core/txpool, eth/catalyst: fix racey simulator due to txpool background reset #28837
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
karalabe
requested review from
gballet,
holiman and
rjl493456442
as code owners
MariusVanDerWijden
approved these changes
Jan 19, 2024
lightclient
approved these changes
Jan 21, 2024
Co-authored-by: lightclient <14004106+lightclient@users.noreply.github.com>
holiman
force-pushed
the
sim-tx-lockstep
branch
from
8e94e14
to
3a73fb6
Compare
Dergarcon
pushed a commit
to specialmechanisms/mev-geth-0x2mev
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 31, 2024
…d reset (ethereum#28837) This PR fixes an issues in the new simulated backend. The root cause is the fact that the transaction pool has an internal reset operation that runs on a background thread. When a new transaction is added to the pool via the RPC, the transaction is added to a non-executable queue and will be moved to its final location on a background thread. If the machine is overloaded (or simply due to timing issues), it can happen that the simulated backend will try to produce the next block, whilst the pool has not yet marked the newly added transaction executable. This will cause the block to not contain the transaction. This is an issue because we want determinism from the simulator: add a tx, mine a block. It should be in there. The PR fixes it by adding a Sync function to the txpool, which waits for the current reset operation (if any) to finish, and then runs an entire round of reset on top. The new round is needed because resets are only triggered by new head events, so newly added transactions will not trigger the outer resets that we can wait on. The transaction pool would eventually internally do a reset even on transaction addition, but there's no easy way to wait on that and there's no meaningful reason to bubble that across everything. A clean outer reset will at worse be a small noop goroutine.
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.
This PR fixes an issues in the new simulated backend. The root cause is the fact that the transaction pool has an internal reset operation that runs on a background thread.
When a new transaction is added to the pool via the RPC, the transaction is added to a non-executable queue and will be moved to its final location on a background thread. If the machine is overloaded (or simply due to timing issues), it can happen that the simulated backend will try to produce the next block, whilst the pool has not yet marked the newly added transaction executable. This will cause the block to not contain the transaction. This is an issue because we want determinism from the simulator: add a tx, mine a block. It should be in there.
The PR fixes it by adding a Sync function to the txpool, which waits for the current reset operation (if any) to finish, and then runs an entire round of reset on top. The new round is needed because resets are only triggered by new head events, so newly added transactions will not trigger the outer resets that we can wait on. The transaction pool would eventually internally do a reset even on transaction addition, but there's no easy way to wait on that and there's no meaningful reason to bubble that across everything. A clean outer reset will at worse be a small noop goroutine.