Replace remaining rmm::cuda_stream_view with cuda::stream_ref

[davidwendt]

Description

One rmm::cuda_stream_view leaked through via crossed merge with #23929 work.

Checklist

• I am familiar with the Contributing Guidelines.
• New or existing tests cover these changes.
• The documentation is up to date with these changes.

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Enterprise

Run ID: a774e97f-6111-40e5-a75a-32d84c24a5de

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 4868806 and a964431.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• cpp/src/io/parquet/reader_impl_dict_transcode.cu

Included review availability: Your plan provides up to 12 included reviews per hour; 11 remain after this review.

---

📝 Summary

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Refactor
  • Updated internal stream handling for Parquet dictionary index remapping without changing its behavior.

Walkthrough

The Parquet dictionary remapping function now accepts cuda::stream_ref instead of the deprecated rmm::cuda_stream_view. Its remapping behavior is unchanged.

Changes

Parquet reader update

Layer / File(s)	Summary
CUDA stream parameter update cpp/src/io/parquet/reader_impl_dict_transcode.cu	The function signature uses cuda::stream_ref instead of rmm::cuda_stream_view.

Priority: ⬇️ Low

Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~2 minutes

Change: Refactor

Merge Risk: ⚪ Minimal · up to a9644

This localized type migration does not change remapping behavior or introduce a merge-blocking risk.

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5

✅ Passed checks (5 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Title check	✅ Passed	The title clearly identifies the main change: replacing the remaining rmm::cuda_stream_view usage with cuda::stream_ref.
Description check	✅ Passed	The description directly explains the remaining rmm::cuda_stream_view usage and relates it to the pull request changes.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	Docstring coverage is 100.00% which is sufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%. Docstring coverage is scoped to functions touched by this diff. Analyzed 1 functions across 1 files.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests

---

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}

[bdice]

Please retarget to 26.10 if the other PR landed there.

[davidwendt]

The code is correct in 26.10 so looks like we are blocked by the forward-merger conflict somewhere.

[davidwendt]

The change is in blocked in here #24133