Commit Graph
14 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
adminandClaude Opus 5 8beba0a3e7 SAFETY-32 round 4: the same family at the SIBLING ARGUMENT, and the family enumerated
Rounds 2 and 3 hardened the FLOOR axis - the max inside binding_soc_floor(),
the roster handed to it, Controller.packs, pack_floor_pct()'s conjunction.
peakguard.decide() is handed a SECOND reduction over the same roster beside it,
soc=self.pack_floor_soc, and peakguard.py's own docstring names the two as a
pair. Three rewrites of Controller.pack_floor_soc were green across all 19 files
on 52380c0 and again after the rebase onto 3934ad7:

    min(float(v) for v in vals)  ->  ... vals[:2]   +4 bytes
                                 ->  ... vals[-2:]  +5 bytes
                                 ->  ... vals[:3]   +4 bytes

while [:1], [-1:], [1:], [:-1], max() and the mean were all red. The suite's
separating power on the SoC axis stopped at exactly N=2 - the state the floor
axis was in before round 3.

It changes a real answer: three packs at 50/60/11 %, emptiest THIRD, answers
11.0 shipped and 50.0 mutated. The site is then graded for discharge PERMISSION
against a pack 39 points fuller than the emptiest and spends a pack its own BMS
stops, through sim/inject.py which runs no validator rule.

Round 3's machinery transfers directly. New test_peakguard.py part 12i:
- six REAL Controller.cycle()s, emptiest pack at every position of a three-pack
  roster and both positions of a two-pack one, observable read off
  PeakDecision.soc; cut-outs held flat so the floor axis cannot move the answers
- computed slice and non-slice tables, printed, red naming any live survivor
- a LENGTH SWEEP over the real property, 78 rosters of 1..12 real inverters,
  closing head/tail widths 1-11 and asserting width 12 is unreached
- a NONE-GUARD sweep over the same 78
- THREE exact structural pins: the vals comprehension iterates the bare
  self.inverters, and both any() and min() reduce the whole vals - closing every
  slice width at every roster length, which no bounded fixture can

SPIKE-04: pack B is 4 x Dyness DL5.0C, DoD 90 -> floor 10 % [FROM DATASHEET AND
SERIAL - inverter B does not exist and nothing about it is measured]. Pack A is
DoD 90 -> 10 % and that one IS measured. So production is DEGENERATE on the
floor axis and a differing floor exists ONLY in the fixtures - which is the
argument for keeping them, not for simplifying them. Recorded in CHANGELOG and
DECISIONS so nobody later collapses them to one number. The SoC axis has no such
degeneracy.

AND THE FAMILY, not the member. Every reduction over self.inverters/self.packs
in Controller was found from the AST and mutated to a slice against the full
suite. Eighteen were already graded. FOUR were not, and three of them are
SAFETY-30's, all any(i.sign_wd.tripped for i in self.inverters), each +4 bytes
and green across 19 files - because the only fixture that reached them was a
roster of ONE, where self.inverters[:1] IS self.inverters:

- cycle()'s stale-input hold: a LATCHED unit must take the roster past it or its
  failsafe SET stops being re-filed the moment a poll is missed
- publish()'s status vocabulary: a site holding an inverter at 0 W published
  "running"
- status_payload()'s banner: the one headline on the page

New test_watchdog.py part 8 grades all three with the latch at EACH position
plus a no-latch counterfactual. New part 12j pins all 26 roster comprehensions
in Controller to iterating the roster WHOLE, so a reduction added over a slice
anywhere in the class is red on the line it is written, with no fixture needed.

Two rows reported OPEN rather than closed: _grade_store_migration()'s second
disjunct (now red on 12j, argued equivalent because a unit tripped at startup
implies its namespaced key is set) and cycle()'s undeliverable-unit LOG LINE,
where sorted(...)[:1] is still green - it truncates names in one event message;
the refusal itself is a different expression and is graded.

MUTATION.md gains habits 10 and 11: a fixture of N members cannot separate two
reductions that agree on N, and mutate the SIBLINGS of anything you harden.

No shipped behaviour changed - tests and documentation only. 19/19 green;
all three named survivors and all round-3 mutations verified RED.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU
2026-09-05 03:01:57 +02:00
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5 a9993aeda2 SPIKE-04a: inverter B is 4600 W FROM ITS DATASHEET, and the copies are pinned
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 4m51s
The desk half of SPIKE-04. No control behaviour changes; this is documentation
and the check that stops it drifting again.

Three places stated inverter B's rating - config.yaml's commented roster
example, DOCS.md's, and tools/supervisor_shape_probe.py's "a blob an operator
would POST" - and all three said 3000 W, a number nobody had measured or read
off anything. The owner supplied B's model and serial on 2026-09-04: a GoodWe
GW5048D-ES, serial `55048ESU22AW0992`, max charging and discharging power
4600 W. Serial characters 6-8 are `ESU`, platform 105 / AA55, so SPIKE-01 does
not gate this site. All three copies now read 4600.

⚠️ 4600 W IS FROM A DATASHEET AND IS NOT A MEASUREMENT, and the one ambiguity
is recorded rather than guessed. The datasheet prints it under BATTERY INPUT
DATA, so it is probably DC, while max_w is graded against 0x0518 - the
inverter's own AC power. If it is DC the AC ceiling is nearer 4324 W. Neither
reading is written in as fact; SAFETY-20's min(max_w, dev_max) already bounds
it correctly under either, once dev_max is read off the unit, so `max_w: 4600`
is what an operator should configure today. goodwe/NOTES.md §1.1b carries the
full record with the date and the method on every figure.

A NEW CHECK, BECAUSE A DOCUMENTATION FIX WITHOUT ONE DRIFTS AGAIN.
test_validate.py now pins all three documented rosters: findable, in agreement,
and equal to 4600 - with an explicit len(...) == 3 guard so that a regex which
stopped matching cannot leave "they all agree" green on the two sites still
read. It also grades the PROVENANCE beside the number (the datasheet, the
0x0518 it is graded against, and the 4324 W the DC reading would make it)
WITHIN 2500 characters of the roster rather than file-wide.

⚠️ The first version of that provenance check searched whole files and was
ALREADY VACUOUS on two of them: 0x0518 appeared once in config.yaml and once in
DOCS.md before this card, for unrelated reasons, so `"0x0518" in src` was green
no matter what happened next to B's rating. That is a check whose data cannot
reach the failure it names, in the file that exists to complain about them. It
is fixed, and the window is what fixes it - deleting the caveat beside the
number now goes red even where the same token survives elsewhere in the file.
The windowed version immediately found that the DOCS.md caveat did not name
0x0518 at all; DOCS.md now says it.

Four mutations, bytecode purged and counted at 0 before and after each, all
RED (two of them 0-byte deltas that change a printed answer):
  M1  probe's operator blob 4600 -> 3000        0 B   RED (value + agreement)
  M2  DOCS.md's DC/AC caveat deleted         -157 B   RED (provenance)
  M3  config.yaml alone 4600 -> 4324            0 B   RED (agreement)
  M4  probe entity renamed, regex finds nothing       RED (the vacuity guard)
Restored, green again. The probe itself was re-run against Supervisor
2026.08.0's own AppOptions validator with the 4600: all cases passed, exit 0.

⚠️ THE TEST FIXTURES KEEP 3000 W ON PURPOSE AND NOW SAY WHY AT THE LINE.
test_inverter.py, test_maintenance.py, test_peakguard.py and test_watchdog.py
build a second inverter at 3000 W against A's 5000 W. The only property those
checks consume is that B's number is unmistakably not A's, and the real pair is
a 400 W gap - narrower than slew_w, inside the range where an off-by-one-unit
bug and ordinary control arithmetic produce indistinguishable numbers.
Collapsing them onto the real values would buy realism those checks do not use
and cost them their separating power, which is exactly what test_peakguard.py's
own §10g PRECONDITION exists to prevent. Their comments no longer call 3000 W a
hypothesis about B's rating; they call it illustrative, and not a placeholder
either - the placeholder era ended on 2026-09-04.

Also recorded in the changelog for the cards that own them: 94 % battery-to-AC
=> ~88 % round trip => ~360 W burned continuously to circulate 3 kW, which is
the number SAFETY-31 argues its threshold from without having one; < 13 W night
self-consumption per unit, which nothing accounts for; and the A/B asymmetry in
opposite directions (~33 % more energy, ~8 % less power), which means MAINT-05's
12 h drain timeout was derived on A and should be re-checked against B.

⚠️ Honest survivors:
- goodwe/NOTES.md §1.1b, where all of this is actually recorded, is graded by
  nothing here. Rewriting its 16 occurrences of 4600 to 3000 and turning every
  FROM DATASHEET label into MEASURED ON THE UNIT leaves all 19 files GREEN.
  This CI cannot fetch admin/goodwe - private, and GITHUB_TOKEN is minted for
  this repository only, as .gitea/workflows/checks.yml already states - so the
  cross-repo check is not buildable here.
- No check can see whether 4600 is the RIGHT number. Everything above pins a
  datasheet reading against itself. Only the bench half of SPIKE-04 can say
  whether the unit agrees, and the DC-vs-AC ambiguity is the live example.
- The constant is still named B_RATING_HYPOTHESIS in four test files, which
  reads as a hypothesis about B's rating when it is now an illustrative
  fixture. It is left alone deliberately: renaming ~20 sites across
  test_peakguard.py and test_inverter.py would collide hard with the open
  SAFETY-32 pull request, which rewrites 1255 lines of the first. The comment
  directly above each definition says what the value is and is not.

Suite: 19/19 green in goodwe-addon-ci, mounted :ro, bytecode purged and
verified 0 before and after.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU
2026-09-04 22:19:31 +02:00
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5 d5c1577212 SAFETY-30: pin WHICH thresholds each sign detector is armed with, not just what the numbers are
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 4m48s
REVIEW FOUND A MUTATION SURVIVOR THAT UNDOES THE WHOLE PRODUCT OF AC 5, and it
is a coverage defect rather than a behaviour one - the shipped code arms the
detectors correctly today. In `_arm_sign_watchdogs()`, collapsing

    inv.sign_wd.arm(self.sign_cfg if one else self.unit_sign_cfg, ...)

to `arm(self.sign_cfg, ...)` throws the re-derived 250 W / 85 s per-unit pair
away and arms every unit with SAFETY-02's meter-facing 300 W / 180 s - and left
ALL 19 FILES GREEN. Reproduced here before fixing anything: fresh per-mutation
tree, no __pycache__, mounted :ro, graded through tools/mutation_run.sh; -31 B;
19 pass, 0 fail.

WHY NOTHING CAUGHT IT. `grep -rn "sign_wd.cfg" test_*.py` found exactly ONE
threshold assertion, part 7's N=1 arm at (300.0, 1.0) - which the mutation
PRESERVES. Nothing at a roster of two read `inv.sign_wd.cfg` at all. The ledger
mutates the VALUES in SIGN_OPTION_DEFAULTS (M10 250->300, M11 325->180, both
correctly red through the config pins) and never the WIRING that delivers them.
Part 3's behavioural checks cannot close the gap either, and the comment now
says why: B is reversed at ~2000 W with short holds, so it trips under EITHER
pair, and a fault big enough and long enough to trip under both thresholds is
evidence about neither.

THE FIX - test_watchdog.py part 3, on the real two-inverter Controller. Every
`inv.sign_wd.cfg` equals the per-unit pair, `site_sign_wd.cfg` equals the site
pair, and each detector's `against` is its own instrument. Graded against
LITERALS, because `== self.unit_sign_cfg` cannot tell "the per-unit pair" from
"whatever this Controller was handed". Both pairs are printed.

⚠️ AND THE FIXTURE HAD TO CHANGE FOR THE PIN TO MEAN ANYTHING - the recursion
worth naming, because it is the same defect class as the one being closed.
`_sign_site` set `sign_disagree_s`, `unit_sign_disagree_s` AND
`site_sign_disagree_s` all to 1 s, with two of the three magnitude gates at
300 W. A bare equality there discriminates on `min_w` alone: a mis-wiring that
delivered the right magnitude with the WRONG HOLD compares EQUAL to the pair it
was supposed to have. A check comparing two things that happen to be equal
cannot see the difference it names (MUTATION.md's third failure mode). The
three pairs are now pairwise distinct IN BOTH COORDINATES - 250 W / 1 s per
unit, 320 W / 2 s site, 300 W / 3 s shipped - a PRECONDITION asserts that
distinctness so a later edit collapsing them goes red rather than quietly
vacuous, and a second PRECONDITION asserts the literals are the pairs this
Controller actually holds.

VERIFIED BY BREAKING IT. Three mutations, each on its own freshly copied tree
with no __pycache__, mounted :ro, through tools/mutation_run.sh:

  M14  arm() handed self.sign_cfg at every roster        -31 B  RED (was the
       survivor; the AC 5 WIRING check names the wiring)
  M15  right min_w, SHIPPED hold - hold-only mis-wire    +78 B  RED, same pin
  M16  right min_w, SITE hold - hold-only, and it still
       trips inside the drive                            +83 B  RED, and the
       ONLY red in test_watchdog.py

M16 is the one that says the hold half of the equality bites on its own.
Unmutated tree: 19 pass, 0 fail, purged and fingerprinted.

Ledger rows M14-M16 and the write-up in DECISIONS/SAFETY-30-per-unit-sign.md
section 5; a CHANGELOG bullet.

NOT IN THIS PR, so it gets a card rather than a quiet fix: a stuck per-unit
power sensor would false-trip the new per-unit check at N>=2. Already-merged
SAFETY-31 has the identical exposure on the same fixture. Pre-existing N>=2
class, unreachable at the deployed roster of one.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU
2026-09-04 11:13:13 +02:00
adminandClaude Opus 5 f000547518 SAFETY-30: grade each inverter against its own power, and the site's total against the meter
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 4m38s
THE DEFECT, in one line. `inv.sign_wd.evaluate(stood, self.grid, ...)` compared
the command THIS controller put on ONE actuator against what the WHOLE SITE is
exchanging with the network. At a roster of one those are two views of the same
thing - specs.md §6.2's identity - and that is what makes the check sound and
what earned it the best record in the safety table (NOTES.md: 93 % agreement
while healthy against 4 % during runaway, four observed episodes, zero false
positives). At two inverters they are not, and it fails in BOTH directions:

  FALSE TRIP  inverter A commanded -1500 W while the meter reads +1500 W is
              evidence of nothing when inverter B is discharging 3000 W exactly
              as told. Nothing is faulty and the highest-value check fires.
  MISSED      the converse, and it is worse. A unit commanded +1500 W and
              MEASURED at -1500 W, beside a sibling at +1500 W, leaves P1
              exactly where a healthy site leaves it. The summation destroys the
              evidence and no threshold recovers it.

DEV-02 had already shipped the per-INSTANCE half - one SignWatchdog per
inverter, namespaced latch, a trip on B no longer latching A. What was left was
the COMPARISON, and it is two questions rather than one:

  PER UNIT  this unit's standing command against ITS OWN measured power
            (`Inverter.batt`, holding register 0x0518, per-instance since
            DEV-02). Conclusion: "the actuator I am driving is not doing what I
            told it" - a fact about one device, so the remedy stays the per-unit
            `failsafe` SET that arbiter.CLAIM_SCOPE has classified SCOPE_UNIT
            from the day it was written. That entry read "the evidence is
            site-wide and the remedy is not"; the first half is now simply true.
  SITE      the SUM of the standing commands against the meter, as a new
            `sign_site` SET at P_SAFETY on the site actuator, latched under flat
            `site_sign_tripped` / `site_sign_reason`. This is the 2026-08-20
            fault day and NO per-unit check can see it, because every inverter
            may be faithfully executing its share of a number that is itself
            wrong. It stops every inverter and the banner names the site.

WHAT IT IS NOT, said here because two guards that overlap without saying so is
how a false-alarm generator gets built. It is not SAFETY-31: circulation.py
compares the units AGAINST EACH OTHER and catches them pushing power THROUGH
each other, which nets to zero at the meter and about which no single command is
evidence. This compares each unit against ITS OWN COMMAND. They overlap in
exactly one scenario - a unit reversing while its sibling pulls the other way -
and test_watchdog.py asserts on that fixture that both fire and what each
concludes. It is also not the saturation freeze, which is a MAGNITUDE test
(|command - measured| > 500 W) that shapes the loop and fires on a merely
saturated unit; this is a DIRECTION test that latches and parks one.

THE FOUR NUMBERS, RE-DERIVED AT TWO INVERTERS - one carried with a justification
and one refused. 1890 closed-loop runs on admin/goodwe's TEST-19 two-master rig
in which NOTHING is faulty, swept over the whole range config.yaml accepts for
`gain` and `slew_w`, across load reversals with write staggers and flapping
loads, and RUN AT BOTH ROSTERS so the N=1 arm is the control:

  unit_sign_disagree_w  250   `saturation_w / 2`. The check gates on both sides,
                              opposed, so the smallest gap it can see is 500 W -
                              exactly where compute()'s own anti-windup test
                              already says the inverter is not following. It
                              cannot fire on a divergence the control law calls
                              ordinary tracking. Worst legitimate opposition at
                              250 W: 10.0 s; the curve is nearly flat, because a
                              unit's own power chases its own command.
  unit_sign_disagree_s   85   8.5x that 10.0 s, 2.8x the firmware's own 30 s
                              link veto (inverter.LINK_STALE_S), under half the
                              180 s site hold.
  site_sign_disagree_w  300   CARRIED. Its argument is the meter's noise floor
                              and the 15 W deadband; the roster touches neither,
                              and the campaign agrees - the gate opens in 994 of
                              1050 runs at two inverters and 955 of 1050 at one.
  site_sign_disagree_s  325   NOT CARRIED, and this is the number the card
                              exists to not assume. The worst legitimate
                              crossing at 300 W is 110 s with one inverter and
                              215 s with TWO, because the command must travel a
                              rail that is the roster sum at a `slew_w` that is
                              not - reachable at gain 0.05, slew_w 50 and a
                              2.2 kW load reversal, all schema-legal. 180 s
                              would have shipped a false trip. 325 s is 1.51x
                              the measured worst, inside the 900 s billing
                              quarter and inside every episode of the fault day.

AT ONE INVERTER NOTHING CHANGES, and "nothing" is asserted rather than assumed.
The two questions are the same sentence there, so only the detector that shipped
is armed: same comparison against the meter, same 300 W / 180 s, same reason
string byte for byte, same namespaced latch and flat rollback mirror, same
`failsafe` claim, same banner, same single status row - and the site detector is
NEVER CALLED, counted on the object over twelve cycles.

VERIFIED BY BREAKING IT. Thirteen mutations on fresh per-mutation trees with no
__pycache__, mounted :ro, with the battery refusing to report at all unless the
baseline is green. Twelve red on the first pass. M4 - the site half armed at N=1
as well - SURVIVED, because the check read `disagree_since is None` and the unit
detector trips first, parks the inverter and leaves the site standing at 0 W:
the assertion ran, the sentence was true, and the data could not reach the
failure it named. Replaced with a call counter on the object; M4 is red now.
Recorded as a survivor in DECISIONS/SAFETY-30-per-unit-sign.md §5, with the
first battery's own RED BASELINE - a shared mutation directory read mid-copy -
discarded rather than reported.

RECORDED, NOT FIXED: the site comparison is defeated by a square-wave load whose
half period is about one control cycle, which holds it opposed for ~1000 s. The
N=1 control arm is what makes that interpretable - it is identical at the roster
this add-on ships, so it is a property of comparing a lagged command against a
meter and has nothing to do with the second inverter. It wants an alternation
test rather than a number, and a card of its own.

SAFETY-24's lo-only asymmetry proof re-run unchanged: 1296 combinations, 0
negative floors, `hi` +inf on every claim, every claim on the SITE actuator.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU
2026-09-04 09:33:20 +02:00
adminandClaude Opus 5 7ef3d23245 SAFETY-31: measure circulating power, which nets to zero at the meter
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 4m28s
Inverter A charging at 3 kW while inverter B discharges at 3 kW nets ~0 W at
P1. The site reads idle while both packs are cycled through two round-trip
conversion losses continuously, for no benefit, and the wear is real.

NOTHING EXISTING CAN SEE IT, AND THAT IS STRUCTURAL. Every guard in this
add-on is a consumer of the NET figure at the grid connection: SAFETY-02's
sign watchdog gates on abs(grid_w) > 300 and the gate never opens at a netted
zero; the peak guard and the capacity tariff both bill grid exchange.
Circulating power is precisely the component of per-inverter power that the
sum destroys, so no threshold on any existing detector could reach it.

WHAT ALLOC-01 ALREADY COVERED, AND IS NOT RE-IMPLEMENTED HERE. Its AC 7
shipped the sign-coherence gate (allocator.REFUSE_SIGN, graded by
test_alloc.py part 6): an allocation whose shares carry two signs is REFUSED,
both units named, no shares returned. That is the COMMAND half - the allocator
can no longer command circulating power. This commit is the MEASUREMENT half:
circulation the allocator NEVER COMMANDED.

  app/circulation.py   the sensor and the trip
  main.py              site_circulating_w, the evaluation, the claim, the alarm
  arbiter.py           `circulation` classified SCOPE_SITE, with the argument
  store.py             a flat, site-level durable latch
  mqtt.py              sensor.goodwe_circulating_power
  config.yaml          two options, two schema ranges, CFG-03 discipline

THE SENSOR: sum(|Bi|) - |sum(Bi)|. Zero when the units pull the same way,
2*min(|Ba|,|Bb|) when they oppose. DERIVED FROM MEASURED PER-INVERTER POWER -
Inverter.batt, register 0x0518 - and never from the allocation record. The
cheap version would be simpler and worth nothing: ALLOC-01's gate already
guarantees the record is sign-coherent, so a record-derived sensor reads zero
BY CONSTRUCTION and can only confirm that the allocator agrees with itself,
which is the third failure mode MUTATION.md names. What this catches is a unit
ignoring or lagging its share, a stale share still being executed, a
maintenance or SAFETY-25 pin holding one unit while the loop drives the other,
or HW-01's power stage running its last instruction for 6 h 25 m with the
comms dead and the allocation record impeccable throughout. batt became
per-instance in DEV-02; before that this could not have been written.

VERIFIED BY MAKING ONE UNIT IGNORE ITS SHARE, on the TEST-19 two-master rig:

  S = -2500 W   shares a = -1250 W  b = -1250 W   <- record ok, ONE sign, sums
  MEASURED      A = -1250 W  B = +1000 W          <- hardware
  sensor over the RECORD     :    0 W
  sensor over MEASURED power : 2000 W  -> trips at 190 s

and the card's own scenario, A -3000 W against B +3000 W at zero house load:
the meter reads +0 W, the sensor reads 6000 W, and the shipped SignWatchdog's
predicate is FALSE on 30 of 30 cycles.

WHAT "ACTED ON" MEANS - decided, and recorded in DECISIONS/. The trip files
Claim.set("circulation", P_SAFETY, 0.0) on the SITE actuator: every inverter
to 0 W, latched. HW-01 established that commanding a wedged inverter achieves
nothing, so the remedy is not aimed at it. A circulating loop needs TWO
participants and one of them is THIS CONTROLLER, faithfully driving the
listening sibling into the one that stopped listening. Stopping (1) halves the
loop, which needs no cooperation from the wedged unit, and (2) - the more
important half - makes the residue VISIBLE at the meter instead of cancelled
at it, where every ordinary guard can finally see it. What it cannot do is
stop the wedged unit; the notification says so and names the isolator as the
last actuator. SITE-scoped because the quantity is defined over the roster and
is identically zero for any one unit - there is no fact of the matter about
which of two opposing inverters is the offender, so filing it per-unit would
invent an attribution and could park the only unit still listening.

THE WINDOW IS FROM THE RIG, NOT A ROUND NUMBER (AC 3). 924 closed-loop runs in
which NOTHING is faulty, over both families of legitimate opposition (7
reversals x 5 write staggers; 7 flap periods x 4 amplitudes), swept across the
whole range the schema accepts for gain and slew_w. Worst CONTINUOUS
legitimate opposition by threshold: 505.0 s at 100 W, 40.0 s at 250 W, 10.0 s
at 300 W, 5.0 s at 400 W and above. The knee is 400 W and it is the schema
floor - below it, ordinary operation holds the sensor over the line for
minutes and no window inside the 900 s billing quarter could tell that from a
fault. circulation_w 700 is 1.75x the knee, the headroom bought for inverter
B's ramp and lag being PLACEHOLDERS until SPIKE-04 measures them.
circulation_hold_s 75 clears three bounds: 15x the worst legitimate episode,
2.5x the firmware's own LINK_STALE_S veto, 12x inside the quarter. A momentary
opposition while one unit slews through zero is LEGITIMATE - writes are
serialised, so B's number lands up to a cycle after A's - and 0 of the 924
runs trip.

THE ALARM SURVIVES AN HA RESTART (SAFETY-34). persistent_notification is in
memory, which is exactly how the 2026-09-02 outage went unseen for 6 h 25 m
with the detector correct throughout. The latch is persisted to /data as flat
site-level keys and the notification is RE-RAISED on the first cycle after
every start, through the same code path as a fresh trip - two paths would be
two chances for the restart one to rot unnoticed.

AT N=1 NOTHING CHANGES (AC 5). |B| - |B| is 0 for every reading including one
nobody took, no claim is ever filed, the arbitration is byte-identical, and
the status page says n/a rather than claiming to watch something that cannot
happen.

VERIFIED BY BREAKING IT (AC 4). 18 mutations, all RED on named checks, each on
a freshly copied tree with no __pycache__ mounted :ro. M10 - the sensor
rewritten to read self.allocation.shares - is the headline: it takes AC 2 red.
Three mutations are +0 B, the risky delta, and are marked as such. One
equivalent mutant (the max(0.0,...) guard) is ARGUED rather than claimed:
searched over 700 000 rosters without a negative. One genuine SURVIVOR was
found and closed - publish() turning an unknown into a published 0 W, the
sensor's own None rule defeated one layer out. Full ledger in DECISIONS/.

arbiter.CLAIM_SCOPE gains its ninth source, so test_peakguard.py's 10f and 10g
tripwires and test_arbiter.py's scope table went red on the line the append
was written. Updated deliberately, with the argument, as their own comments
require. Full 19-file suite green.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU
2026-09-04 01:56:23 +02:00
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5 753f700539 DEV-02: merge release/1.0, and close the two review blockers
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 4m15s
PR #43 was rejected on two findings and had gone unmergeable behind SAFETY-28
and the ALLOC-01 fix. This is the merge commit; the conflict resolution and both
fixes are below, because a merge that also changes behaviour has to say so.

THE MERGE, AND WHAT IT COST
===========================
Two conflicts in main.py, both where SAFETY-28 and this card touched the same
method:

  * `write_setpoint()` split into a site entry point plus a per-unit
    `_write_unit()` here, while SAFETY-28 put its record gate in the old
    single-unit body. `write_refusal()` now takes the INVERTER it is about.
    Asking it with `self.unit` - as release/1.0 does - would authorise A's share
    on B's wire, and would also trip test_inverter.py part 1's AST scan, which
    goes red on any read of a Controller N=1 view inside Controller.
  * the SAFETY-28 gate sits above the clamp and below the non-finite coercion,
    exactly where release/1.0 put it, and is now asked about `inv`.

Fallout the merge produced in the checks, re-aimed rather than relaxed:

  * every fixture that calls `write_setpoint()` DIRECTLY - the clamp probe, the
    hung-heartbeat experiment and its serialised counterfactual, the split
    deadline probe - now arms a real allocation record first. test_inverter.py
    grows an `arm()` built through the shipped `resolve()`, the same shape
    test_clamp.py's is: the per-unit envelopes are filed as real `supervised`
    claims and the site target is their sum, so the water-fill has exactly one
    answer and the fixture cannot quietly become its own allocator.
  * test_clamp.py's two-unit failsafe fixture assigned `c.units`, which DEV-02
    made a derived property with no setter. It appends a real `Inverter`.

BLOCKER 1 - AC 4's ARBITER-BOUND EVIDENCE WAS VACUOUS
=====================================================
test_peakguard.py claimed "each unit's `supervised` bound is ITS OWN `max_w` -
give inverter B a different rating and the claim filed on inverter B moves with
it", and compared B's bound against `_b2.max_w`. `second_inverter()` DEFAULTED
B's rating to `LIVE_MAX_W`, which is A's. IT COMPARED (-5000, 5000) AGAINST
(-5000, 5000): a number against itself, unable to observe the failure it named.

Reproduced: filing the per-unit `device`/`supervised` claims from
`self.inverters[0]`'s numbers while leaving `actuator=self.actuator_of(..., inv)`
alone left ALL 19 FILES GREEN. At a roster of two with A=5000/B=3000 that makes
inverter B's planned envelope (-5000, 5000) instead of (-3000, 3000) - a 2000 W
over-command the arbiter believes is supervised. It is a DIFFERENT defect from
the actuator variant the static routing pin catches, and only the actuator
variant was in the mutation table.

  * `second_inverter()` gives B 3000 W - a hypothesis, marked as one - for every
    fixture in the file, so no check there can compare B against A by accident.
  * the claim is asserted against LITERAL numbers rather than against an
    expression that can read the same object twice, for `supervised` AND for
    `device` (whose `dev` had the same defect), plus the envelope the ARBITER
    RESOLVED for B - a claim filed right and resolved wrong is the same defect
    one layer down.
  * a PRECONDITION check fails if the two ratings are ever made equal again.
  * the BOUND mutation is in the table, beside the actuator one, and was
    observed RED (3 checks in test_peakguard.py) via tools/mutation_run.sh.

⚠️ THIRD INSTANCE THIS SESSION of a check whose DATA cannot reach the failure it
names - ARB-03's call-site scan saw 3 of 8 appends, ALLOC-01's replay generator
saw 0 escapes where a widened one saw 39,991. MUTATION.md gains a section for it
beside the stale-bytecode and masking ones, and the rule is written at the line:
ANY CHECK ASSERTING "X DIFFERS FROM Y" MUST BE RUN ONCE WITH X AND Y ACTUALLY
MADE DIFFERENT.

BLOCKER 2 - THE LATCH WAS SILENTLY DISARMED BY THE ROLLBACK ROUND TRIP
======================================================================
store.py's rule 2 keeps the flat keys "so a rollback still finds its latch". The
operator path that rule contemplates is a ROUND TRIP, and this card lost the
latch on it:

  1. install migrates          -> schema_version=1, unit/inverter-a/... = False
  2. operator DOWNGRADES; SAFETY-02 trips inside the downgrade window and the
     old add-on writes only the flat `sign_tripped: true`
  3. operator upgrades again   -> `rep.ran` is False, so `_grade_store_migration()`
     returned early, and `Inverter.__init__` read the namespaced key: False

Observed: the controller came up with `sign_wd.tripped = False` while
/data/state.json said `sign_tripped: true`. That is store.py's own header
sentence - "the file still says sign_tripped: true, the banner is green, and the
controller resumes driving the wrong way" - rebuilt by the version marker. A
firmware version change with a rollback path was performed on this site on
2026-09-02, so this is not hypothetical.

Three changes, each graded by a mutation observed RED:

  * THE OPERATOR'S CLEAR CLEARS BOTH SPELLINGS. That is what removes the
    "re-arm forever" objection the `rep.ran` gate existed to answer: with the
    fossil cleared, `flat True + namespaced False` is unambiguously a
    downgrade-window latch.
  * A TRIP MIRRORS THE FLAT PAIR. Rule 2 only ever covered the latch present AT
    MIGRATION TIME - nothing flat was written for a trip taken afterwards, so an
    operator who downgraded found `sign_tripped: false` and came up DRIVING.
    store.py claimed the staleness could only fail toward a SPURIOUS latch. It
    could not; that sentence is corrected rather than left standing.
  * THE GUARD RUNS ON EVERY START, and asks the STORE - not the roster - whether
    anything namespaced is latched. A mirrored trip on B must not re-arm a
    healthy A, and the store is the right place to ask because it holds every
    `unit/*/sign_tripped` this install has written, including one belonging to a
    unit that is not in today's roster.

Graded by the three-step scenario itself, run end to end in test_inverter.py
part 2, with all three preconditions asserted - including that the catching
start did NOT migrate anything, which is what used to skip the guard. Part 2's
idempotence check now PRESSES the button instead of hand-writing the store,
because the state it used to construct is not one the shipped clear path can
produce. Part 3 grades the mirror and the clear on a real roster of two.

test_watchdog.py's "the flat key is NOT written" assertion is re-aimed rather
than deleted: its argument was right about the READ and wrong about the WRITE.
Nothing at runtime reads that key, and the one thing that does ignores it
whenever any namespaced latch is set - which a sibling's trip always leaves.
What its absence actually cost was the rollback.

HANDOVER.md and DOCS.md said the flat key "is never read again", which was the
instruction an operator clearing a trip by hand would follow. Both corrected: it
is a maintained rollback view, it IS read on every start, and clearing a trip by
hand means clearing both spellings.

MUTATIONS THIS ROUND, each applied on a purged tree via tools/mutation_run.sh
and observed RED:
  * per-unit `device`/`supervised` BOUNDS from `self.inverters[0]`, actuator
    left correct                                   -> test_peakguard.py 10g
  * `_grade_store_migration()` gated on `rep.ran`   -> test_inverter.py part 2
  * the operator's clear leaving the flat keys set  -> test_inverter.py part 2/3
  * a trip not mirroring the flat pair              -> test_inverter.py part 3
  * the guard asking only `self.inverters[0]`       -> test_inverter.py part 3

19/19 files green on the merged tree. No hardware was touched.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU
2026-09-03 23:37:23 +02:00
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5 e306c74cb8 DEV-02: per-instance inverter objects, so nothing is graded against a sibling
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 4m15s
Every piece of per-device state in the Controller was a scalar, and several of
them are safety inputs. app/inverter.py introduces an `Inverter` that owns its
entities, its rating, its device range, its SignWatchdog, its last_write and
its last_beat, under store keys namespaced by unit name. The Controller holds a
list of them and keeps only what is genuinely site-level: the P1 reading, the
site integrator, and the tariff quarter.

WHAT THE SCALARS WERE SILENTLY ASSERTING

  dev_min/dev_max   one pair, read from one setpoint_entity. A second
                    inverter's rating was NEVER READ AT ALL, so its clamp, its
                    freeze rail and the peak guard's achievable_w were the
                    first one's numbers.
  soc               one reading into the maintenance FSM, SAFETY-24's pack
                    floor and arbitrage's bounds. An average lets the emptier
                    pack be driven below its own floor.
  sign_wd           ONE SignWatchdog, whose own docstring says "one instance
                    per actuator", latched under FLAT store keys - so a trip
                    caused by B latched A across restarts and one operator
                    press cleared both.
  last_beat         one deadline and one serialised hass.call(), so a hung
                    write to A ate B's 30 s layer-1 budget.

actual_w BECAME SITE LEVEL WHILE THE READINGS BECAME PER-INSTANCE, and those
are opposite directions on purpose. compute()'s anti-windup test is
`abs(prev_w - actual_w) > saturation_w` with prev_w the SITE target, so feeding
it one inverter's power compares a site number against a unit number, trips the
saturation freeze permanently and leaves a standing grid error. Measured on
admin/goodwe's two-master rig (tools/alloc_sim.py --splits, 2 kW load, 40
cycles), worst |delta| between splits at the meter:

    gain    one unit's power      the site sum
    0.2           510 W                0 W
    0.4           250 W                0 W
    0.6            50 W                0 W

That was ALLOC-01's disclosed finding; test_alloc.py part 8 kept its stimulus
and now grades the other row.

THE STORE MIGRATION IS GRADED, NOT MERELY PERFORMED. sign_tripped/sign_reason
move to unit/<name>/... once, verified by READING BACK what was written, and
the version marker is set only when nothing that carried state was lost. The
flat keys stay in the file so a rollback still finds its latch. And __init__
compares the pre-migration flat latch against what unit A actually came up
with: if the latch did not survive it is RE-ARMED from the legacy value and
shouted about. A latch that silently fails to migrate is a disarmed safety
guard on an install whose state file says it is protected - which is strictly
worse than never persisting it, because now there is evidence saying it is
fine. test_inverter.py part 2 breaks the migration and watches the guard fire.

HEARTBEATS ARE INDEPENDENT AND THE BUDGET IS DERIVED. Each inverter owns its
deadline, the refreshes go out concurrently, and each write is bounded by
WRITE_BUDGET_S = 4 s. The inequality is graded rather than asserted: 4 +
heartbeat_s's schema maximum of 25 < 30, validate.FIRMWARE_INGEST_VETO_S.
Verified by injecting a transport that accepts and never answers.

live_units() ANSWERS HONESTLY. A unit whose every write has been rejected for a
whole layer-1 window is not commandable; the allocator drops it, the survivors
carry its share, the action log names it, and the dropped unit is commanded
0 W rather than left standing on its last share. A roster entry with NO
setpoint_entity is deliberately not handled there - that is a configuration
that cannot be delivered, and it reaches main.py's refusal branch, which is how
that branch keeps a live trigger after this card removed its old one.

AT N=1 NOTHING MOVES. The removed scalars survive as read/write properties of
the sole inverter, so every existing replay runs unmodified - and they REFUSE
at N>=2 rather than answering for the first inverter, which is the tripwire on
a consumer that was never made per-instance.

EVIDENCE. 19 files green. test_inverter.py is new (82 checks). Eighteen
mutations were applied to the shipped modules on a purged tree via
tools/mutation_run.sh and each was observed RED. Two of them SURVIVED first
time and the checks were changed rather than the table: the serialised dispatch
and the shared last_beat both passed while part 6 gathered its own writes and
computed its own `due` list. send_heartbeats() was extracted from run_control()
so the shipped dispatch is reachable by a check at all.

INVERTER B STILL DOES NOT EXIST. build_roster() returns exactly one inverter
from the flat options and is the one function CFG-04 changes; every two-unit
figure here is architecture, and the second rating in the checks is marked a
hypothesis.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU
2026-09-02 14:50:43 +02:00
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5 d5b1ef19b3 CFG-03: give maintenance option defaults one source of truth
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 3m44s
Option defaults for the maintenance cycle were declared in three places that
could disagree, and MAINT-04 proved they already did. config.yaml shipped
`maintenance_charge_w: 2000`; main.py carried TWO `opts.get(..., 2500)`
fallbacks; MaintConfig's dataclass carried a third `2500.0`. So an options dict
with the key ABSENT was ACCEPTED by validate.py's rule 6 - which read 2000 -
and then built by main.py at 2500, against a 2000 W ceiling:

    options dict with maintenance_charge_w ABSENT, max_w=2000
      validate_startup_config  ->  []  (accepted, no problems)
      MaintConfig().charge_w   ->  2500.0
      arbiter.resolve()        ->  0.0 W, contradiction=True

That is the bug rule 6 exists to refuse, passing rule 6. It is unreachable on a
Supervisor install, which always supplies every key from config.yaml, and fully
reachable from sim/inject.py and from the test suite - which is where anyone
debugging maintenance actually works.

MAINT-04 shipped a TRIPWIRE and said so: test_validate.py pinned all three
literals and asserted the consequence through the real arbiter, so the
divergence could not silently widen or be half-closed. Its PASSING CONDITION
WAS THE BUG. Both it and validate.py's comment said to delete each other when
the divergence was closed. It is closed, so both are deleted.

THE DIVERGENCE WAS WIDER THAN ONE KEY. `maintenance_discharge_w` had the
identical three-way split (config.yaml 2000, MaintConfig 2500) and the card
named only the charge side. Closing one and leaving its twin would have
satisfied the numbers and left three sources of truth one line down, which is
the state that produced the bug. Both are closed, and so is the whole family:
all eight `maintenance_*` keys go through the same mechanism.

WHAT THE SINGLE SOURCE IS. config.yaml's `options:` block - it is what the
Supervisor reads and what the operator edits, so it wins by definition. There
is now exactly one in-code copy, `maintenance.MAINT_OPTION_DEFAULTS`, which is
TARIFF-02's `PRICE_OPTION_DEFAULTS` and SAFETY-24's `PEAK_OPTION_DEFAULTS`
pattern applied to the family that named the card - validate.py's rule 8 comment
already called that "CFG-03 read as a rule rather than as a complaint", so this
makes the rule hold where it was first broken rather than inventing a fourth
mechanism for one option family.

A MIRROR RATHER THAN A RUNTIME READ, and the reason is mechanical: the
Dockerfile copies `app/` and `run.sh` into the image and NOT config.yaml. The
running add-on cannot open the file it is configured by, so there is nothing to
read at 03:00 on a client's Pi, and a YAML-subset parser that could fail at
import is a new way for the add-on not to start. What makes the copy safe is
that test_maintenance.py pins every entry by READING the shipped file - drift is
a CI failure, not a comment.

EVERY OTHER SITE NOW DERIVES FROM IT OR HAS CEASED TO EXIST:

  * MaintConfig's eight dataclass defaults are indexed out of the mirror. No
    numeric literal survives in the class that held the third opinion.
  * `MaintConfig.from_options()` is the ONLY place in the add-on that reads a
    `maintenance_*` option. main.py's eight inline `opts.get(key, <literal>)`
    calls are gone: moving the read next to the mirror means the fallback cannot
    be anything but the mirror, because there is no literal in sight of it to
    disagree with. It uses `key in opts` rather than truthiness, so a shipped
    `false` or `0` is honoured instead of being quietly replaced by the default
    - this card's own bug in a different costume.
  * main.py's SECOND fallback site - the cheap-window charge floor at the
    P_MAINT_SHAPE claim - reads `self.maint.cfg.charge_w` instead of re-opening
    the options dict with its own literal. The Controller had already parsed
    this once in __init__; asking the object that owns it cannot drift from it,
    and the rate the shaping asks for can no longer be a different number from
    the rate the state machine drains at on the same install.
  * validate.py's rule 6 and its `maintenance_discharge_w` warning take their
    fallbacks from the mirror.

WHERE THE RANGE LIVES, STATED AND CHECKED. config.yaml's `schema:` block carries
`maintenance_charge_w: int(500,5000)` - a fourth declaration site of a different
kind. It is a BOUND, not a default, so it is not this bug; but leaving the
question open is how a fifth site arrives. The decision recorded in config.yaml
and in maintenance.py is: bounds live in the schema block ONLY, because the
Supervisor is what enforces them and the Supervisor reads only that file, so a
Python copy of `int(500,5000)` would be a place to disagree and nothing else.
test_maintenance.py checks both halves of that: every mirrored key must have a
schema entry - without one the Supervisor drops the option and the add-on
silently runs on the mirror instead of the operator's value - and every shipped
default must lie INSIDE its own range, since a default the schema rejects is a
config that cannot be re-entered once it is edited. What the schema grammar
cannot express is a relation BETWEEN keys (`maintenance_charge_w` against
`max_w`), which is exactly why rule 6 is written in Python and why it does not
belong in the mirror either.

THE REPLACEMENT CHECKS, AND HOW THEY WERE VERIFIED. test_validate.py's new
section exercises the same four consumers the defect ran through, the same way:
the validator ACCEPTS a dict with every maintenance key missing; a REAL
Controller built from that same dict holds 2000 W (through main.py, not through
a regex over its source); `MaintConfig()` answers 2000 W with no dict at all;
and the real arbiter emits `-2000 W, limited by supervised(max_w)` instead of
`0 W, contradiction=True`. test_maintenance.py pins the mirror to config.yaml in
both directions - equal values, and full coverage of every `maintenance_*` key
the file ships, so a ninth key cannot arrive unmirrored - and asserts the
consumers move as a RELATION rather than against numbers, reading MaintConfig's
defaults back out of `dataclasses.fields()`.

Each new check was verified by BREAKING the thing it watches and observing red,
this project's rule:

  1. config.yaml -> 1500, mirror left at 2000:  test_maintenance 1 FAILED,
     test_validate 4 FAILED.
  2. config.yaml AND the mirror -> 1500: green again, and every consumer moved
     together - MaintConfig() 1500 W, the Controller 1500 W, and the arbiter
     `-1500 W, limited by maintenance(cheap-window charge)` where it had said
     `-2000 W, limited by supervised(max_w)`. That is AC4: change the single
     source and watch the consumers follow.
  3. `charge_w: float = 2500.0` retyped into the dataclass: 2 FAILED in each of
     the two files.
  4. `opts.get("maintenance_charge_w", 2500)` restored in main.py: 1 FAILED,
     naming the file and the literal it found.
  5. `maintenance_hold_min` deleted from config.yaml's options block: 3 FAILED.

Full suite 17/17 in goodwe-addon-ci, twice, once under parallel load.

Stale prose that asserted the now-closed divergence as current is corrected in
app/watchdog.py, test_watchdog.py and test_peakguard.py - watchdog.py's example
still uses 1500 W, but because the point of the example is a charge strictly
inside the ceiling, not because 2500 is what ships.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-09-01 06:16:54 +02:00
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5 7b4877d56d TEST-15: purge the bytecode cache before a mutation run, not after
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 3m35s
FCST-03's developer reverted `self.provisional` to `here.provisional`, re-ran,
and reported the mutation as a survivor. It was not one. CPython validates a
cached `.pyc` on (source size, source mtime truncated to whole seconds), and
that edit moved neither number - same length, same second - so the interpreter
loaded the bytecode it already had. Disassembly settled it at the time: the
source read `here`, the running code loaded `self`. A mutation run had graded
code that was not there, with no error and exit status 0.

This does not make the results already on the record wrong. It makes them
UNVERIFIED, and that distinction is the whole card - so nothing here re-runs a
campaign and nothing here quietly assumes the old numbers hold.

REPRODUCED, THEN CLOSED. test_bytecode.py builds a real package whose two
return values are the same length, imports it in a real subprocess, rewrites it
inside the same second (retrying until both writes land in one whole second -
milliseconds, no sleep) and reads back which value ran. Part 1 shows the
interpreter running SELF off a file that says HERE.

AND THE TWO OBVIOUS MITIGATIONS DO NOT WORK. Measured, not read off
documentation: `python3 -B` and PYTHONDONTWRITEBYTECODE=1 are write-side only.
Neither stops an EXISTING stale .pyc being read, and a mutation run always has
one, because the previous run wrote it. Part 2 grades both still running the old
code. The advice in test_control.py's coverage audit led with `-B`; it is
corrected here - the purge is the half that works, and `-B` earns its place by
keeping THIS run from leaving a cache for the NEXT edit to inherit.

NO SLEEP ANYWHERE. One-second mtime resolution is the mechanism, not the enemy.
Waiting it out would slow every run down and would still only cover the edit
somebody remembered to slow down.

THE HARNESS. tools/mutation_run.sh purges, prints a sha256/byte fingerprint of
every app/*.py it is about to grade - so a mutation report can say WHICH source
produced it, which is the reviewer's addition to this card - runs each suite
under `python3 -B`, refuses a tree with no test_*.py (CI-01's rule, for CI-01's
reason), and fails if a cache appears during the run. It takes the tree as an
argument so the infra repo's replay harnesses can call it without being moved.

WHERE IT IS SAID (AC 2). MUTATION.md carries the mechanism, the measurement,
the reporting rules and the survey, and every one of the 16 suites now points at
it from its docstring. That list is DERIVED FROM THE TREE by test_bytecode.py
part 5, so a new suite that joins this directory without the pointer is red -
the same failure shape CI-01's file glob exists to prevent.

CI WAS ALREADY IMMUNE, AND IS DESCRIBED THAT WAY (AC 4). Verified rather than
reasoned: with the checkout bind mounted `-v "$WS:/w:ro"` the interpreter writes
no __pycache__ into the tree at all, and it fails SILENTLY - no error, exit
status 0 - while the same probe on a writable mount produces one. Each job also
rm -rf's its workspace and clones afresh, so nothing crosses between jobs on the
shared runner. PYTHONDONTWRITEBYTECODE=1 is added as belt and braces only: the
`:ro` is one character wide and the next person debugging a write will be
tempted by it. Part 6 grades both ON THE DOCKER COMMAND LINE rather than on the
file - the first draft searched the whole workflow and stayed green after the
flag was deleted, because the comment explaining it still named it.

THE SHIPPED ADD-ON IS NOT AFFECTED and the question is closed:
goodwe_controller/Dockerfile has set PYTHONDONTWRITEBYTECODE=1 since it was
written. There is no deploy-side finding.

THE SURVEY (AC 3), in MUTATION.md, scoped BY THE PROPERTY. The defect is
one-directional - a mutation that never took leaves the suite green, so stale
bytecode manufactures SURVIVORS and cannot manufacture a red - which puts every
"all red, no survivors" claim in the window out of scope, along with mutations
executed in-process (SAFETY-07's B1/B2/B3, test_peakguard parts 7 and 10, where
no source file is edited) and everything run after the purge discipline landed
on 2026-08-31 (SAFETY-24, SAFETY-26, OPT-04, FCST-03's re-run). What is left is
the recorded SURVIVORS from source-edit runs before that date. Two were re-run
here under the harness and both still stand: TARIFF-01's record_block() ignoring
its policy argument, and SAFETY-03's abs() on the clamp limit - 15 suites green
each, on the tree as it stood. The rest are labelled still-unverified rather
than assumed or re-run; each is one harness run to close, and the moment to
spend it is when somebody next touches that module.

OUT OF SCOPE AND RECORDED: the infra repo's sim/ replay harnesses import the
add-on and write bytecode into both trees (goodwe/sim/__pycache__ exists today),
so SAFETY-02's headline replay carries the same exposure. mutation_run.sh takes
a tree argument for exactly that, but the change belongs in that repo and some
of those harnesses want the rig.

RED AND GREEN. Every new check was broken and watched fail: the purge commented
out of the harness turns part 4 red (and its non-vacuity probe already proves
the fixture would mis-grade without it); one docstring pointer removed turns
part 5 red naming the file; `:ro` and the `-e` flag removed from the workflow
turn part 6 red. Full suite green, 16 files, in the CI image on a read-only
mount - the shape the runner uses.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-09-01 02:07:09 +02:00
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5 c040aac4b8 SAFETY-03: alarm when a computed setpoint exceeds the rating, do not just clip it
The clamp was never the missing half. specs.md 10.3 records an unclamped
integrator climbing ~130 W per 4 s past 10 kW and reporting 14 768 W pinned at
the 5 kW rail; clipped silently that is a flat, legal-looking 5000 W hold and
nothing says the loop asked for three times it.

write_setpoint() - the one path every write takes - now clamps to the VALIDATED
max_w and reports whether the raw value differed; check_output_clamp() raises
OUTPUT_CLAMP as a notification, an ERROR, an event row and a red status banner.
Not a trip: the clamped value is written and the loop keeps running.

The rating is max_w and nothing is min()ed at runtime - CFG-01 already refuses a
max_w outside the device range at startup. The device range is applied second as
defence in depth; it cannot bite after a successful validation, so if it ever
does it alarms too and names the bound. No new config key.

Decision grew i_clamped / clamped booleans, and that is the load-bearing part:
`reason` is one string that slew-limiting and the saturation freeze overwrite,
so an alarm keyed on it is silent on exactly the cycles a winding loop produces.
Mutating main.py back onto the string drops the 10.3 replay from 2 engagements
to 0.

Distinct from saturation by construction - no shared reason code, notification
id, status row or counter - and checked in the negative, after first asserting
the saturation freeze really did engage.

Two things found by running it rather than by reading it: a row per engagement
flushed the 40-row event log and evicted SAFETY-18's own METER FROZEN? row (now
coalesced per episode with an exact count), and a naive clamp turns a nan into a
command at the full rating because every comparison against nan is False.

test_clamp.py is new: assert-based, no framework. Six author mutations
reproduced red, including "clamp kept, alarm deleted". Two of the check's own
hypotheses about the freeze/clamp interaction were refused by its sweep and
rewritten to what it measured.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_015VXjA3LWccN1rJsk3okyPC
2026-08-30 15:22:22 +02:00
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5 878a6ce452 MAINT-04: refuse a maintenance charge the ceiling cannot deliver
config.yaml shipped max_w 2000 against maintenance_charge_w 2500. The
cheap-window shaping files Claim.limit(hi = -maintenance_charge_w) against
the supervised SAFETY limit's lo = -max_w, so lo > hi - the arbiter's
clause 3, correctly resolved to 0 W and logged as a CONTRADICTION.
Maintenance silently never charged in a cheap window on a default install,
and the only evidence read like a bug in the arbiter rather than like the
two numbers the operator set.

validate_startup_config() now refuses maintenance_charge_w > max_w, the
same shape as CFG-01's sign_disagree_w >= max_w. Equality is reachable
(-max_w is a single valid point) and is not refused. Demonstrated by
starting the add-on on the pre-fix pair: exit 78 and the refusal banner.

maintenance_discharge_w was checked rather than assumed and is NOT the same
case: the drain phase OWNS the actuator (Claim.set at P_MAINTENANCE), so
the ceiling clamps it to +2000 W and the arbiter's explain() names the
clamp every cycle. Loud, and it still moves energy - warned, not refused.

The shipped maintenance rates drop to 2000 so the defaults pass the rule;
max_w was deliberately not raised, because it is the supervised safety
ceiling. test_validate.py now reads config.yaml itself, so a default the
validator refuses cannot ship again.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_015VXjA3LWccN1rJsk3okyPC
2026-08-30 02:28:09 +02:00
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5 e40eb0768d SAFETY-02: the P_PEAK assertion was pinning the test's copy of the gate
Review finding 2, and it is the same duplication `disagrees()` just removed, so
it gets the same fix rather than a follow-up card.

`following_from()` in test_watchdog.py was a TRANSCRIPTION of the gate in
main.py, carrying "keep the two in step" as an instruction - which is exactly the
arrangement that does not keep two things in step. Measured: editing the shipped
gate alone to `winner in ("loop", "peak")` left every suite green while the
watchdog went blind for the duration of every peak event. The row whose whole job
is to force whoever lands peak shaving to come and change an expectation did not
do that.

The expression is now `watchdog.loop_is_following()`, called by main.py and by
the test. One definition, two callers, same reasoning as `disagrees()`: the copy
that drifts is always the one in the harness doing the grading.

⚠️ AND EXTRACTING IT WAS NOT SUFFICIENT - the drift proof still came out green
after the extraction, which is why it was worth running rather than assuming. The
realistic P_PEAK row has peak shaving asking for MORE than the loop, so the
magnitude term rejects it whatever `winner` says and masks the term under test. A
second row with peak asking for LESS makes `winner` the only deciding term. With
that row, widening the shipped gate fails two checks; without it, none.

Also enforcing the write ordering that was documented and not asserted: swapping
the two `store.set` calls passed everything. A store that fails the second write
now proves the property the ordering exists for - a crash mid-trip leaves a
reason with no latch, never a latch with no explanation. Swapping them now turns
that check red.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Du77usMj8XNKNFZGmUiWDa
2026-08-28 22:59:46 +02:00
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5 cc4e88490b SAFETY-02 review: a latch that a restart clears is not a latch
BLOCKER. `auto` was persisted and `sign_wd.tripped` was not, so reconstructing
the Controller against the same store - which is what a container restart does -
brought it back ARMED, into the same fault, unattended: tripped=False, banner
back to NOT READY, and it resumed commanding -1000 then -2000 W before
re-tripping 180 s later. "Restart the add-on" is the first thing an operator
looking at a FAILSAFE banner and a 0 W inverter will try, and under a supervisor
that restarts a crashed add-on it is a loop of three-minute wrong-direction
bursts. DOCS.md's "it does not clear itself" was false across a restart.

`sign_tripped` and `sign_reason` are Store keys now, beside the maintenance
state and for the reason store.py's own docstring gives. Written the moment the
trip happens - reason first, flag second, so a crash between the two can never
persist a latch with no explanation - restored in Controller.__init__, cleared
only by the operator's start. The regression is covered: reverting the restore
fails seven checks in test_watchdog.py.

Review follow-ups, no behaviour change:

- The arming gate is tested against the REAL arbiter. It is the decision the
  ticket turns on and it was asserted in three comment blocks and verified by
  nothing - every case passed `following` in as a literal. Twelve claim
  configurations now derive it from resolve(), including the redirect case
  `winner == "loop"` alone would have got wrong and the `lo` limit that raises
  magnitude without flipping sign.
- The MQTT `status: "failsafe"` value is tested. The check that claimed to cover
  it restated the line above it and never touched the payload.
- The worked example described a config that does not ship: at the defaults
  maintenance_charge_w 2500 against max_w 2000 is an arbiter contradiction and
  0 W, not a -2500 W charge. Rewritten at 1500 W. The contradiction is a real
  pre-existing bug - a default cheap-window maintenance charge silently never
  happens - filed separately and deliberately not fixed here.
- Forward hazard recorded at the gate: `winner == "loop"` disarms the watchdog
  under any higher-priority SET, and a peak-shaving strategy at P_PEAK IS
  grid-following in sign, so it would blind this for every peak event.
- disagrees() is public so the replay harness stops carrying its own copy of the
  predicate it grades.
- held_s takes the clock instead of reading one.
- The two limits are now each stated in both places rather than one each.
- The no-false-positive argument is tied to control.py's freeze permitting the
  command to cross zero; under the shrink-only encoding control.py records as
  rejected, this would false-trip on a load step.
- Measured figures corrected: 93.4 % / 4212 of 17280, per-cluster
  0.3/0.9/10.5/0.0, and the near-circularity of those figures is now stated
  rather than leaned on.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Du77usMj8XNKNFZGmUiWDa
2026-08-28 22:33:15 +02:00
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5 9aed43990b SAFETY-02: a loop can be fresh, tracking and inside its rating and still push the wrong way
The stale-input watchdog asks whether the meter is still talking. The saturation
freeze asks whether the inverter can follow. The output clamp asks whether the
number is too big. A loop can pass all three while charging the battery out of
the grid, because the only thing wrong is the sign.

On 2026-08-20 a commercial controller did exactly that four times in one day,
for up to 77 minutes at a stretch, reaching a commanded -14 768 W against a
±5000 W inverter. app/watchdog.py compares the emitted setpoint against the
authoritative P1 figure and, when they oppose each other with both over 300 W
for 180 s continuously, files a failsafe SET claim at P_SAFETY, commands 0 W and
latches there until an operator starts control again.

Validated against that day rather than against an argument: sim/replay_sign.py
in the infra repo drives this module over the committed captures of both
2026-08-20 and the healthy 2026-08-23 and reaches 18 trips on the fault day -
every one inside a window NOTES.md §4.7 accounts for - and 0 on the healthy day.
The four episodes do share one signature: 0.3 / 0.9 / 10.5 / 0.0 % sign
agreement inside them against 92.9 % healthy.

Three decisions the ticket could not make:

- It is DISARMED whenever the grid-following loop is not what is driving. Sign
  agreement is a property of a loop that follows the meter, and a maintenance
  grid charge opposes the meter by design - 2500 W of charge into a house
  drawing 500 W is +3000 W on the meter against a -2500 W command, for hours.
  The gate tests the emitted number, not the winning claim's name, because a
  limit claim can let the loop "win" and still replace its value.
- The trip LATCHES. Commanding 0 W removes the command side of the comparison,
  so the disagreement always clears the moment the trip works.
- sign_disagree_w at or above max_w is refused at startup. The arbiter never
  lets a command exceed max_w, so such a threshold leaves the watchdog incapable
  of firing while the status page still reports it armed.

What it does not catch, said out loud: an inverter that ACTS opposite to its
command moves the meter further the same way, leaving command and meter in
agreement. That is the saturation freeze's job.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Du77usMj8XNKNFZGmUiWDa
2026-08-28 21:51:35 +02:00