Holy crap! What an answer!I agree with the general consensus that the motor is fine. However, I thought I'd contribute an engineering explanation of what "break-in" actualy means so you can understand why the motor (probably) wasn't damaged by the rev to redline. There are two main elements to break-in; wearing or conforming mated, moving parts together and work hardening.
When a new motor is assembled many parts that are in physical contact with, such as bearing surfaces, cylinder wall and rings, etc. are not smoothly mated. Even though dimensionally within tolerance there are microscopic high points between the mating surface. These high points are a source of high friction and localized heating of the metals. This can cause damage to the crystaline structure of the metal surface leading to pitting, galling and other problems down the road. As the motor breaks-in these high spots are worn down and mate the surfaces together thus reducing friction. My guess is that 80% of that process is done by 200-300 miles.
The second element of break-in is work hardening of load bearing components. The con rods, crankshaft, bearing structures are under heavy loads at higher RPMs. The design and dimension of these components are based on the strength of the metal after being stressed in use. This process is probably 80% done by 2000-3000 miles but it explains the gradual break-in period. Work hardening takes time in service and as the metal strengthens over time it can then handle more stress (i.e. more RPMs) eventually reaching its design strength.
That said, I think the break-in recommendations are probably overly conservative for a variety of business and engineering reasons. With the high tolerances of modern metal manufacturing, the wear-in period is greatly reduced from 20 years ago but the 1000's of miles rule of thumb still persist like 3000mi oil changes.
On the other hand, the work-hardening period is a gradual process but is probably overly conservative to avoid warranty repairs. What causes a forged or cast part to fail under load is the inclusion of a flaw, a void or dislocation in the crystaline structure of the metal, that limits the stress it can take. However, modern casting and forging techniques have really good control over the source of these flaws so even this problem has been greatly reduced over the past 20 years. But the components in the 'Strom engine haven't been x-rayed and analyzed like a jet engine turbine blade to confirm there are no inclusions in the metal. What Suzuki is trying to avoid is breaking parts that have an inclusion that could have survived if the part was allowed to reached its max strength through work hardening.
I have seen a jet engine mechanics YT channel and they (AgentJayZ) really have high turbine blade standards! This dude.