Records the 0x800A9C24 collision (coordinator double-assignment: the row was
redistributed to B2 and then chartered to C2), B2's diagnosis that "verify the file
at the path you claim" is necessary but not sufficient because the gap is between
verify and merge, the adopted md5-in-claim-row guard, and worker A's 4 first-attempt
bodies including the second byte-exact stack-switch row that isolates the variable
to an argument move at the call site.
Records: worker A's 8 first-attempt bodies and two general levers (two-arm polarity
byte-required; named boolean local forces the branchless compare); worker B2's
limitation of the coordinator's polarity broadcast (both ordinary spellings give the
mirrored branch, so the guard must be a goto); the staging slip the candidate gate
caught (verified finding, wrong file staged) and the standing rule it produces
(verify the file you stage, not a scratch variant); and the dead-store-elimination
class from 0x80016F80.
Third coordinator over-generalisation a worker has caught this phase.
32 new bodies from 400, all verified on the candidate whole-binary gate before
promotion. SHA-1 e173426c157384ebf1b6caf8c6fea18a85a14af9 stable.
Registry requests granted (each byte-verified with a failing control):
cc1=-G8 on 0x800A6BEC; gp=-D_80121B88 on 0x80015D50
symbols D_80122700, D_80122704, D_80121AD4 (gp)
Harness: per-region maspsx modes wired through sf3_match (maspsx=noreordernop,
maspsx=regread) plus --no-jump-slot-nop/--nop-on-reg-read for range. Both are
opt-in and default-off; make check green at 441 with them off, suite 229 -> 232
tests. Carried as a TRACKED patch (tools/patches/maspsx-phase10-r1r2.patch)
because tools/maspsx/ is git-ignored, so an in-place edit would not survive a
fresh clone; patch verified to reproduce the working tree byte-identically.
R1/R2 are recorded as a MEASURED NEGATIVE: neither closes a region (cookbook
finding 40 has the mechanism and the remaining developer-owned route).
Docs: cookbook finding 40 (rare-epilogue mechanism + why the obvious maspsx fix
fails); SETUP.md maspsx patch provenance and apply step.
Negatives: 0x8010AA28 imported; index sorted by address (140 rows, 0 registered).
Full clean audit green: make clean && make all exit 0, cmp exit 0, both SHA-1
match, registry 441/0 overlaps/0 bad extents/0 missing sources, 0 firewall.
- Phase10_PLAN.md status DRAFT -> APPROVED (Goal A, 475 bodies, 70-80% ctx cap)
- phase-ends/CURRENT_PHASE.md: Phase 10 control record
- config/near_match_negatives.tsv: drop 6 rows that were already registered
(index header says every row is UNREGISTERED); index 145 -> 139 rows, 0 registered.
Worklist regenerates byte-identically after the fix.
- Baseline revalidated at 25bf4a3: make check exit 0, regions=409 disagreements=0
AGREE, c_regions=409 differing_bytes=0 MATCH, 229 tests OK, SHA-1 stable.
- Worklist regen: listed=1343, excluded_already_registered=409 (= registry size).
- 3-way partitions in .run/p10 (448/448/447, pairwise intersection 0, union == worklist).
- Roster deviation recorded and developer-approved: 3 workers, not the plan's 2.
Phase 9 closed at 400 distinct bodies / 409 regions (from 149/158), all
gates green from clean: CMP_OK, SHA-1
e173426c157384ebf1b6caf8c6fea18a85a14af9, 229 tests, make gate
c_regions=409 MATCH, extents-verify AGREE, worklist listed=1343 with
excluded_already_registered=409, firewall 0, src/ 0 untracked.
Milestone partially met (400 of 500): the blocker is recorded with per-class
evidence (tier-1 tie-break domination, class disjointness, measured rate
decay) per the plan's Or branch. PhaseEnd_Phase9.md, digest entry, and the
ledger archive (logs/Phase9.md) written. docs/PHASE9_PROTOCOL.md (scale-run
retrospective: queue fix, tier-2 pivot, family-set lever, rotation
discipline, leading-indicator rule, measured budget), docs/PHASE9_VERIFICATION.md
(all gates, incidents, class exclusions), cookbook findings 29-39,
conventions additions, README updated to 400/409.
Phase10_PLAN.md drafted (Goals A/B/C: tail squeeze vs library-boundary
investigation, developer decisions enumerated) — requires explicit approval
before any Phase 10 task; no Phase 10 work begins in this session.
Christopher Williams