No prescriptions are issued. The Market-fit agent surfaced gap_count = 0 in-domain gaps: every devops_sre skill the market demands at ≥ 30% frequency (Docker 100%, Bash 100%, Git 92%, Python 92%, Kubernetes 83%, Linux-admin 83%, Monitoring 83%, CI/CD 75%, Terraform 75%, AWS 75%, Go 67%, GitHub Actions 67%, On-call 67%, Prometheus 67%, Helm 58%, Datadog 58%, Jenkins 50%, Grafana 50%, SLOs/SLIs 50%, Ansible 50%, GitLab CI 42%, ArgoCD 42%, Vault 42%, Incident Response 42%) sits in the modern container / cloud / observability tooling domain that has 0% partial coverage anywhere in the Silberschatz-based slide deck. Under Rule 1 (each prescription must extend a partially-covered topic with a citable slide) and Rule 2 (respect the depth bound, which excludes containers/virtualization internals, distributed systems, and hands-on sysadmin labs), none of these market demands can be legitimately mapped onto an existing slide as an extension — they would each require introducing a wholly new topic into a course whose stated intent is classical OS concepts and algorithm-level reasoning.
These top market prescriptions close 0% of the devops_sre market gap from within this course. This is the honest answer: the gap is a curriculum-design gap (the program lacks a Cloud / Containers / SRE-tooling course), not an in-course gap. Topics that *could* be motivated from existing slide content — e.g., 'orphan reaping' → PID 1 in containers, 'mode bit + privileged instructions' → container/VM isolation, 'demand paging + dirty bit' → cgroup memory pressure, 'semaphores' → distributed locks — are all bridge analogies, not market-demanded skills in their own right; pretending they discharge the Docker/K8s/Terraform/Prometheus demand would be scope drift and is rejected under Rule 3. Recommend the program add a separate 'Cloud Infrastructure & SRE' course rather than overload Operating Systems.