Samples were taken only when maybe_preempt's cold block happened to fire
in-site, so the interval between the last check and SiteGuard drop was
discarded on every site entry. Measured live on the 24-core box:
22-29us lost per entry, a constant attribution efficiency of ~0.93-0.94,
which under-reported every impact (+83.5% where theory says +100%; the
observed shortfall fits 1/(1-pct*eff)-1 at both 25% and 50%).
SiteGuard enter/drop now call site_transition(): leaving the target site
flushes the pending interval into the ledger (sample-only, never spins,
so safe under no-preempt regions); entering the target site re-arms the
sample clock so pre-site time is never attributed (the symmetric
over-attribution). Winner attribution is factored into attribute(),
shared by the cold check and the flush, with the same interval clamps.
Adds examples/causal_attrib_probe.rs (ground-truth in-site time vs
ledger attribution, the probe that confirmed the leak) and the
site_boundaries_flush_tail regression test (a site entry that never
hits a cold check must still be attributed). Also gates causal_probe
on smarm-causal in Cargo.toml - it never was, so featureless builds
of the examples were broken.
