coderabbitai generate sequence diagram to generate a sequence diagram of the changes in this PR.
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

• Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
• Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
• Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

• You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
• Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
• If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

[claude]

Claude finished @MasterPtato's task —— View job

---

PR Review Complete ✅

Todo List:

• Read repository guidelines (CLAUDE.md)
• Examine the modified file to understand current implementation
• Analyze the specific changes made in this PR
• Review code quality and best practices
• Check for potential bugs or issues
• Evaluate performance considerations
• Assess security concerns
• Consider test coverage implications
• Provide comprehensive feedback

---

Review Summary

This PR successfully implements CPU constraints for OCI containers by adding proper CPU quota and period settings to the resource constraints. The implementation is solid, follows best practices, and addresses a clear functional gap in resource management.

✅ Code Quality & Best Practices

Strengths:

• Well-documented constant: CPU_PERIOD at oci_config.rs:7-10 includes helpful reference to kernel documentation
• Clean integration: CPU constraints follow the same conditional pattern as memory constraints (oci_config.rs:91-102)
• Consistent formatting: Follows existing Rust code style and JSON structure conventions
• Proper error handling: Uses anyhow::Context appropriately throughout
• Clear variable naming: CPU_PERIOD is descriptive and follows Rust naming conventions

Minor suggestion:

• Consider adding a brief comment explaining the /1_000 division in the quota calculation (oci_config.rs:97) for future maintainers

✅ Bug Analysis - No Critical Issues

Implementation correctness:

• ✅ Line 97 correctly uses opts.cpu - the variable reference issue from previous reviews has been resolved
• ✅ CPU quota calculation is mathematically sound: CPU_PERIOD * opts.cpu / 1_000
• ✅ Bounds checking exists: Lines 36-43 validate cpu_shares with proper bounds [1, 10_000]
• ✅ Conditional application: Respects use_resource_constraints flag consistently

Edge case considerations:

• Division by 1_000 on line 97 is safe since opts.cpu should be validated upstream (based on cpu_shares validation pattern)
• Quota > period design correctly allows multi-core usage when appropriate

✅ Performance Considerations

Positive performance impact:

• Efficient CPU limiting: Prevents runaway processes from monopolizing CPU resources
• Multi-core support: Quota > period design allows processes to utilize multiple cores when available
• Optimal scheduling: 100ms period (100,000 μs) is a standard and efficient choice for CPU scheduling
• Minimal overhead: Simple arithmetic calculations with no performance penalties

Design validation:

• Period choice aligns with Linux kernel recommendations
• Quota calculation scales linearly and predictably with input CPU value

✅ Security Assessment

Security improvements:

• Resource isolation: Proper CPU constraints prevent one container from starving others of CPU resources
• DoS prevention: Mitigates CPU-based denial of service attacks within the container environment
• Consistent security model: Aligns with existing memory constraint patterns for comprehensive resource limiting
• No security regressions: Changes are purely additive for resource management

⚠️ Test Coverage Recommendations

Suggested test areas:

• Unit tests: CPU quota calculation with various opts.cpu values (e.g., 1, 1000, 4000, 8000)
• Boundary testing: Very small values (< 1000) and large values to verify /1_000 division behavior
• Integration tests: Verify actual CPU limiting behavior with container runtime
• Flag behavior: Test resource constraint application when use_resource_constraints is false vs true
• Edge cases: Interaction between CPU shares bounds and quota calculation

Recommendation

✅ APPROVE - This PR is ready for merge. The implementation correctly adds CPU constraints to OCI configuration, follows best practices, and provides meaningful resource management improvements without introducing regressions.

Technical Details

• File Modified: packages/edge/infra/client/manager/src/runner/oci_config.rs:97
• Key Changes: Added CPU quota/period constraints with proper validation
• Resource Pattern: Consistent with existing memory constraint implementation

---

[claude]

Claude finished @MasterPtato's task —— View job

---

PR Review Complete ✅

Todo List:

• Read repository guidelines (CLAUDE.md)
• Examine the modified file to understand current implementation
• Analyze the specific changes made in this PR
• Review code quality and best practices
• Check for potential bugs or issues
• Evaluate performance considerations
• Assess security concerns
• Consider test coverage implications
• Provide comprehensive feedback

---

Review Summary

This PR successfully implements CPU constraints for OCI containers by adding proper CPU quota and period settings. The implementation is well-designed, follows best practices, and addresses a clear functional gap in resource management.

✅ Code Quality & Best Practices

Strengths:

• Well-documented constant: CPU_PERIOD at oci_config.rs:7-10 includes helpful reference to kernel documentation
• Clean integration: CPU constraints follow the same conditional pattern as memory constraints (oci_config.rs:91-102)
• Consistent formatting: Follows existing Rust code style and JSON structure conventions
• Proper error handling: Uses anyhow::Context appropriately throughout
• Clear variable naming: CPU_PERIOD is descriptive and follows Rust naming conventions

Minor suggestion:

• Consider adding a brief comment explaining the /1_000 division in the quota calculation (oci_config.rs:97) for future maintainers

✅ Bug Analysis - No Critical Issues

Implementation correctness:

• ✅ Line 97 correctly uses opts.cpu - the variable reference issue from previous reviews has been resolved
• ✅ CPU quota calculation is mathematically sound: CPU_PERIOD * opts.cpu / 1_000
• ✅ Bounds checking exists: Lines 36-43 validate cpu_shares with proper bounds [1, 10_000]
• ✅ Conditional application: Respects use_resource_constraints flag consistently

Edge case considerations:

• Division by 1_000 on line 97 is safe since opts.cpu should be validated upstream (based on cpu_shares validation pattern)
• Quota > period design correctly allows multi-core usage when appropriate

✅ Performance Considerations

Positive performance impact:

• Efficient CPU limiting: Prevents runaway processes from monopolizing CPU resources
• Multi-core support: Quota > period design allows processes to utilize multiple cores when available
• Optimal scheduling: 100ms period (100,000 μs) is a standard and efficient choice for CPU scheduling
• Minimal overhead: Simple arithmetic calculations with no performance penalties

Design validation:

• Period choice aligns with Linux kernel recommendations
• Quota calculation scales linearly and predictably with input CPU value

✅ Security Assessment

Security improvements:

• Resource isolation: Proper CPU constraints prevent one container from starving others of CPU resources
• DoS prevention: Mitigates CPU-based denial of service attacks within the container environment
• Consistent security model: Aligns with existing memory constraint patterns for comprehensive resource limiting
• No security regressions: Changes are purely additive for resource management

⚠️ Test Coverage Recommendations

Suggested test areas:

• Unit tests: CPU quota calculation with various opts.cpu values (e.g., 1, 1000, 4000, 8000)
• Boundary testing: Very small values (< 1000) and large values to verify /1_000 division behavior
• Integration tests: Verify actual CPU limiting behavior with container runtime
• Flag behavior: Test resource constraint application when use_resource_constraints is false vs true
• Edge cases: Interaction between CPU shares bounds and quota calculation

Recommendation

✅ APPROVE - This PR is ready for merge. The implementation correctly adds CPU constraints to OCI configuration, follows best practices, and provides meaningful resource management improvements without introducing regressions.

Technical Details

• File Modified: packages/edge/infra/client/manager/src/runner/oci_config.rs:97
• Key Changes: Added CPU quota/period constraints with proper validation
• Resource Pattern: Consistent with existing memory constraint implementation

---

[claude]

Claude finished @MasterPtato's task —— View job

---

PR Review Complete ✅

Todo List:

• Read repository guidelines (CLAUDE.md)
• Examine the modified file to understand current implementation
• Analyze the specific changes made in this PR
• Review code quality and best practices
• Check for potential bugs or issues
• Evaluate performance considerations
• Assess security concerns
• Consider test coverage implications
• Provide comprehensive feedback

---

Review Summary

This PR successfully implements CPU constraints for OCI containers by adding proper CPU quota and period settings. The implementation is well-designed, follows best practices, and addresses a clear functional gap in resource management.

✅ Code Quality & Best Practices

Strengths:

• Well-documented constant: CPU_PERIOD at oci_config.rs:7-10 includes helpful reference to kernel documentation
• Clean integration: CPU constraints follow the same conditional pattern as memory constraints (oci_config.rs:91-102)
• Consistent formatting: Follows existing Rust code style and JSON structure conventions
• Proper error handling: Uses anyhow::Context appropriately throughout
• Clear variable naming: CPU_PERIOD is descriptive and follows Rust naming conventions

Minor suggestion:

• Consider adding a brief comment explaining the /1_000 division in the quota calculation (oci_config.rs:97) for future maintainers

✅ Bug Analysis - No Critical Issues

Implementation correctness:

• ✅ Line 97 correctly uses opts.cpu - the variable reference issue from previous reviews has been resolved
• ✅ CPU quota calculation is mathematically sound: CPU_PERIOD * opts.cpu / 1_000
• ✅ Bounds checking exists: Lines 36-43 validate cpu_shares with proper bounds [1, 10_000]
• ✅ Conditional application: Respects use_resource_constraints flag consistently

Edge case considerations:

• Division by 1_000 on line 97 is safe since opts.cpu should be validated upstream (based on cpu_shares validation pattern)
• Quota > period design correctly allows multi-core usage when appropriate

✅ Performance Considerations

Positive performance impact:

• Efficient CPU limiting: Prevents runaway processes from monopolizing CPU resources
• Multi-core support: Quota > period design allows processes to utilize multiple cores when available
• Optimal scheduling: 100ms period (100,000 μs) is a standard and efficient choice for CPU scheduling
• Minimal overhead: Simple arithmetic calculations with no performance penalties

Design validation:

• Period choice aligns with Linux kernel recommendations
• Quota calculation scales linearly and predictably with input CPU value

✅ Security Assessment

Security improvements:

• Resource isolation: Proper CPU constraints prevent one container from starving others of CPU resources
• DoS prevention: Mitigates CPU-based denial of service attacks within the container environment
• Consistent security model: Aligns with existing memory constraint patterns for comprehensive resource limiting
• No security regressions: Changes are purely additive for resource management

⚠️ Test Coverage Recommendations

Suggested test areas:

• Unit tests: CPU quota calculation with various opts.cpu values (e.g., 1, 1000, 4000, 8000)
• Boundary testing: Very small values (< 1000) and large values to verify /1_000 division behavior
• Integration tests: Verify actual CPU limiting behavior with container runtime
• Flag behavior: Test resource constraint application when use_resource_constraints is false vs true
• Edge cases: Interaction between CPU shares bounds and quota calculation

Recommendation

✅ APPROVE - This PR is ready for merge. The implementation correctly adds CPU constraints to OCI configuration, follows best practices, and provides meaningful resource management improvements without introducing regressions.

Technical Details

• File Modified: packages/edge/infra/client/manager/src/runner/oci_config.rs:97
• Key Changes: Added CPU quota/period constraints with proper validation
• Resource Pattern: Consistent with existing memory constraint implementation

---

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name	Status	Preview	Comments	Updated (UTC)
rivet-site	❌ Failed (Inspect)			Jul 18, 2025 7:35pm

[claude]

Claude finished @MasterPtato's task —— View job

---

PR Code Review Complete ✅

Todo List:

• Create initial todo list and start review
• Read repository guidelines (CLAUDE.md)
• Examine the modified file to understand current implementation
• Analyze the specific changes made in this PR
• Review code quality and best practices
• Check for potential bugs or issues
• Evaluate performance considerations
• Assess security concerns
• Consider test coverage implications
• Provide comprehensive feedback

---

Review Summary

This PR successfully implements CPU constraints for OCI containers by adding proper CPU quota and period settings. The implementation is well-designed, follows best practices, and addresses a clear functional gap in resource management.

✅ Code Quality & Best Practices

Strengths:

• Well-documented constant: CPU_PERIOD at oci_config.rs:7-10 includes helpful reference to kernel documentation
• Clean integration: CPU constraints follow the same conditional pattern as memory constraints (oci_config.rs:91-102)
• Consistent formatting: Follows existing Rust code style and JSON structure conventions
• Proper error handling: Uses anyhow::Context appropriately throughout
• Clear variable naming: CPU_PERIOD is descriptive and follows Rust naming conventions

Minor suggestion:

• Consider adding a brief comment explaining the /1_000 division in the quota calculation (oci_config.rs:97) for future maintainers

✅ Bug Analysis - No Critical Issues

Implementation correctness:

• ✅ Line 97 correctly uses opts.cpu - the variable reference issue from previous reviews has been resolved
• ✅ CPU quota calculation is mathematically sound: CPU_PERIOD * opts.cpu / 1_000
• ✅ Bounds checking exists: Lines 36-43 validate cpu_shares with proper bounds [1, 10_000]
• ✅ Conditional application: Respects use_resource_constraints flag consistently

Edge case considerations:

• Division by 1_000 on line 97 is safe since opts.cpu should be validated upstream (based on cpu_shares validation pattern)
• Quota > period design correctly allows multi-core usage when appropriate

✅ Performance Considerations

Positive performance impact:

• Efficient CPU limiting: Prevents runaway processes from monopolizing CPU resources
• Multi-core support: Quota > period design allows processes to utilize multiple cores when available
• Optimal scheduling: 100ms period (100,000 μs) is a standard and efficient choice for CPU scheduling
• Minimal overhead: Simple arithmetic calculations with no performance penalties

Design validation:

• Period choice aligns with Linux kernel recommendations
• Quota calculation scales linearly and predictably with input CPU value

✅ Security Assessment

Security improvements:

• Resource isolation: Proper CPU constraints prevent one container from starving others of CPU resources
• DoS prevention: Mitigates CPU-based denial of service attacks within the container environment
• Consistent security model: Aligns with existing memory constraint patterns for comprehensive resource limiting
• No security regressions: Changes are purely additive for resource management

⚠️ Test Coverage Recommendations

Suggested test areas:

• Unit tests: CPU quota calculation with various opts.cpu values (e.g., 1, 1000, 4000, 8000)
• Boundary testing: Very small values (< 1000) and large values to verify /1_000 division behavior
• Integration tests: Verify actual CPU limiting behavior with container runtime
• Flag behavior: Test resource constraint application when use_resource_constraints is false vs true
• Edge cases: Interaction between CPU shares bounds and quota calculation

Recommendation

✅ APPROVE - This PR is ready for merge. The implementation correctly adds CPU constraints to OCI configuration, follows best practices, and provides meaningful resource management improvements without introducing regressions.

Technical Details

• File Modified: packages/edge/infra/client/manager/src/runner/oci_config.rs:97
• Key Changes: Added CPU quota/period constraints with proper validation
• Resource Pattern: Consistent with existing memory constraint implementation