Only consume artifacts from the real firmware workflow by Raffi1202 · Pull Request #11930 · iNavFlight/inav

Raffi1202 · 2026-09-11T15:09:22Z

Both ci.yml and non-code-change.yaml are named "Build firmware". When the non-code stub succeeds, pr-test-builds.yml still runs and fails with Artifact not found for name: pr-number, because the stub uploads no artifacts. All 37 failed PR Test Builds runs among the last 100 (2026-09-21 to 2026-09-24) came from the stub, e.g. https://github.com/iNavFlight/inav/actions/runs/35958044484 after stub run https://github.com/iNavFlight/inav/actions/runs/35957880882. ci-size-report.yml already survives this through the step guard from #11878; there the new condition only skips the job earlier.

Both consumer jobs now also require github.event.workflow.path == '.github/workflows/ci.yml', next to the existing pull-request and success checks. A path rather than a workflow ID keeps forks working. workflow.path is part of the workflow_run payload and holds the plain file path; pytorch/pytorch runs the same guard in claude-issue-triage-run.yml (e.g. https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/actions/runs/35978025124). A missing or different path skips the job.

workflow_run workflows execute from the default branch, currently maintenance-10.x, so the change takes effect once it reaches that branch.

Validation: node --test .github/scripts/artifact-workflow-filter.test.js passes 11 tests, also on CRLF checkouts. They read the conditions from both YAML files and cover firmware runs, the same-name stub, a misleading workflow_run.path, unsuccessful and push runs, missing and unknown paths, and that ci.yml exists. Artifact download and release publication with the final filter have not run end to end, since consumer changes only execute from the default branch.

Firmware code and the baseline-publishing job are unchanged.

github-actions · 2026-09-11T15:09:32Z

Branch Targeting Suggestion

You've targeted the master branch with this PR. Please consider if a version branch might be more appropriate:

maintenance-9.x - If your change is backward-compatible and won't create compatibility issues between INAV firmware and Configurator 9.x versions. This will allow your PR to be included in the next 9.x release.
maintenance-10.x - If your change introduces compatibility requirements between firmware and configurator that would break 9.x compatibility. This is for PRs which will be included in INAV 10.x

If master is the correct target for this change, no action is needed.

This is an automated suggestion to help route contributions to the appropriate branch.

qodo-code-review · 2026-09-11T15:18:28Z

ⓘ Qodo reviews are paused because the subscription is no longer active. Ask your workspace admin to reactivate the subscription to resume reviews. Manage billing

qodo-free-for-open-source-projects · 2026-09-11T15:19:43Z

PR Summary by Qodo

Restrict artifact consumers to the firmware CI workflow

🐞 Bug fix ⚙️ Configuration changes 🕐 Less than 10 minutes

AI Description

• Restricts artifact consumers to successful pull-request runs from .github/workflows/ci.yml.
• Prevents same-named placeholder workflows from causing missing-artifact failures.
• Leaves pre-release baseline publishing unchanged.

Diagram

graph TD
  F["Firmware CI"] --> G{"ci.yml PR success?"} -->|Yes| S["Size report"]
  P["Placeholder workflow"] --> G
  G -->|Yes| T["Test builds"]
  G -->|No| K["Jobs skipped"]
  N["Pre-release build"] --> B["Baseline publish"]

High-Level Assessment

The workflow path guard is the most direct and reliable approach because workflow display names are not unique. It preserves existing workflow_run triggers while preventing artifact consumers from accepting runs that cannot provide the required artifacts.

Files changed (2) +2 / -0

Bug fix (2) +2 / -0

ci-size-report.ymlLimit PR size reports to the real firmware workflow +1/-0

Limit PR size reports to the real firmware workflow

• Adds a workflow_run path condition to the PR comment job so only '.github/workflows/ci.yml' runs can consume size-report artifacts. Baseline publishing from the pre-release workflow remains unchanged.

.github/workflows/ci-size-report.yml

pr-test-builds.ymlLimit test-build publishing to the real firmware workflow +1/-0

Limit test-build publishing to the real firmware workflow

• Requires successful pull-request runs to originate from '.github/workflows/ci.yml' before downloading and publishing firmware artifacts. This excludes successful placeholder runs sharing the 'Build firmware' name.

.github/workflows/pr-test-builds.yml

qodo-free-for-open-source-projects · 2026-09-11T15:20:01Z

Code Review by Qodo

🐞 Bugs (0) 📘 Rule violations (0) 📎 Requirement gaps (0) 🎨 UX issues (0) 🔗 Cross-repo conflicts (0) 📜 Skill insights (0)

1. ~~Valid firmware builds are skipped~~ ✓ Resolved 🐞 Bug ≡ Correctness

Description

Both consumer jobs now require github.event.workflow_run.path to equal the firmware workflow path,
but no repository fixture or convention establishes that this property is populated for
workflow_run events. When the property is absent, the condition evaluates false and valid
pull-request builds are skipped, preventing both artifact consumers from publishing their reports or
builds.

Code

.github/workflows/pr-test-builds.yml[19]
+      github.event.workflow_run.path == '.github/workflows/ci.yml' &&

Evidence
The changed guards make both jobs depend on workflow_run.path. The repository's consumers
otherwise identify the run by workflow name, event, and conclusion, while ci.yml is the
pull-request workflow that uploads the artifacts consumed downstream; no repository fixture or
documentation verifies that workflow_run.path is available in this event payload.
.github/workflows/pr-test-builds.yml[8-20]
.github/workflows/ci-size-report.yml[42-45]
.github/workflows/ci-size-report.yml[138-142]
.github/workflows/ci.yml[5-19]
.github/workflows/ci.yml[126-139]

Agent prompt

The issue below was found during a code review. Follow the provided context and guidance below and implement a solution

## Issue description
The consumers require `github.event.workflow_run.path`, but the repository does not establish that this property is present in `workflow_run` event payloads. An absent property makes the condition false, so valid pull-request firmware runs do not reach the artifact consumers.
## Fix Focus Areas
- .github/workflows/pr-test-builds.yml[17-20]
- .github/workflows/ci-size-report.yml[138-142]
## Recommended Fix
Replace the path-based guard with a reliably available identifier for the real firmware workflow, such as its workflow ID or another supported discriminator. Preserve the existing pull-request and successful-conclusion checks, and ensure both consumers reject `non-code-change.yaml` without excluding valid `.github/workflows/ci.yml` runs.

ⓘ Copy this prompt and use it to remediate the issue with your preferred AI generation tools

Tip of the day

💡 Did you know, you can choose which labels appear on a finding, and whether they show icons or text

More tips ↗ | Customize Qodo ↗ | Qodo docs ↗

Raffi1202 · 2026-09-22T20:42:40Z

/agentic_review

qodo-free-for-open-source-projects · 2026-09-22T20:43:25Z

Code review by qodo was updated up to the latest commit be6fe1d

Raffi1202 · 2026-09-22T21:55:44Z

/agentic_review

The remaining path-guard finding is contradicted by executed workflow evidence: the guard is present on the fork default branch at ac6fbcd, and the pr-comment job completed artifact downloads and publication in https://github.com/Raffi1202/inav/actions/runs/34614556238 and https://github.com/Raffi1202/inav/actions/runs/34616048856. Those jobs would have been skipped if workflow_run.path were absent. The second consumer has the identical expression; its upstream-only repository guard means it was checked by inspection, not executed in the fork. Please reassess this finding against those runs.

qodo-free-for-open-source-projects · 2026-09-22T21:56:39Z

Code review by qodo was updated up to the latest commit be6fe1d

github-actions · 2026-09-23T00:07:10Z

RAM / Flash usage vs. base commit bbc0553 — commit 5a9e797

Target	Flash Δ	RAM Δ
MATEKF405	+232 B (+0.04%)	±0 B (±0.00%)
MATEKF722	+184 B (+0.04%)	±0 B (±0.00%)
MATEKF765	+216 B (+0.03%)	±0 B (±0.00%)
MATEKH743	+216 B (+0.03%)	±0 B (±0.00%)

See RAM/flash optimization guide for techniques to reduce usage.

github-actions · 2026-09-23T00:07:45Z

Test firmware build ready — commit 5a9e797

Download firmware for PR #11930

245 targets built. Find your board's .hex file by name on that page (e.g. MATEKF405SE.hex). Files are individually downloadable — no GitHub login required.

Development build for testing only. Use Full Chip Erase when flashing.

ci: only consume artifacts from the real firmware workflow

be6fe1d

Raffi1202 marked this pull request as ready for review September 11, 2026 15:18

qodo-free-for-open-source-projects Bot reviewed Sep 11, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread .github/workflows/pr-test-builds.yml Outdated

sensei-hacker added this to the 9.1.1 milestone Sep 20, 2026

Raffi1202 added 2 commits September 23, 2026 00:34

Document exercised firmware workflow path filter

4305a1a

Identify artifact producer through workflow event metadata

4e713ca

Keep artifact filter comments, docs and test in line with the path guard

5a9e797

Navigation Menu

Only consume artifacts from the real firmware workflow - #11930

Only consume artifacts from the real firmware workflow#11930
Raffi1202 wants to merge 4 commits into
iNavFlight:masterfrom
Raffi1202:fix/artifact-consumer-workflow-path

Raffi1202 commented Sep 11, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Sep 11, 2026

Uh oh!

qodo-code-review Bot commented Sep 11, 2026

Uh oh!

qodo-free-for-open-source-projects Bot commented Sep 11, 2026

Uh oh!

qodo-free-for-open-source-projects Bot commented Sep 11, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Raffi1202 commented Sep 22, 2026

Uh oh!

qodo-free-for-open-source-projects Bot commented Sep 22, 2026

Uh oh!

Raffi1202 commented Sep 22, 2026

Uh oh!

qodo-free-for-open-source-projects Bot commented Sep 22, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Sep 23, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Sep 23, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

Conversation

Raffi1202 commented Sep 11, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Sep 11, 2026

Branch Targeting Suggestion

Uh oh!

qodo-code-review Bot commented Sep 11, 2026

Uh oh!

qodo-free-for-open-source-projects Bot commented Sep 11, 2026

PR Summary by Qodo

Uh oh!

qodo-free-for-open-source-projects Bot commented Sep 11, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Code Review by Qodo

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Raffi1202 commented Sep 22, 2026

Uh oh!

qodo-free-for-open-source-projects Bot commented Sep 22, 2026

Uh oh!

Raffi1202 commented Sep 22, 2026

Uh oh!

qodo-free-for-open-source-projects Bot commented Sep 22, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Sep 23, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Sep 23, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

Raffi1202 commented Sep 11, 2026 •

edited

Loading

qodo-free-for-open-source-projects Bot commented Sep 11, 2026 •

edited

Loading

github-actions Bot commented Sep 23, 2026 •

edited

Loading

github-actions Bot commented Sep 23, 2026 •

edited

Loading