Skip to content

fix(knowledge): correct Cosmos3 PP cache failure and CI evidence - #446

Merged
tzhouam merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
codex/correct-cosmos3-knowledge-evidence-20261111
Nov 11, 2026
Merged

tzhouam merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
codex/correct-cosmos3-knowledge-evidence-20261111

Conversation

@tzhouam

@tzhouam tzhouam commented Nov 11, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Summary

This PR changes only the existing Cosmos3 knowledge Markdown pages.

  • Explain the stale-cache failure correctly: a PP-missing module is mistaken for an owned layer, producing a false missing-required-weight error.
  • Replace the outdated AMD status with the later, explicitly attributed maintainer report: the target shard passed in AMD build #14506 while unrelated Wan tests failed overall. Keep the limit against claiming real multi-stage PP parity.
  • Update the existing owner navigation and page dates.

The ownership contract, stable rule ID, and lifecycle footer are unchanged. There are no test, code, configuration, or workflow changes in the PR diff.

Evidence

The AMD result is a maintainer report, not a rerun performed for this change.

Validation

Base: 8b27af27252f4133b64bd2dcab1faea3969fbce2.

  • Checked the corrected explanation against the pinned upstream implementation and both evidence comments.
  • Scoped repository-validator checks for the complete Cosmos3 owner directory passed: structure, relative-link destinations, index uniqueness, size limits, privacy/dangerous-command checks, and frontmatter/taxonomy.
  • Existing size advisory remains: rules.md is above 16 KiB and below the 32 KiB error threshold.
  • Verified the PR diff contains exactly two files, both existing knowledge .md pages.

Local scoped validation used Python 3.13.5 and PyYAML 6.0.2. No model or GPU execution was performed.

Review and remaining checks

An independent review session found no substantive defects at head 99d17a277810334d9e9999684ad4794f6a81b898 and confirmed the Markdown-only scope. Both Linux suites, both Windows checks, and the release-drift audit passed on that head. The local workspace was a sparse source snapshot, so whole-tree validators, vLLM-Omni release-drift enforcement, and the aggregate suite were not run locally. The correction does not establish runtime retrieval, GPU correctness, or deployment activation. No deployment or knowledge-maintenance feature is enabled by this change.

@tzhouam
tzhouam marked this pull request as ready for review November 11, 2026 07:06
@chatgpt-codex-connector

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Nov 11, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Codex Review Summary: ✅ Completed

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review Status Commit Review trigger
📝 Code Review ✅ Completed 2026-11-11T07:08:02.671593Z 99d17a2 Draft marked ready
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

@tzhouam
tzhouam merged commit 3ec02d1 into main Nov 11, 2026
5 checks passed
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