I recorded "92/14 on pristine develop vs 93/13 after — nothing worsened, one
case better". Three consecutive runs on one unchanged tree give 90/16, 92/14,
92/14: the suite is non-deterministic and both figures were single samples of
that spread. The port is indistinguishable from the noise; claiming an
improvement was false precision.
Surfaced because the post-merge run reported 90/16 and looked like a
regression. It was not — but the only reason the question could be settled
was re-running, which is exactly what the original claim had skipped.
bmottin
91ea02d990