Correct that they're different layers. Nobody said they were the same mechanism.
But validator quorum instability and cachecoherency anomalies both reduce to the same root problem,distributed agents disagreeing on state ordering with no single source of truth.
You've described the map perfectly. You're just refusing to notice the territory looks the same.
Your distributed consensus abstraction appears to conflate network-level Byzantine fault tolerance with processor-level synchronization semantics. While adversarial node desynchronization may superficially resemble cache-coherency anomalies, the issue is not inherently rooted in memory fencing or instruction-order serialization. Memory barriers operate within shared-memory concurrency domains to enforce deterministic visibility across execution threads, whereas cross-chain consensus orchestration functions within probabilistic distributed-state propagation layers. Consequently, equating validator quorum instability with low-level memory fence violations introduces a categorical mismatch between kernel-space synchronization primitives and decentralized consensus topology.