Prebuilt: repin #95 onto an upstream base - #97
Conversation
The first pin for #95 was cut from fork master, whose merge base with the current base tag is from June 10, so merging it dragged in the whole fork/upstream divergence and conflicted across ~1600 files. Rebased the change onto b10359 and repinned to e2e842a. #95 now sits on penalties-upstream-base, matching how #70 and #91 are carried. Verified: all five pins merge onto b10359 in pr-set.json order, #70 via the additive resolver as before, everything else clean.
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 89c2a36701
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".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
| "https://github.com/unslothai/llama.cpp/pull/70/commits/06d2326acbf515b10f8d6abeada09123d361acde", | ||
| "https://github.com/unslothai/llama.cpp/pull/91/commits/c86ed269986f2dced6325c5c58bda966a2e2ead1", | ||
| "https://github.com/unslothai/llama.cpp/pull/95/commits/c26185ba22df3e2b3b0f486e80d3274733bd0582" | ||
| "https://github.com/unslothai/llama.cpp/pull/95/commits/e2e842a46990765f26cfb5b6c5f1f8e03c3601bc" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The reviewed commit records both its author and committer as Codex and contains an AI-written submission message. This repository explicitly prohibits AI-written commit messages and automated commits, so the submission is ineligible even if the new pin is technically correct; a human who understands and has verified the change needs to recreate the commit and write its message directly.
AGENTS.md reference: AGENTS.md:L47-L49
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
1 participant
The pin added in #96 pointed at
c26185b, which was cut from fork master. Fork master's merge base with the current base tag (b10359) is from June 10, so merging that commit into the mix pulled in the whole fork/upstream divergence and conflicted across roughly 1600 files. The change itself was fine; the branch point was not.Rebased the commit onto
b10359and repinned to e2e842a. #95 now targetspenalties-upstream-base, which is the upstream base commit, matching how #70 (kimi-k3-text-upstream) and #91 (iq1-narrow-upstream-base) are carried. Its diff is back to the 2 files it should be.Replayed the prebuilt merge loop locally against
b10359, inpr-set.jsonorder:#70 still needs
additive_merge.pyand every conflict it saw was a pure add/add insrc/llama-arch.cpp,src/llama-context.cpp,src/llama-model.cpp,tests/test-llama-archs.cppandtools/mtmd/CMakeLists.txt, which is the same shape it has been resolving all along. Nothing else conflicts, and the mixed tree builds withtests/test-samplingpassing.