v1.1.6 field/method renaming #2853
Closed
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Tagged as "do not merge" until we figure out how we're handling kintsugi-v2 vs kintsugi-v3 |
…1.6-rename-coinbase-fields
realbigsean
added
work-in-progress
6 tasks
|
I think we should merge this (via #2822) and let the old |
|
Closing for #2822 |
bors bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 13, 2021
## Issue Addressed Resolves: #2741 Includes: #2853 so that we can get ssz static tests passing here on v1.1.6. If we want to merge that first, we can make this diff slightly smaller ## Proposed Changes - Changes the `justified_epoch` and `finalized_epoch` in the `ProtoArrayNode` each to an `Option<Checkpoint>`. The `Option` is necessary only for the migration, so not ideal. But does allow us to add a default logic to `None` on these fields during the database migration. - Adds a database migration from a legacy fork choice struct to the new one, search for all necessary block roots in fork choice by iterating through blocks in the db. - updates related to ethereum/consensus-specs#2727 - We will have to update the persisted forkchoice to make sure the justified checkpoint stored is correct according to the updated fork choice logic. This boils down to setting the forkchoice store's justified checkpoint to the justified checkpoint of the block that advanced the finalized checkpoint to the current one. - AFAICT there's no migration steps necessary for the update to allow applying attestations from prior blocks, but would appreciate confirmation on that - I updated the consensus spec tests to v1.1.6 here, but they will fail until we also implement the proposer score boost updates. I confirmed that the previously failing scenario `new_finalized_slot_is_justified_checkpoint_ancestor` will now pass after the boost updates, but haven't confirmed _all_ tests will pass because I just quickly stubbed out the proposer boost test scenario formatting. - This PR now also includes proposer boosting ethereum/consensus-specs#2730 ## Additional Info I realized checking justified and finalized roots in fork choice makes it more likely that we trigger this bug: ethereum/consensus-specs#2727 It's possible the combination of justified checkpoint and finalized checkpoint in the forkchoice store is different from in any block in fork choice. So when trying to startup our store's justified checkpoint seems invalid to the rest of fork choice (but it should be valid). When this happens we get an `InvalidBestNode` error and fail to start up. So I'm including that bugfix in this branch. Todo: - [x] Fix fork choice tests - [x] Self review - [x] Add fix for ethereum/consensus-specs#2727 - [x] Rebase onto Kintusgi - [x] Fix `num_active_validators` calculation as @michaelsproul pointed out - [x] Clean up db migrations Co-authored-by: realbigsean <seananderson33@gmail.com>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Issue Addressed
We will probably want a
kintsugi-v2orkintsugi-v3branch before merging these, because these changes are a part of v3ethereum/consensus-specs#2728
ethereum/consensus-specs#2738
Proposed Changes
Rename
coinbasetofee_recipientRename
is_merge_*tois_merge_transition_*Additional Info
Commented out the ssz static merge EF tests because those will fail on v1.1.5 with these changes, they will pass once we start testing against v1.1.6