Skip to content

line:memory-trim-policy: restore RSS low-water and GC cooldown policy - #131

Open
Skywind5487 wants to merge 2 commits into
base/memory-runtime-110from
fork/memory-trim-policy
Open

line:memory-trim-policy: restore RSS low-water and GC cooldown policy#131
Skywind5487 wants to merge 2 commits into
base/memory-runtime-110from
fork/memory-trim-policy

Conversation

@Skywind5487

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Work line: \line:memory-trim-policy\

Part of merge unit
epair:memory-runtime\ (#110).

Commits

  1. \docs(research): record Phase 2: reconstruct Memory Runtime as one merge unit #110 memory-runtime preflight\ — durable preflight with pinned refs
  2. \ ix(mem-trim): restore low-water and GC policy\ — RSS threshold + independent GC cooldown

Behavior

  • \context.memory_trim.threshold_mb: non-forced RSS low-water gate (current VmRSS, fail-open)
  • Independent \gc_cooldown_seconds\ (default 300s): malloc_trim stays eligible while GC cools
  • \ orce=True\ bypasses RSS gate and GC cooldown, retains 5s burst-close floor
  • Invalid config falls back to safe defaults

Coverage

19 policy tests in \ ests/hermes_cli/test_mem_trim.py.

Composed into integration PR #120 (
epair:memory-runtime).

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner Author

Wayfinder topology HOLD

The behavior intent of this line is valid, but this PR is not currently a valid internal-line review surface.

line:memory-trim-policy must expose only the policy intent delta. This PR targets long-lived dev@fa5ed679..., so GitHub currently presents ~2661 commits and reports the PR non-mergeable. dev is integration/history state, not the intent boundary for this line.

Before review/landing, reconstruct or retarget the line onto the relevant current-upstream/feature parent so its diff contains only:

current-RSS low-water eligibility + independent GC cooldown/force/config semantics, with the evidence needed to prove that behavior.

Then keep #132 stacked on the corrected policy line if diagnostics still extends it cleanly. Do not change the behavior split merely to solve this branch-topology error.

Tracked canonically in Wayfinder #97 and issue #110.

@Skywind5487
Skywind5487 changed the base branch from dev to base/memory-runtime-110 August 19, 2026 05:26
@Skywind5487

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner Author

Topology corrected per Wayfinder review. Reconstructed the line onto its current-upstream parent:

  • Created \�ase/memory-runtime-110\ pinned at \3b9a963b8\ (the upstream parent the line was forked from).
  • Retargeted this PR's base to \�ase/memory-runtime-110; the diff now contains only the policy intent delta (2 commits: research preflight + low-water/GC-cooldown policy, +313/-38) and is MERGEABLE.
  • line:memory-trim-diagnostics: restore fail-open runtime diagnostics #132 remains stacked on \ ork/memory-trim-policy\ (1 commit, diagnostics), unchanged behavior split.

Integration PR #120 (
epair:memory-runtime) lands all 3 commits as one merge unit into \main.

@Skywind5487
Skywind5487 force-pushed the fork/memory-trim-policy branch from a62ae2a to 8a7b98f Compare August 19, 2026 06:10
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Aug 19, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

૮ >ﻌ< ა ci review

ran on 8a7b98f — fix(mem-trim): restore low-water and GC policy

⚠️ Warnings

CI timings · View report · View job

Wall time 5m39s vs 3m25s (+65.4%). 21 job(s) slower, 14 faster, 4 unchanged.

  • Python tests / Run tests slice 1/12: -41.0s
  • Python tests / Run tests slice 10/12: -31.0s
  • Python tests / Run tests slice 7/12: -30.0s
  • Python tests / Run tests slice 8/12: +17.0s
  • JS & TS checks / apps/desktop / check:test:ui:shard-2of3: +17.0s

OSV vulnerability scan · View job

5 known vulnerabilities found in pinned dependencies.

How to fix:

Review the findings in the Security tab. Update the affected dependencies if a patched version is available.

@Skywind5487
Skywind5487 changed the base branch from base/memory-runtime-110 to main August 19, 2026 06:18
@Skywind5487
Skywind5487 changed the base branch from main to base/memory-runtime-110 August 19, 2026 06:18
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant