Add verification tool for evm offchain replay #6755
Conversation
zhangchiqing
changed the base branch from
master
to
leo/add-testcase-for-offchain-evm-backward-compatibilities
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #6755 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 41.17% 41.07% -0.11%
==========================================
Files 2065 2071 +6
Lines 182905 183431 +526
==========================================
+ Hits 75316 75336 +20
- Misses 101284 101794 +510
+ Partials 6305 6301 -4
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
zhangchiqing
force-pushed
the
leo/add-verify-evm-offchain-replay
branch
from
103f257 to
d379a68
Compare
| return nil | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| func parseEVMEvents(evts flow.EventsList) (*events.BlockEventPayload, []events.TransactionEventPayload, error) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This does not seem to handle the case where there was a period that did not have blocks executed events, but did have transaction executed.
The solution is to accumulate the transaction executed events, until you hit the next block executed event.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, it's handled by the NewEVMEventsAccumulator module
| return nil | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| func initStorages(chainID flow.ChainID, dataDir string, executionDataDir string) ( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
chain ID is not needed
zhangchiqing
force-pushed
the
leo/add-verify-evm-offchain-replay
branch
2 times, most recently
from
8f6ed3b to
5db925d
Compare
zhangchiqing
force-pushed
the
leo/add-testcase-for-offchain-evm-backward-compatibilities
branch
from
4fe749e to
27c0f3a
Compare
zhangchiqing
force-pushed
the
leo/add-verify-evm-offchain-replay
branch
from
a725780 to
f564161
Compare
zhangchiqing
force-pushed
the
leo/add-testcase-for-offchain-evm-backward-compatibilities
branch
from
27c0f3a to
0cfcb7d
Compare
zhangchiqing
requested review from
janezpodhostnik
and removed request for
Kay-Zee
zhangchiqing
force-pushed
the
leo/add-verify-evm-offchain-replay
branch
from
887419e to
a41e107
Compare
| transactionEvents []events.TransactionEventPayload, | ||
| blockEvent *events.BlockEventPayload, | ||
| ) (types.ReplayResultCollector, error) { | ||
| ) (types.ReplayResultCollector, []*types.Result, error) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Added the result for comparing trie updates, but the original ReplayBlock is unchanged, so that gateway doesn't need to update its usage.
| if chainID == flow.Testnet { | ||
| return flowHeight == 211176670 | ||
| } else if chainID == flow.Mainnet { | ||
| return flowHeight == 85981135 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I believe that the proper Flow Height should be 85981134. This is where the EVM contract was first deployed on mainnet, see https://www.flowscan.io/contract/A.e467b9dd11fa00df.EVM/deployments?deployment=85981134
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This height is used to skip the root height where there is no execution data to read EVM events from.
Technically, you are right, but I can't use 85981134 with mainnet25's data, because 85981134 is a block from mainnet24. And this doesn't matter much as both 85981134 and 85981135 have no EVM events.
It only matters if we are verifying the state change at register level, which is not the case at the moment.
zhangchiqing
force-pushed
the
leo/add-verify-evm-offchain-replay
branch
from
556d903 to
1bdc486
Compare
This PR adds a util cmd for verifying the evm offchain replay.
No API change for gateway.