fix(ci): rename backport auto-label output so its report step runs

[Yicong-Huang]

What changes were proposed in this PR?

The Report backport decisions step in backport-auto-label.yml is skipped on every run, so the report comment and release-manager review request added in #6962 never fire.

Root cause: the step's guard reads steps.label.outputs.result. actions/github-script always writes the script's return value to an output named result after the body runs. The Label fix PRs script has no return, so that post-run write blanks out the explicit core.setOutput("result", …) — the guard is therefore always false.

Fix: rename the output to decisions (github-script only reserves result), and update the guard and the RESULT env reference to match. No logic in either step changes.

Any related issues, documentation, discussions?

Closes #7021.

How was this PR tested?

• Confirmed the failure on run 30423275226 (PR fix(workflow-operator): re-validate redirect hops in HF remote-URL fetches to close an SSRF bypass #7013): the Report backport decisions step shows skipped.
• Verified 0 <!-- backport-auto-label-report --> comments across fix(workflow-operator): re-validate redirect hops in HF remote-URL fetches to close an SSRF bypass #7013, fix(docs): use a plain year range in NOTICE copyright #6983, fix: Add missing license headers to Docs #6958, fix(deps, frontend): update dependency ajv to v8.18.0 [security] #6908 (including PRs that were auto-labeled), confirming the step is systemically skipped.
• Change is name-only; the report/review logic is untouched, so it runs unchanged once the guard sees the output.

Was this PR authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?

Generated-by: Claude Code (Claude Opus 4.8)

[github-actions]

Automated Reviewer Suggestions

Based on the git blame history of the changed files, we recommend the following reviewers:

• No candidates found from git blame history.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 79.19%. Comparing base (f319f04) to head (738e2ac).

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main    #7022      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     83.26%   79.19%   -4.07%     
- Complexity      225     3785    +3560     
============================================
  Files           533     1160     +627     
  Lines         30097    46118   +16021     
  Branches       3222     5114    +1892     
============================================
+ Hits          25059    36525   +11466     
- Misses         4233     7972    +3739     
- Partials        805     1621     +816     

Flag	Coverage Δ
access-control-service	70.00% <ø> (ø)
agent-service	76.76% <ø> (ø)
amber	72.42% <ø> (-14.04%)	⬇️
computing-unit-managing-service	20.49% <ø> (ø)
config-service	66.66% <ø> (ø)
file-service	67.21% <ø> (ø)
frontend	83.08% <ø> (ø)
notebook-migration-service	78.94% <ø> (ø)
pyamber	96.30% <ø> (-0.05%)	⬇️
workflow-compiling-service	26.31% <ø> (ø)

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[github-actions]

⚠️ Benchmark changes need a look

🟢 2 better · 🔴 3 worse · ⚪ 10 noise (<±5%) · 0 without baseline

Compared against main f319f04 benchmarked on this same runner, so the delta is largely free of cross-runner hardware noise. The "7d avg" column still reflects the gh-pages dashboard. Treat <±5% as noise unless repeated.

Dashboard · Run

	config	throughput	MB/s	latency	max Δ latest / 7d
🔴	bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	355	0.217	27,233/40,392/40,392 us	🔴 -6.9% / 🔴 +156.1%
🔴	bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	773	0.472	128,479/147,871/147,871 us	🔴 +7.7% / 🔴 +37.7%
⚪	bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	899	0.549	1,118,302/1,141,541/1,141,541 us	⚪ within ±5% / 🔴 +14.1%

Baseline details

Latest main f319f04 from same runner

config	metric	PR	latest main	7d avg	Δ latest	Δ 7d
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	throughput	355 tuples/sec	381 tuples/sec	786.12 tuples/sec	-6.8%	-54.8%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	MB/s	0.217 MB/s	0.233 MB/s	0.48 MB/s	-6.9%	-54.8%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	p50	27,233 us	26,420 us	12,305 us	+3.1%	+121.3%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	p95	40,392 us	40,240 us	15,774 us	+0.4%	+156.1%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	p99	40,392 us	40,240 us	18,978 us	+0.4%	+112.8%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	throughput	773 tuples/sec	805 tuples/sec	999.71 tuples/sec	-4.0%	-22.7%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	MB/s	0.472 MB/s	0.492 MB/s	0.61 MB/s	-4.1%	-22.6%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	p50	128,479 us	119,275 us	100,616 us	+7.7%	+27.7%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	p95	147,871 us	159,297 us	107,356 us	-7.2%	+37.7%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	p99	147,871 us	159,297 us	113,255 us	-7.2%	+30.6%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	throughput	899 tuples/sec	901 tuples/sec	1,031 tuples/sec	-0.2%	-12.8%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	MB/s	0.549 MB/s	0.55 MB/s	0.63 MB/s	-0.2%	-12.8%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	p50	1,118,302 us	1,115,693 us	980,328 us	+0.2%	+14.1%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	p95	1,141,541 us	1,137,231 us	1,027,528 us	+0.4%	+11.1%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	p99	1,141,541 us	1,137,231 us	1,054,298 us	+0.4%	+8.3%

Raw CSV

config_idx,batch_size,schema_width,string_len,num_batches,total_ms,total_tuples,total_bytes,tuples_per_sec,mb_per_sec,lat_p50_us,lat_p95_us,lat_p99_us
0,10,10,64,20,563.35,200,128000,355,0.217,27233.03,40391.88,40391.88
1,100,10,64,20,2587.37,2000,1280000,773,0.472,128478.97,147871.16,147871.16
2,1000,10,64,20,22236.99,20000,12800000,899,0.549,1118302.28,1141540.86,1141540.86