Acquire lock in separate thread

[peytondmurray]

This PR modifies the way that the process to be inspected gets locked.

Before, py-spy would first check the process for active threads before locking the process (otherwise all threads are reported as being idle). If the process exited before a lock could be acquired, py-spy would hang while waiting for the status of the PID to change.

With this PR, acquiring the lock on the process happens in a separate thread; if the thread doesn't acquire a lock in a specified time (default is 1s, but this is a config variable. If this is too short we can increase it) we simply error out instead of hanging. Closes #732.

I've also fixed an issue with installing the numpy>=2 optional test requirement in the test workflow.

[peytondmurray]

Okay, this ended up being trickier than I thought, because not only do you need a locker thread responsible for locking the target process, but you also need to keep the remoteprocess::Lock that gets acquired in that thread alive until samples are taken. If you don't do this, the remoteprocess::Lock will unpause the target thread when it gets dropped as the locker thread exits, screwing up the sampling.

So my original solution in which the locker thread finishes execution immediately, it would just instantly unpause the target thread before samples could be taken. Happily this is something we're testing for with test_recursive, so I was able to catch it.

Please let me know if you have any comments or if you feel this could be handled more gracefully, I'd be grateful for any feedback.

[peytondmurray]

Ack, I pushed the last commit after testing (and passing locally on linux), and then was away for the past couple of weeks. I see now the Windows tests are failing, but I don't know why. I'll try spinning up a VM to test this out, but any help here would be appreciated. Moving back into draft until this gets resolved.

[Carreau]

I pushed an empty commit to re-trigger CI, but workflow needs approval again; as far as I can tell the failing test now pass on my fork I think (https://github.com/Carreau/py-spy/actions/runs/21870162508/job/63122773473)

[peytondmurray]

☝️ Thanks for double checking about this. Let me mark this as ready for review.

[peytondmurray]

Hey all, it would be great to see this merged at some point - would it be possible to retrigger CI?