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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
Implement and add changes for EIPs 7002, 6110, 7685 #10533
Implement and add changes for EIPs 7002, 6110, 7685 #10533
Changes from all commits
d47a1d3
c22dfe5
20974ec
a3a44f9
e1dc205
11b95f4
76500ae
5d28a3e
2dcd6f3
7c91c32
2875ee2
937e48a
8565fa2
a6ff6f5
3ff3ffa
0d69887
f5c7385
75c2aca
310209c
55e3d20
8c1cf53
96a47b2
d40d970
d475907
0e0f083
6bd8c31
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We probably need a similar check for withdrawal requests - see https://discord.com/channels/595666850260713488/892088344438255616/1247841586147229696
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Withdrawal request validations are done at the smart contract itself, so
dequeue
would get out the exact set of withdrawals.Deposits are obtained from logs, which happens outside of EVM and in the above lines, and must be checked.
However, this check is already embedded with checking the
requestsRoot
as there is no scenario in which a different set of deposits passed in would lead to the samerequestsRoot
.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I still don't understand why there should be a difference between deposit and withdrawal requests in terms of checks. At the end of a block expected deposit requests are calculated by
ParseDepositLogs(logs)
, while withdrawal requests are calculated byDequeueWithdrawalRequests7002(syscall)
. If we rely solely on the*header.RequestsRoot != rh
check for withdrawal requests, then we should do the same for deposit ones and remove the!reflect.DeepEqual(sds, ds.Deposits())
check.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, I will add the
DeepEqual
check forwithdrawal_requests
in a later PR - under the assumption that there can be other request types in future.Alternatively, until there is another type of request introduced, we can remove this check altogether and rely on
block.HashCheck()
combined with the root check above