GeezerVisonThe World Wide Web, restored to 800 pixels of glory. | |||||||||||||||||
| Home|About|Gaming cabinet|Archives|How it works|Starter sites | |||||||||||||||||
GeezerVison is showing github.com — fix: retry Anthropic thinking binding errors with drop_block by ethanndickson · Pull Request #29792 · coder/coder Conversation
|
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
aibridge removed thinking-binding-controls-2026-08-01 for every Bedrock model except Opus 5.5 and Fable 5.1, so each new model that enforces thinking block binding needed a code change. Clients send the beta only to models that need it, so forward it for any model. Bedrock names the field thinking.block_binding.mismatch_behavior. Some regions reject the Anthropic name, prefix_mismatch_behavior, so InvokeModel now renames it. chatd now tracks drop_block per chat and model config. A binding error in compaction with an override model turns on drop_block for the override config only, and the main model config no longer turns it on for the override.
|
@codex review |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Codex Review SummaryThis comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: b1a14cdb9c
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Move the thinking binding retry into a model decorator applied in resolveModelCall, so turns, computer use, compaction, and the advisor all get it. The decorator records a provider and model only after a drop_block retry succeeds, which bounds the in-memory set to configured models instead of growing with every chat.
|
@codex review |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: c634f7260c
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
The cached provider and model entry only picks which request goes first. With the hint set, drop_block is sent first and any 400 before output retries once without it, clearing the hint if that succeeds. BYOK keys, key rotation, or a gateway that rejects the beta now cost one extra 400 instead of failing every request until restart.
|
@codex review |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
|
Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Already looking forward to the next diff. Reviewed commit: ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍. Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback". |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 9c2b4d61b0
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
|
@codex review Reset the stream watchdog before opening the fallback Fair, but I don't think it's worth the extra plumbing here. The fallback only loses however long the first 400 took, which is normally a second or two against a 10 minute default, and if the guard does fire it's classified as retryable, so chatd just runs a fresh attempt with a fresh guard. If we end up with more in-attempt retries like this I'd rather add a proper activity hook to guardedStream in its own PR. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
|
Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. 🎉 Reviewed commit: ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍. Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback". |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
|
LGTM |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
cc @pawbana -- this is probably not going to be necessary with passthrough mode
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.