Skip to content

hw-first-host - #10974

Closed
gunbai-bot[bot] wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix/colo-grain-single-cabinet-name
Closed

gunbai-bot[bot] wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix/colo-grain-single-cabinet-name

Conversation

@gunbai-bot

@gunbai-bot gunbai-bot Bot commented Sep 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Auto-opened by session-dashboard for session eager-owl-205.
Pushing to fix/colo-grain-single-cabinet-name advances this PR.

Worker attestation

Before flipping this PR to ready for review, confirm each item:

  • Title describes the change (not the session id or branch).
  • PR body summarises what and why (replace the TODO below).
  • Tests run: name the command (e.g. npm test, cargo test) and the result.
  • If this closes a work item, the body contains a Closes #N directive.
  • No commits on this branch are surprises (no fork/cherry-pick I did not make).
  • No secrets / credentials / large binaries staged.

Summary

TODO: replace this paragraph with one or two sentences naming the change and its motivation. Reviewers read this first.

Test plan

  • TODO: list the commands that ran (or "no tests changed; relied on CI") and the outcome.

`test.claim.colo_nj_central_south_census` imports and calls
`grain_admits_single_cabinet` from `test.claim.colo_cabinet_density_witness`,
which declares no such name — so the declarations phase of the required floor
lane refuses on every head, including branches that touch nothing near colo.

THIS IS A RENAME MISMATCH, NOT A MISSING CONCEPT, which is why the fix is a
rename and not a new declaration. The witness declares
`grain_offers_single_cabinet(g: RetailGrainStanding) -> Bool` and its own
`w_density_and_grain_are_separate_facts` calls it under that spelling. The
consumer's call sites are identical in shape — same `g:` parameter, same
RetailGrainStanding arguments, same Bool use under `!` and `&&` — so the two
names denote one concept and the declaring module is the authority for which
spelling it has. `grain_admits_single_cabinet` appears NOWHERE else in the
corpus: the only occurrences were the import line and the six call sites in
this one file, so nothing else can be relying on the other spelling.

Authoring a `grain_admits_single_cabinet` beside the existing function to make
the import resolve would have been the DESIGN section 3 fork — a second name for
one concept — inside a fix for a name that was already one too many.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
@gunbai-bot

gunbai-bot Bot commented Sep 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Closing as a duplicate. Three of us independently diagnosed and fixed the same one-line rename; #10968 got there first and is already green (build/floor/heal/witnesses all SUCCESS, mergeStateStatus CLEAN), so that is the one to land. #10973 is the same fix too.

Same diagnosis in all three, for the record: grain_admits_single_cabinet was never declared anywhere in the corpus — only the import line and six call sites in colo_nj_central_south_census_test.dag — while the witness declares grain_offers_single_cabinet with an identical signature and calls it under that spelling in its own test. So it is a rename mismatch, and authoring the missing name beside the existing one would have been a §3 fork inside a fix for a name that was already one too many.

This branch was pushed from a session whose actual subject is the Mt Collins hardware census, hence the misleading auto-title. No content from that work is on it — the branch is the colo rename alone.

— sent from eager-owl-205

@gunbai-bot gunbai-bot Bot closed this Sep 10, 2026
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.

0 participants