Skip to content
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

fix(isthmus): include storage updates in l2 withdrawals root computation #14307

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 14, 2025

Conversation

emhane
Copy link
Member

@emhane emhane commented Feb 7, 2025

No description provided.

@emhane emhane added C-bug An unexpected or incorrect behavior A-block-building Related to block building A-op-reth Related to Optimism and op-reth labels Feb 7, 2025
Copy link
Collaborator

@mattsse mattsse left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

this seems right, but would like another review from
@shekhirin or @rkrasiuk

Copy link
Member

@rkrasiuk rkrasiuk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

otherwise lgtm

Comment on lines +393 to +396
Some(state.database.as_ref().storage_root(
ADDRESS_L2_TO_L1_MESSAGE_PASSER,
hashed_storage_updates.unwrap_or_default(),
)?)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

this most likely does redundant IO because we might traverse this path during state root computation. please, leave a comment saying this. the proper way would be to include state_root in the MultiProof struct and call state_provider.multiproof with the target instead of state_provider.root when sealing a block

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

opened an issue #14492

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

thank you @rkrasiuk !

@emhane emhane added this pull request to the merge queue Feb 14, 2025
@rkrasiuk rkrasiuk removed this pull request from the merge queue due to a manual request Feb 14, 2025
@rkrasiuk rkrasiuk mentioned this pull request Feb 14, 2025
@rkrasiuk rkrasiuk added this pull request to the merge queue Feb 14, 2025
Merged via the queue into main with commit 1c09351 Feb 14, 2025
45 checks passed
@rkrasiuk rkrasiuk deleted the emhane/build-withdrawals-root branch February 14, 2025 12:24
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
A-block-building Related to block building A-op-reth Related to Optimism and op-reth C-bug An unexpected or incorrect behavior
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants