Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

add proposer index to BeaconBlock #1626

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Mar 10, 2020
Merged

add proposer index to BeaconBlock #1626

merged 2 commits into from Mar 10, 2020

Conversation

djrtwo
Copy link
Contributor

@djrtwo djrtwo commented Feb 18, 2020

Addresses #1601

  • add proposer_index to BeaconBlock and BeaconBlockHeader
  • remove proposer_index from ProposerSlashing and instead assert that both headers have same proposer index
  • add and modify tests

Comment from @protolambda below copied here for visibility

LGTM, happy to see this! It will make cases that trust block-roots, but are unaware of the state, aware of proposers. This is good for tooling/bridges/etc.

Note for implementers though: careful, don't trust blocks blindly, follow spec and verify the proposer index.

@djrtwo djrtwo requested a review from protolambda Feb 18, 2020
Copy link
Collaborator

@protolambda protolambda left a comment

Did an initial pass and it looks good. It's a substantial change however, so I like to do a second pass, check if there are more cases where we need to change things. And think about edge-cases like the genesis latest-header proposer index.

@djrtwo
Copy link
Contributor Author

djrtwo commented Feb 18, 2020

Sounds good. Added a couple of additional sanity block tests to cover the combinations on how the index might be messed up

@hwwhww
Copy link
Contributor

hwwhww commented Feb 20, 2020

def process_randao(state: BeaconState, body: BeaconBlockBody) -> None:
    epoch = get_current_epoch(state)
    # Verify RANDAO reveal
    proposer = state.validators[get_beacon_proposer_index(state)]
    ...

could be refactored to

def process_randao(state: BeaconState, block: BeaconBlock) -> None:
    epoch = get_current_epoch(state)
    # Verify RANDAO reveal
    proposer = block.proposer_index
    randao_reveal = block.body.randao_reveal
    ...

@djrtwo
Copy link
Contributor Author

djrtwo commented Feb 27, 2020

@hwwhww I decided to make the changes minimally invasive and to only check that the specified proposer index in the block matches the expected in state once process_block_header. Otherwise to keep everything to same.

One place that could also be refactored is process_attestation, but this would involve changing the function signature.

Since proposer shuffling lookup will almost certainly be memoized, this is safe and doesn't really add a cost to processing

Copy link
Collaborator

@protolambda protolambda left a comment

LGTM, happy to see this! It will make cases that trust block-roots, but are unaware of the state, aware of proposers. This is good for tooling/bridges/etc.

Note for implementers though: careful, don't trust blocks blindly, follow spec and verify the proposer index.

hwwhww
hwwhww approved these changes Mar 10, 2020
Copy link
Contributor

@hwwhww hwwhww left a comment

Agreed with minimal changes here and the clients can still optimize it if they want.
LGTM!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants