all: implement EIP-6110, execution layer triggered deposits #29431
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
|
We added some logics in downloader when we introduce |
core/types/block.go
Outdated
| if deposits == nil { | ||
| b.header.DepositsHash = nil | ||
| } else if len(deposits) == 0 { | ||
| b.header.DepositsHash = &EmptyWithdrawalsHash |
core/types/block.go
Outdated
| b = b.WithWithdrawals(withdrawals) | ||
|
|
||
| // TODO(matt): copy this | ||
| b.deposits = deposits |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
e.g. b.deposits = slices.Clone(deposits) ?
lightclient
force-pushed
the
eip-6110
branch
3 times, most recently
from
b6ebd84
to
e86bac2
Compare
lightclient
force-pushed
the
eip-6110
branch
4 times, most recently
from
e4446bb
to
7a41242
Compare
|
We need to allow prague in fcuV3 as well |
lightclient
force-pushed
the
eip-6110
branch
8 times, most recently
from
e942406
to
8ea1e62
Compare
lightclient
force-pushed
the
eip-6110
branch
2 times, most recently
from
e631d4c
to
fc447bb
Compare
lightclient
requested review from
fjl,
s1na,
gballet and
karalabe
as code owners
lightclient
force-pushed
the
eip-6110
branch
3 times, most recently
from
f1e9ed7
to
517c2d9
Compare
|
I like the handwritten decoder much better, I did a bunch of fuzzing of the types and nothing came up, but I haven't verified that the decoding is_actually_ correct |
rjl493456442
reviewed
Aug 1, 2024
| if header.RequestsHash != nil { | ||
| depositSha := types.DeriveSha(res.Requests, trie.NewStackTrie(nil)) | ||
| if depositSha != *header.RequestsHash { | ||
| return fmt.Errorf("invalid deposit root hash (remote: %x local: %x)", *header.RequestsHash, depositSha) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Perhaps invalid request root?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
and also please change the var name to requestSha
holiman
reviewed
Aug 1, 2024
lightclient
force-pushed
the
eip-6110
branch
2 times, most recently
from
a2df8b2
to
94ea9c8
Compare
|
I think there's a missing validation in fyi prague := chain.Config().IsPrague(header.Number, header.Time)
if !prague {
if header.RequestsHash != nil {
return fmt.Errorf("invalid requestsRoot: have %d, expected nil", header.RequestsHash)
}
} else {
if header.RequestsHash == nil {
return errors.New("header is missing requestsRoot")
}
} |
… 6110 deposit type
lightclient
force-pushed
the
eip-6110
branch
from
94ea9c8
to
ed290cd
Compare
|
@islishude that occurs in |
it doesn't have a validation for the chain fork rule |
islishude
reviewed
Sep 4, 2024
lightclient
force-pushed
the
eip-6110
branch
from
ed290cd
to
eff58ff
Compare
lightclient
force-pushed
the
eip-6110
branch
from
eff58ff
to
0fc2c72
Compare
This was referenced Sep 12, 2024
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 implements EIP-6110: Supply validator deposits on chain. It also sketches out the base for Prague in the engine API types. I plan to base future Prague EIP work against this PR.