-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.8k
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
Update evmc
to 12.0.0
and evmone
to 0.12.0
#15320
Conversation
evmc
to 12.0.0
and evmone
to 0.12.0`evmc
to 12.0.0
and evmone
to 0.12.0
Thank you for your contribution to the Solidity compiler! A team member will follow up shortly. If you haven't read our contributing guidelines and our review checklist before, please do it now, this makes the reviewing process and accepting your contribution smoother. If you have any questions or need our help, feel free to post them in the PR or talk to us directly on the #solidity-dev channel on Matrix. |
d0c2549
to
7e91b78
Compare
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.
Hey @rodiazet can you please revert all of the dockerfile changes in docker/buildpack-deps
? These need to be in a separate PR (which I've already opened), as this is where the artifacts are built; once said artifacts are build in my PR, then you'll need to get the hashes from said new artifacts and apply them in to the CircleCI config.yml
(in this PR). See our previous bump PR #14758
7e91b78
to
c06af9f
Compare
@@ -112,7 +112,7 @@ then | |||
rm -rf "$z3_dir" | |||
|
|||
# evmone | |||
evmone_version="0.11.0" | |||
evmone_version="0.12.0" |
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.
The checksum below needs to be updated as well. See line 133: https://github.com/ethereum/solidity/pull/15320/files#diff-95c60f439bb8a5efd25627b6a7c2b37310e42d8bd13e1cdb369fd3af41e88ea7R133
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 just checked the evmone repository and it seems that they don't ship darwin-x86_64
anymore, since version 0.12.0
. In this case, as they are shipping arm64
now (https://github.com/ethereum/evmone/releases/) we can remove the if
below and update the checksum accordingly.
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.
Ah, great catch. @rodiazet can you please update?
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.
How did it even pass CI with the current checksum though? If we're not running CI on intel macs any more and not executing this bit, perhaps it's better to just remove it?
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're ARM only (M1), so it was hitting the first branch and building from sources - the else branch is dead, and should be removed as @r0qs suggested. Or rather, the else branch should become the new standard and simply unpack from the tar.gz, since these are now available for ARM.
What I'm curious about is this. What does b_bytecode_osx_intel-via-ir-optimize
even do, since we're running on ARM only? I assume this step should be renamed.
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.
Done
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.
What I'm curious about is this. What does
b_bytecode_osx_intel-via-ir-optimize
even do, since we're running on ARM only? I assume this step should be renamed.
No, we have a universal binary, which contains both ARM and Intel code in one package. This this step is testing that the Intel part works too. But IIRC it still runs on ARM and just runs under emulation.
Would not hurt to have a comment saying that next to the job though. We should be leaving more of such comments with extra context really.
Heya @rodiazet, we finally managed to bump the docker images to evmone12, but unfortunately, not all of them, since the ossfuzz images is causing problems - we therefore decided to leave said images as is (with evmone11), and to bump the rest of them. You can now bump the hashes in the Ping if you need help :) |
008bdd7
to
9286908
Compare
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.
👍
9286908
to
1006992
Compare
3c67d5f
to
6f548be
Compare
1006992
to
d130d64
Compare
@@ -112,7 +112,7 @@ then | |||
rm -rf "$z3_dir" | |||
|
|||
# evmone | |||
evmone_version="0.11.0" | |||
evmone_version="0.12.0" |
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 just checked the evmone repository and it seems that they don't ship darwin-x86_64
anymore, since version 0.12.0
. In this case, as they are shipping arm64
now (https://github.com/ethereum/evmone/releases/) we can remove the if
below and update the checksum accordingly.
test/evmc/bytes.hpp
Outdated
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'm assuming the files under test/evmc/
were just straight copied from evmc - or where there any adjustments needed?
BTW, We should really consider replacing this with a submodule soon. We have switched other deps to submodules so this wouldn't even cause the minor hiccups we could expect with such a change in the past.
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'm assuming the files under test/evmc/ were just straight copied from evmc - or where there any adjustments needed?
As always :)
We should really replace this with a submodule soon.
Yes please, but not now.
d130d64
to
fee6b35
Compare
# solbuildpackpusher/solidity-buildpack-deps:ubuntu2004-24 | ||
default: "solbuildpackpusher/solidity-buildpack-deps@sha256:b8b645fa7ab40d55f2d16eac295d16ca01ec51d32be7d668ae6eaecd47dbd763" | ||
# solbuildpackpusher/solidity-buildpack-deps:ubuntu2004-25 | ||
default: "solbuildpackpusher/solidity-buildpack-deps@sha256:b3f321fb2d8e7a41ca9328672061c1840e5cd3fb5be503aa158d1c508deacf0a" | ||
ubuntu-2204-docker-image: | ||
type: string | ||
# solbuildpackpusher/solidity-buildpack-deps:ubuntu2204-9 | ||
default: "solbuildpackpusher/solidity-buildpack-deps@sha256:80247de9655b1f39afd4ac22b14266bc9b9a0d64b283ae8fb9cb5b8250e4e77d" | ||
# solbuildpackpusher/solidity-buildpack-deps:ubuntu2204-10 | ||
default: "solbuildpackpusher/solidity-buildpack-deps@sha256:ba2d878c26d681a7d6c1922258b47c2e5dd61d0e46ab4c6a4862b473e61997b6" |
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 really liked how @r0qs linked to the PRs hashes came from in #15422. It helps a lot when reviewing. We should always be doing that when the update is spread over more than the usual 2 PRs and you can get lost in them. It would have helped to at least link the PR as a dependency in the description.
In this case:
ubuntu2204-10
: Bump evmone to v0.12.0 and add ubuntu2404 image #15321 (comment)ubuntu2004-25
: Bump evmone to v0.12.0 and add ubuntu2404 image #15321 (comment)ubuntu2204.clang-9
: Bump evmone to v0.12.0 and add ubuntu2404 image #15321 (comment)
6a6de79
to
890ad92
Compare
890ad92
to
1d58415
Compare
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.
LGTM. Thanks @rodiazet :D
Depends on #15422