-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 47
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
Polkadot update v0.9.42 #1337
Polkadot update v0.9.42 #1337
Conversation
7efc53d
to
598e7d8
Compare
c64f36f
to
e51081d
Compare
0cde9df
to
6c81611
Compare
6c81611
to
bf1aee8
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.
Looks actually good to me, I don't know how the CI error can occur yet.
I see these errors in the log, seem to be new: see M6 offchain test |
started testing manually: locally with SW mode and skip-ra: https://hackmd.io/@brenzi5/HJ8Y2Sr5n
|
seems like our integritee-node is notcompatible with rpc behavior of api-client polkadot-0.9.42-tag-1.10 therefore, integritee-service thinks that extrinsics fail when they don't and block hashes are wrong (wrong hash is fixed with next commit) not sure if this could help: |
"enclave count is {} for previous block 0x{:?}", | ||
enclave_count_of_previous_block, | ||
register_enclave_xt_header.parent_hash() | ||
); | ||
Ok(enclave_count_of_previous_block == 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 really don't get the logic of this. It's here for a while already: why so complicated?
why check that enclave count was zero in the previous block when we can check that it is 1 in the current block?
I didn't touch it beyond logging because we'll kick that out anyway and replace it with per-shard ShardStatus logic
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 have no idea actually.
I reproduced sending a transfer extrinsic with an api-client example and the successful jsnrpc log looks like this:
I will now gather the same type of log for the failing case here |
ok. our issue was scs/substrate-api-client#624 |
back to square one:
|
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.
Cool, I have revisited the PR, and I think it is ready when the CI says so! 🥳
"enclave count is {} for previous block 0x{:?}", | ||
enclave_count_of_previous_block, | ||
register_enclave_xt_header.parent_hash() | ||
); | ||
Ok(enclave_count_of_previous_block == 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 have no idea actually.
I will merge it, as the instability has been noted before and does not have to do with this PR, see #1403 |
Required PRs to be merged / issues to be solved first:
Closes #1303.
Closes #1379.