Both eviction sites checked for a consumer's `.reading-` marker and then,
seconds later — `usage_gb` runs `du -sk` over a multi-GB tree between the
two — unlinked the directory. A consumer that started a clone inside that
gap had its source removed mid-walk, which `cp -al` does not report: a
subtree unlinked before its parent is listed is silently omitted.
Unreachable today, and only by policy: snapshots belong to protected refs
and protected refs never reach the marker check. `cargo-cache` and
`cargo-cache-publish` take that ref list as two independent inputs, so a
workflow listing a publisher in one and not the other arms this with no
code change at all.
Closed structurally, with publish-snapshot.sh's rotation rather than a new
mechanism: the candidate is renamed aside and only then re-examined, so the
scan the unlink rests on happens strictly after the rename. A consumer that
resolved the directory published its marker before that scan and cannot be
missed; one arriving after cannot resolve the path and starts cold, the same
degrade the publisher's swap window already produces. Renaming disturbs no
clone in flight — no entry is unlinked and the inode is unchanged — so a
declined eviction costs a deferred eviction and nothing else. A reprieved
cache is put back under its own name; one whose name a concurrent seed has
retaken is left aside and swept by a later pass once its readers drain,
since nothing else globs a dotted name.
prune-cache-selftest gains three scenarios (21 -> 31 assertions). Scenario
12 is the one that bites: the `du` the pass runs on its candidate publishes
the marker, placing it strictly after the check and strictly before the
unlink. Against check-then-delete, 1-11 pass and 12 fails; breaking only
the second look and leaving the rename fails it too.
claude
88ab063b64
