mirror of
https://github.com/Druthulu/BFM-decomp
synced 2026-09-27 05:56:00 -04:00
Drew T
c2566010f2
The §42e pin guard refuses any family whose exemplar carries `register __asm__` pins: 680 of the top
8 FREE families' 1,083 members (63%) were skipped BEFORE any gate ran. Re-run with --allow-pins,
letting the byte-gate arbitrate (G3/P9): 268 banked, and ZERO cc1 crashes across hundreds of pinned
compiles — confirming the SIGABRT the guard was written against was Phase 27's extract_unit
macro-drop, NOT a compiler limit. The guard is protecting against a bug that no longer exists.
THE LAW (§86): templatability is a PER-FAMILY property, not a per-member rate.
func_801749C8 137/137 = 100% func_80133AB0 4/136
func_8014C6F4 137/137 = 100% func_8014CF04 0/137
func_80143D28 0/136
Two families at 100%, three at ~1%. MY REPORTED "37%" WAS AN ARTEFACT: a 19-member sample that
straddled families reported their AVERAGE and hid the bimodality. Sample PER-FAMILY, never per-pool.
=> PROCEDURE, now the default: probe ONE member per pinned family; bank -> sweep the family; fail ->
skip entirely. The blanket sweep spent ~412 futile gate cycles (60% of the run) on three families
that were never going to bank; the 1-member probe reduces that to 5 probes + 2 sweeps.
Left explicitly UNDIAGNOSED (do not guess): why two families template and three do not. Likely axis
is caller-saved pins spanning a `jal` (§74's corrupting form) vs pins fixing only a local allocno.
Diagnose BEFORE extending --allow-pins fleet-wide — the byte-gate makes a wrong guess free, but a
wrong PROCEDURE costs a sweep.
R22 clean-fleet 140/140 BYTE-IDENTICAL; tools-health OK; dedup 1886/0; 0 NON_MATCHING (G4).
Fleet: instr 81.3 -> 81.5% · distinct-code 69.0% · fn-count 89.41 -> 89.49%.