Support Actions `concurrency` syntax #32751

Zettat123 · 2024-12-07T12:37:19Z

Depends on https://gitea.com/gitea/act/pulls/124

https://docs.github.com/en/actions/writing-workflows/workflow-syntax-for-github-actions#concurrency

⚠️ BREAKING ⚠️

This PR removes the auto-cancellation feature added by #25716. Users need to manually add concurrency to workflows to control concurrent workflows or jobs.

) Move the main logic of `generateTaskContext` and `findTaskNeeds` to the `services` layer. This is a part of #32751, since we need the git context and `needs` to parse the concurrency expressions. --------- Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>

Zettat123 · 2025-05-20T20:22:36Z

I created a test workflow file like this

on:
  push:
    branches:
      - main

concurrency:
  group: example-group
  cancel-in-progress: true

jobs:
  job-1:
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    steps:
      - run: echo 'test1' && sleep 60

But it seems new run task will not cancel the old one.

Good catch. There was a bug when checking workflow-level concurrency groups. Now it has been fixed.

ChristopherHX · 2025-05-22T20:16:29Z

I just tried this, with workflow

on: push
concurrency:
  group: ${{ github.workflow }}-${{ github.ref }}
  cancel-in-progress: true
jobs:
  test:
    strategy:
      fail-fast: false
      matrix:
        no:
        - 1
        - 2
        - 3
        - 4
        - 5
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    steps:
    - name: Checkout code
      uses: actions/checkout@v4
    - name: Run tests
      run: |
        echo ${{ github.run_id }} > "/tmp/test.txt"
    - uses: christopherhx/gitea-upload-artifact@v4
      with:
        path: test.txt
        name: test

Without any connected act_runner I pushed this via automation.
pushed a second file
Connect a single act_runner
All good first workflow cancelled, last push succeeded 👍
Now rerun all jobs of the previously cancelled run
Rerun all jobs latest previously successful run (directly after the other rerun)
latest previously successful rerun is cancelled and the rerun of "previously cancelled" succeeded

I expected the same result as on initial push, same order opposite behavior

Maybe you could provide me some insights, or I am going to debug this myself and share you my findings

What works good so far

Pushing two workflows without concurrency, I like this

ChristopherHX · 2025-05-22T20:48:09Z

services/actions/task.go

@@ -53,6 +53,10 @@ func PickTask(ctx context.Context, runner *actions_model.ActionRunner) (*runnerv
 			return nil
 		}

+		if err := CancelJobsByJobConcurrency(ctx, t.Job); err != nil {


This code is cancelling implicitly a newer (re)run while a task is picked by an older (re)run and seems to be the cause for the behavior I described just before

I would expect only scheduling a job updates concurrency, since I am still using GitHub Actions side by side

Rerun all jobs didn't cancel the older run, which is already an error state.

Rerun all jobs didn't cancel the older run, which is already an error state.

Status fixed, by respecting workflow concurrency in rerun all jobs.

ChristopherHX · 2025-05-22T21:01:41Z

models/actions/run_job.go

+			// cancel previous jobs in the same concurrency group
+			previousJobs, err := db.Find[ActionRunJob](ctx, &FindRunJobOptions{
+				RepoID:           job.RepoID,
+				ConcurrencyGroup: job.ConcurrencyGroup,
+				Statuses:         []Status{StatusRunning, StatusWaiting, StatusBlocked},
+			})
+			if err != nil {
+				return cancelledJobs, fmt.Errorf("find previous jobs: %w", err)
+			}
+			previousJobs = slices.DeleteFunc(previousJobs, func(j *ActionRunJob) bool { return j.ID == job.ID })
+			cjs, err := CancelJobs(ctx, previousJobs)
+			if err != nil {
+				return cancelledJobs, fmt.Errorf("cancel previous jobs: %w", err)
+			}
+			cancelledJobs = append(cancelledJobs, cjs...)


I would expect that job concurrency key cancels equal workflow concurrency if defined on job level.

Based on my experience workflow and job concurrency use the same pool of concurrency keys. (deadlock handling required)

and CancelPreviousJobsByRunConcurrency to not be called here (EDIT 2 idk how this PR currently works, might break everything if not replaced)

e.g.

jobs: _: concurrency: test

cancels workflow

concurrency: test

In response of the unexpected behavior I have seen

EDIT
If we add an optional job / string parameter to CancelPreviousJobsByRunConcurrency , so the concurrency group of the job can be provided to replace the run concurrency key would fulfill my expectation, I guess.

seriouz · 2025-07-08T09:31:32Z

Any news on this? Is this still planed for 1.25.0?

ChristopherHX · 2025-07-08T10:12:16Z

@Zettat123 I would try to fix my findings here and resolve the conflicts, but I have no access to this Pullrequest (Maintainer with read only access).

Allowing to queue up Workflows again is very nice, since I am not in favor of auto concurrency of length 1.

For own CI feedback I need create a new (draft) PR including all commits from here.

Then there are multiple options

I create a PR against the PR branch
You push my changes to your branch
We continue discussing on my followup PR

Thank you for all your work on this so far :).

wxiaoguang · 2025-07-08T10:35:37Z

If you'd like to work with others' PRs often, maybe you can ask @go-gitea/technical-oversight-committee or some core members like @lunny to apply a merger's access, then you can edit PRs directly

ChristopherHX · 2025-07-08T11:51:34Z

I would expect this to happen < 5 times per year. I actually only applied as maintainer due to work with others' PRs. I will ask formally in discord.

…at123/32751

ChristopherHX · 2025-07-13T21:33:34Z

New Defect found, needs fixing in gitea/act

invalid jobs: yaml: unmarshal errors:\n  line 4: cannot unmarshal !!str `test` into model.RawConcurrency

workflow

on: push
jobs:
  test:
    concurrency: test
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    steps:
    - name: Checkout code
      uses: actions/checkout@v4

short syntax not parseable.

Do we have this bug in act_runner as well? Do we have this bug in Gitea already?

…at123/32751

Naxdy · 2025-07-18T13:10:51Z

One thing that I've noticed while running it is that manually cancelling a job that is blocking another job will not start the blocked job. You have to manually cancel & re-run the blocked job for it to be picked up.

So, if e.g. you have a job with:

concurrency:
  group: main
  cancel-in-progress: false

And you push twice to main, then cancel the job that was created first, the second job will never start.

ChristopherHX · 2025-07-18T13:44:09Z

Thanks for pointing this out, I convert is to a draft until I am certain this works correctly.

I will add this scenario to the test cases and try to fix this

Naxdy · 2025-07-18T13:46:24Z

Sounds good. Feel free to ping / DM on discord if you want me to test something, or need something else. I've been running this for a while on my instance already.

Zettat123 · 2025-07-18T23:16:31Z

@ChristopherHX Sorry for the late reply, as I was busy with other work last month. Thank you for the improvements and bug fixes to this PR. Please feel free to update the code. I will also check if there are still issues with this PR.

ChristopherHX · 2025-07-19T09:02:25Z

Hi,

No problem, once we both agree this is finished and can be merged I approve.

Good that you already looked at the cancellation problem.

I still think about if my code removal is correct or not in sense of not only let existing tests pass.

I had another behavior difference
If we do not have cancel in progress

GitHub Actions cancells all earlier blocked runs/jobs (only inprogress are kept if cancel-in-progress is false)
This PR queues up and runs every Run one by one

Would we want to add a custom boolean to implement both behaviors?

concurrency:
  cancel-pending: true # default true for GitHub Actions Compat, false for current implementation

Would we want to keep the behavior difference and document it?

ChristopherHX · 2025-07-19T08:49:35Z

routers/web/repo/actions/view.go

+	if err != nil {
+		ctx.ServerError("GetRunByIndex", err)
+	}
+	if err := actions_service.EmitJobsIfReady(run.ID); err != nil {


Queue EmitJobsIfReady from Actions Notifier Job and Workflow Completed?

(The event source used by workflow_run and workflow_job webhooks / action trigger)

I mean whatif the job is cancelled by abandoning or other reasons.

Less explicit code that has the same weakness towards all ways of cancellation

GiteaBot added the lgtm/need 2 This PR needs two approvals by maintainers to be considered for merging. label Dec 7, 2024

pull-request-size bot added the size/L label Dec 7, 2024

github-actions bot added modifies/api This PR adds API routes or modifies them modifies/go Pull requests that update Go code modifies/migrations modifies/dependencies labels Dec 7, 2024

Zettat123 force-pushed the support-actions-concurrency branch from 3551677 to fcf4517 Compare December 10, 2024 08:56

github-actions bot removed the modifies/dependencies label Dec 10, 2024

pull-request-size bot added size/XL and removed size/L labels Dec 12, 2024

lunny added this to the 1.24.0 milestone Dec 16, 2024

pull-request-size bot added size/XXL and removed size/XL labels Dec 16, 2024

Zettat123 force-pushed the support-actions-concurrency branch from 52833e7 to 130f2a2 Compare December 17, 2024 01:49

pull-request-size bot added size/XL and removed size/XXL labels Dec 17, 2024

Zettat123 force-pushed the support-actions-concurrency branch 3 times, most recently from 461c7c1 to d5168a2 Compare January 6, 2025 06:16

Zettat123 force-pushed the support-actions-concurrency branch from e038ed2 to f77f266 Compare January 10, 2025 06:00

This was referenced Jan 14, 2025

[Actions] Opt-out from auto-cancellation #32662

Open

[Actions] Support concurrency syntax #24769

Open

Zettat123 changed the title ~~WIP: Support concurrency for Actions~~ WIP: Support Actions concurrency syntax Jan 15, 2025

Zettat123 mentioned this pull request Jan 15, 2025

workflow_dispatch allows only one job in a branch #33260

Open

Zettat123 force-pushed the support-actions-concurrency branch from ad71599 to 8f5948b Compare January 15, 2025 03:03

Zettat123 mentioned this pull request Jan 15, 2025

Move some Actions related functions from routers to services #33280

Merged

This comment was marked as resolved.

Sign in to view

lunny approved these changes May 20, 2025

View reviewed changes

GiteaBot added lgtm/need 1 This PR needs approval from one additional maintainer to be merged. and removed lgtm/need 2 This PR needs two approvals by maintainers to be considered for merging. labels May 20, 2025

ChristopherHX reviewed May 22, 2025

View reviewed changes

ChristopherHX added 7 commits July 8, 2025 20:52

Merge branch 'main' of https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea into pr/Zett…

f713c68

…at123/32751

fix: lint

76f58ef

fix: assert correct status code

249e315

fix: rerun all jobs did not respect concurrency

b012126

Fix and Test rerun single jobs

91fccb7

Remove CancelJobsByJobConcurrency in PickTask

2e6032a

Merge branch 'main' of https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea into pr/Zett…

1a08b87

…at123/32751

ChristopherHX added 2 commits July 15, 2025 12:16

remove code

9bba25e

Merge branch 'main' of https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea into pr/Zett…

e6d25e2

…at123/32751

ChristopherHX marked this pull request as draft July 18, 2025 13:41

Zettat123 added 2 commits July 18, 2025 18:33

call EmitJobsIfReady when cancelling a run

dc86086

add TestCancelConcurrentRun

8721155

ChristopherHX reviewed Jul 19, 2025

View reviewed changes

Uh oh!

Support Actions concurrency syntax #32751

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Support Actions concurrency syntax #32751

Conversation

Zettat123 commented Dec 7, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

⚠️ BREAKING ⚠️

Uh oh!

This comment was marked as resolved.

Zettat123 commented May 20, 2025

Uh oh!

ChristopherHX commented May 22, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

ChristopherHX May 22, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ChristopherHX Jul 9, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ChristopherHX May 22, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

seriouz commented Jul 8, 2025

Uh oh!

ChristopherHX commented Jul 8, 2025

Uh oh!

wxiaoguang commented Jul 8, 2025

Uh oh!

ChristopherHX commented Jul 8, 2025

Uh oh!

ChristopherHX commented Jul 13, 2025

Uh oh!

Naxdy commented Jul 18, 2025

Uh oh!

ChristopherHX commented Jul 18, 2025

Uh oh!

Naxdy commented Jul 18, 2025

Uh oh!

Zettat123 commented Jul 18, 2025

Uh oh!

ChristopherHX commented Jul 19, 2025

Uh oh!

ChristopherHX Jul 19, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Support Actions `concurrency` syntax #32751

Support Actions `concurrency` syntax #32751

Zettat123 commented Dec 7, 2024 •

edited

Loading

ChristopherHX commented May 22, 2025 •

edited

Loading

ChristopherHX May 22, 2025 •

edited

Loading

ChristopherHX May 22, 2025 •

edited

Loading