update mio to 0.8.11

[bw-solana]

Problem

New security advisory popped up requiring moving from mio v0.8.8 to >= v0.8.11

Note: This appears to be a windows only vulnerability.

https://crates.io/crates/mio
https://github.com/tokio-rs/mio/blob/master/CHANGELOG.md

Summary of Changes

Move to v0.8.11

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 81.8%. Comparing base (3f9a7a5) to head (dd81a3d).
Report is 1 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##           master      #60     +/-   ##
=========================================
- Coverage    81.8%    81.8%   -0.1%     
=========================================
  Files         837      837             
  Lines      225922   225922             
=========================================
- Hits       184955   184888     -67     
- Misses      40967    41034     +67     

[AshwinSekar]

I added the 1.17 and 1.18 backport labels as those branches are also failing for the same vuln

[mergify]

Backports to the stable branch are to be avoided unless absolutely necessary for fixing bugs, security issues, and perf regressions. Changes intended for backport should be structured such that a minimum effective diff can be committed separately from any refactoring, plumbing, cleanup, etc that are not strictly necessary to achieve the goal. Any of the latter should go only into master and ride the normal stabilization schedule.

[mergify]

Backports to the beta branch are to be avoided unless absolutely necessary for fixing bugs, security issues, and perf regressions. Changes intended for backport should be structured such that a minimum effective diff can be committed separately from any refactoring, plumbing, cleanup, etc that are not strictly necessary to achieve the goal. Any of the latter should go only into master and ride the normal stabilization schedule. Exceptions include CI/metrics changes, CLI improvements and documentation updates on a case by case basis.

[t-nelson]

I added the 1.17 and 1.18 backport labels as those branches are also failing for the same vuln

can we do ignores instead?

cc/ @AshwinSekar @bw-solana

[bw-solana]

I added the 1.17 and 1.18 backport labels as those branches are also failing for the same vuln

can we do ignores instead?

cc/ @AshwinSekar @bw-solana

Yep, that's viable as well