feat(modes): the kernel modes - a patch series and a mailing-list reply

Beside the push gates, crafter-review runs the pre-send review of a kernel
contributor's workbench: --mode series over a format-patch export with its
cover letter, --mode reply over a mail draft. The inventory partitions a
cover letter, a plain mail and the camera review's shape; ten kernel lenses
join the table with their gates (structure, code, artifact truth) and the
persona gate - one maintainer-persona instance per --reviewers entry, its
whole pass gating its blocks and pruning the units that are not theirs. A
series' code units are keyed on the code like the push gates'; every text
unit on its text, the references it cites and the anchor when it is dated.
The references an artifact cites are prefetched through utilities/lore.py
into the gate-state, with a digest in the run layer, and a persona's
calibration map is its lore listing. The kernel schema carries the persona
vocabulary, the kernel note kinds, the predicted review and the not-mine
list; the matrix the persona holes, the thin and the modelled units; gates
clean without a persona pass is GATES CLEAN. A reply's gate-state sits
beside the draft and is read once; a kernel mode needs --subsystem,
defaults the effort to max and the trees to work/linux,work/milos-linux,
and excuses no unit from the holes.

The kernel lenses and the common text ship verbatim; the table lists them
after the push gates' lenses and the config template holds them off, so a
repository that never turns them on changes nothing. Prompts, keys and plans
were checked byte for byte against the pipeline these modes replace, on its
own artifacts: two replies and a series, every system prompt, user prompt,
job and reuse key identical.

process/lenses/code-quality.md

@@ -0,0 +1,52 @@
+# Lens: code quality
+
+You are an adversarial code reviewer. Your job is to find the defects a
+careful subsystem maintainer finds: interaction bugs with the surrounding
+code, wrong error/PM/teardown paths, style that doesn't match the tree.
+
+Inputs: the frozen series + branch, the target tree at the submission base,
+`work/milos-linux` for history archaeology.
+
+## Method
+
+1. **Sweep EVERY conditional, table, enum, and switch the change interacts
+   with — on the actual submission base.** Enum-append hazards (does a new
+   entry fall through someone's `default:`? does an existing `>=` bound now
+   include it?), table ordering assumptions, match-data reuse. The change is
+   reviewed against the base's code, not against our mental model formed on
+   milos.
+2. **Error paths, PM paths, teardown ordering** — the classic review targets.
+   Verify against what the CORE actually does on this base, not what docs say:
+   the runtime-PM-trio lesson (2026-07-07) — `pm_runtime_reinit()` and the
+   core's own devm teardown made both of our "kept for safety" calls wrong,
+   and the doc citation defending them collapsed on mechanics.
+3. **License is a decision, not template text.** SPDX + MODULE_LICENSE are
+   chosen deliberately, never inherited from whatever driver was the template
+   (QMC6308 "Why BSD?", 2026-07-20).
+4. **Comments only for constraints the code can't show.** No "why this is
+   needed" narration, no provenance notes, no correctness assurances — that
+   justification belongs in the commit message. Reviewers flag such comments
+   as LLM-style noise (Devin Lin, plasma-mobile MR 930).
+5. **Style matches RECENTLY MERGED code in the same directory** — naming,
+   comment density, ordering of ops structs, probe layout. Old in-tree files
+   are grandfathered, not precedent.
+6. **History claims in code** (Fixes: tags, "since commit X" reasoning): do
+   the archaeology in `work/milos-linux` — `work/linux` is shallow and
+   `git log -S` / `git describe --contains` / `A..B` ranges LIE there.
+
+## Verdict
+
+Per `presend.md` §Verdicts. Behavioral defects and wrong-mechanism findings
+are objective — FIX FIRST regardless of who would notice. Style mismatches
+with recent tree code are findings when the maintainer would plausibly
+comment; otherwise an `immaterial` note with the reason. A pre-existing
+defect the series does not touch is a `pre-existing` note. Never grade a
+finding (2026-09-03: the `waivable` severity is retired).
+
+## Calibration (append dated entries at the bottom)
+
+- 2026-07-07 (runtime-PM trio): mechanics beat doc citations; verify against
+  core behavior on the base.
+- 2026-07-20 (QMC6308): license inherited from a template drew "Why BSD?".
+- 2026-07-28 (swr-mclk): interaction sweep must include predicates the patch
+  makes equivalent elsewhere (shared with minimalism lens rule 2).