audit(cycle stderr-class-markers): drift adjudication — clean, no baseline moved
Cycle #278+#313 close (commits34987be,1102d77,913d187oncfc2d9f). Architect (What holds): C14 exit-code partition untouched at every retag site (exit-carrying refusal sites verified bare `aura: `, both class markers grep-exact by codebase sweep); spec site table 9/9 shipped with both moving pins; the #313 note on both walk-forward paths through the one shared diag helper, pinned by three e2es; commit bodies truthful, c28_layering roster updated, clippy green on both touched crates. Architect drift items, adjudicated: - [medium, dissolved on verification] Claimed contradiction between C14's warning-class text ("a failed cell feeding exit 3") and the verb_sugar sites' `return Ok(1)`. Verified against the tree: the sugar paths return a failed-cell COUNT into `exit_on_campaign_result` (main.rs:1684), whose mapping is `Ok(0) => {}` / `Ok(_) => exit(3)` — the sugar-path failed-cell warning feeds exit 3 exactly as the campaign path does. Ledger and code agree; no edit. Carry-on. - [low] The cycle spec's Components line scoped diag.rs to "the two marker macros" while the shipped module also owns the #313 helper. The spec is a git-ignored working file deleted at this close; the durable records (C14 paragraph, commit1102d77body) describe the shipped shape correctly. Carry-on. Regression (aura-bench, exit 0, all fingerprints OK, raw): engine_throughput bars_per_s 13638785 wall_s 0.733s Δ bars_per_s -2.6% wall_s +2.7% fingerprint OK ingest_throughput bars_per_s 13030599 wall_s 0.385s Δ bars_per_s +0.2% wall_s -0.2% fingerprint OK campaign_sweep cpu_percent 2194.0 peak_rss_mb 93.3 wall_s 1.402s Δ cpu_percent +0.2% peak_rss_mb +1.2% wall_s +0.5% fingerprint OK campaign_heavy cpu_percent 2146.0 peak_rss_mb 99.6 wall_s 5.620s Δ cpu_percent -0.3% peak_rss_mb -1.7% wall_s +0.8% fingerprint OK cli_fixed_cost help_ms 1.5ms run_ms 3.6ms Δ help_ms -1.7% run_ms -0.9% fingerprint OK (loadavg warning during the run: the workspace suite ran in parallel; all deltas within tolerance regardless.) No baseline update, so no ratify statement is due. Cycle stderr-class-markers tidy (drift-clean). Not a milestone close: the "Surface honesty on stderr" milestone additionally needs its green milestone fieldtest (binary-only knowledge floor per the user direction of 2026-07-23), which runs next; the formal close stays the user's act. refs #278, refs #313
This commit is contained in:
