EIP-6110: Supply validator deposits on chain #13944
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
james-prysm
commented
May 2, 2024
| if uint64(len(body.Deposits())) != maxDeposits { | ||
| return nil, fmt.Errorf("incorrect outstanding deposits in block body, wanted: %d, got: %d", | ||
| maxDeposits, len(body.Deposits())) | ||
| if len(body.Deposits()) != 0 { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
double check as this is changing existing logic or if I need to handle it in a fork specific way
james-prysm
commented
May 3, 2024
james-prysm
commented
May 3, 2024
|
don't forget about this,
|
Co-authored-by: Preston Van Loon <pvanloon@offchainlabs.com>
| @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@ go_library( | |||
| "effective_balance_updates.go", | |||
| "registry_updates.go", | |||
| "transition.go", | |||
| "transition_no_verify.sig.go", | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This filename doesn't make sense for what you've added. It should be called operations.go, in my opinion.
If you want to keep it with this pattern please use underscores for the name and avoid a .sig.go suffix
There was a problem hiding this comment.
another good catch was definitely not intentional...
| // for_ops(body.execution_payload.withdrawal_requests, process_execution_layer_withdrawal_request) | ||
| // for_ops(body.execution_payload.deposit_requests, process_deposit_requests) # [New in Electra:EIP6110] | ||
| // for_ops(body.consolidations, process_consolidation) # [New in Electra:EIP7251] | ||
| func Operations( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| func Operations( | |
| func ProcessOperations( |
This name is more appropriate imo
| return nil, errors.Wrap(err, "could not process deposit receipts") | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // TODO: Process consolidations from execution header. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'll have this ready for review today 💪
Comment on lines
159
to
195
| // AddValidatorToRegistry updates the beacon state with validator information | ||
| // def add_validator_to_registry(state: BeaconState, | ||
| // | ||
| // pubkey: BLSPubkey, | ||
| // withdrawal_credentials: Bytes32, | ||
| // amount: uint64) -> None: | ||
| // index = get_index_for_new_validator(state) | ||
| // validator = get_validator_from_deposit(pubkey, withdrawal_credentials) | ||
| // set_or_append_list(state.validators, index, validator) | ||
| // set_or_append_list(state.balances, index, 0) # [Modified in Electra:EIP7251] | ||
| // set_or_append_list(state.previous_epoch_participation, index, ParticipationFlags(0b0000_0000)) | ||
| // set_or_append_list(state.current_epoch_participation, index, ParticipationFlags(0b0000_0000)) | ||
| // set_or_append_list(state.inactivity_scores, index, uint64(0)) | ||
| // state.pending_balance_deposits.append(PendingBalanceDeposit(index=index, amount=amount)) # [New in Electra:EIP7251] | ||
| func AddValidatorToRegistry(beaconState state.BeaconState, pubKey []byte, withdrawalCredentials []byte, amount uint64) error { | ||
| val := GetValidatorFromDeposit(pubKey, withdrawalCredentials) | ||
| if err := beaconState.AppendValidator(val); err != nil { | ||
| return err | ||
| } | ||
| index, ok := beaconState.ValidatorIndexByPubkey(bytesutil.ToBytes48(pubKey)) | ||
| if !ok { | ||
| return errors.New("could not find validator in registry") | ||
| } | ||
| if err := beaconState.AppendBalance(0); err != nil { | ||
| return err | ||
| } | ||
| if err := beaconState.AppendPendingBalanceDeposit(index, amount); err != nil { | ||
| return err | ||
| } | ||
| if err := beaconState.AppendInactivityScore(0); err != nil { | ||
| return err | ||
| } | ||
| if err := beaconState.AppendPreviousParticipationBits(0); err != nil { | ||
| return err | ||
| } | ||
| return beaconState.AppendCurrentParticipationBits(0) | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Shouldn't this go in the validator file?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I can move it, i think it's only used in deposits though
| // effective_balance=0, # [Modified in Electra:EIP7251] | ||
| // | ||
| // ) | ||
| func GetValidatorFromDeposit(pubKey []byte, withdrawalCredentials []byte) *ethpb.Validator { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| func GetValidatorFromDeposit(pubKey []byte, withdrawalCredentials []byte) *ethpb.Validator { | |
| func ValidatorFromDeposit(pubKey []byte, withdrawalCredentials []byte) *ethpb.Validator { |
Please use idiomatic go, avoid Get prefix
james-prysm
commented
Jun 28, 2024
prestonvanloon
previously approved these changes
Jun 28, 2024
prestonvanloon
approved these changes
Jun 29, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
What type of PR is this?
Feature
What does this PR do? Why is it needed?
implements eip6110 as defined in https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-6110
TODO
adds spec testsspec tests need to be updated in future PR for devnet1Which issues(s) does this PR fix?
Other notes for review
related PR: #13943