Fix .silol.series generation

[wilfonba]

This PR moves the generation of the .silo.series file before the failure message in MFC.sh. If post process failed, then the silo series file wouldn't be generated. I'm not sure how this got reordered, because I thought I'd done the correct ordering when I first merged this. Git blame shows that I just did it wrong though.

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

Note

Copilot was unable to run its full agentic suite in this review.

This PR fixes the ordering of .silo.series generation so it happens before the post-process failure path in MFC.sh, ensuring the series file is still produced when post-processing fails.

Changes:

• Move the generate_silo_series.py invocation earlier in the post_process target block.
• Ensure .silo.series generation occurs before the $code == 22 early-exit error message.

[github-actions]

Claude Code Review

Head SHA: 454d7f6

Files changed:

• 1
• toolchain/templates/include/helpers.mako

Findings:

generate_silo_series.py now runs unconditionally even when post_process has failed

In run_epilogue, the diff moves the generate_silo_series.py invocation from after the error-exit checks to before them:

+% if target.name == 'post_process':
+    python3 "${MFC_ROOT_DIR}/toolchain/templates/include/generate_silo_series.py" '${os.path.dirname(input)}'
+% endif
+
     if [ $code -eq 22 ]; then
         ...
     fi

     if [ $code -ne 0 ]; then
         exit 1
     fi

-% if target.name == 'post_process':
-    python3 "${MFC_ROOT_DIR}/toolchain/templates/include/generate_silo_series.py" '${os.path.dirname(input)}'
-% endif

Because code=$? is captured from post_process before this block, the error-exit logic ($code -ne 0) still correctly terminates on failure. However, the silo-series script is now invoked before that check, so it will run even when post_process exited non-zero (including the case-file-error code 22). Previously it only ran on success.

Running generate_silo_series.py over incomplete or corrupt post-process output is likely to produce a broken silo series and may mask the real error by emitting spurious output before the failure message.

[sbryngelson]

@wilfonba, what do you think of the Claude review above?

[sbryngelson]

Reorder looks right — moving the .silo.series generation ahead of the code -eq 22 / failure-exit blocks ensures it actually runs. One thing I checked that's reassuring: code=$? is captured at line 86, before this python call, so even if generate_silo_series.py errors it won't clobber the real post_process exit status used by the checks below. Minor inline note.

[sbryngelson]

Non-blocking: this now runs unconditionally (for post_process) even when post_process actually failed — i.e. it may execute generate_silo_series.py over missing or partial silo output. Since code is already captured above, it won't mask the real error, but worth confirming generate_silo_series.py degrades gracefully (no silo files / incomplete set) rather than dumping a traceback. If you'd rather only generate on success, gating this on [ $code -eq 0 ] would do it — though I suspect you want it to run on the spurious-failure case, which is the whole point of the PR.

[wilfonba]

generate_silo_series.py reads the list of files present in the root directory when it is called, so it should never fail if files exist in the root directory. I don't know what it would do if there were no files in the root directory. I'll have to check the actual script when I'm on the right computer.