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

Optimize number of gates in folding verifier #849

Closed
ledwards2225 opened this issue Feb 8, 2024 · 0 comments · Fixed by AztecProtocol/aztec-packages#4517
Closed

Optimize number of gates in folding verifier #849

ledwards2225 opened this issue Feb 8, 2024 · 0 comments · Fixed by AztecProtocol/aztec-packages#4517
Assignees

Comments

@ledwards2225
Copy link
Collaborator

No description provided.

@ledwards2225 ledwards2225 self-assigned this Feb 8, 2024
ledwards2225 added a commit to AztecProtocol/aztec-packages that referenced this issue Feb 8, 2024
Updates folding recursive verifier to use batch_mul for optimal goblin
ec op efficiency. This reduces a single recursive verification from 1144
ECC ops to 264. (Note: 264 = 6*44 where 6 is the number of ecc op gate
rows needed for two scalar muls (one for each instance) plus an "equals"
op and 44 is the number of witnesses plus precomputed polys, not
including shifts)

Closes AztecProtocol/barretenberg#849

New benchmark result:
```
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Benchmark                       Time             CPU   Iterations
-----------------------------------------------------------------
IvcBench/Full/6             54156 ms        51691 ms            1
```
Old benchmark result:
```
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Benchmark                       Time             CPU   Iterations
-----------------------------------------------------------------
IvcBench/Full/6             66891 ms        63569 ms            1
```
AztecBot pushed a commit that referenced this issue Feb 9, 2024
Updates folding recursive verifier to use batch_mul for optimal goblin
ec op efficiency. This reduces a single recursive verification from 1144
ECC ops to 264. (Note: 264 = 6*44 where 6 is the number of ecc op gate
rows needed for two scalar muls (one for each instance) plus an "equals"
op and 44 is the number of witnesses plus precomputed polys, not
including shifts)

Closes #849

New benchmark result:
```
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Benchmark                       Time             CPU   Iterations
-----------------------------------------------------------------
IvcBench/Full/6             54156 ms        51691 ms            1
```
Old benchmark result:
```
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Benchmark                       Time             CPU   Iterations
-----------------------------------------------------------------
IvcBench/Full/6             66891 ms        63569 ms            1
```
michaelelliot pushed a commit to Swoir/noir_rs that referenced this issue Feb 28, 2024
…ol#4517)

Updates folding recursive verifier to use batch_mul for optimal goblin
ec op efficiency. This reduces a single recursive verification from 1144
ECC ops to 264. (Note: 264 = 6*44 where 6 is the number of ecc op gate
rows needed for two scalar muls (one for each instance) plus an "equals"
op and 44 is the number of witnesses plus precomputed polys, not
including shifts)

Closes AztecProtocol/barretenberg#849

New benchmark result:
```
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Benchmark                       Time             CPU   Iterations
-----------------------------------------------------------------
IvcBench/Full/6             54156 ms        51691 ms            1
```
Old benchmark result:
```
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Benchmark                       Time             CPU   Iterations
-----------------------------------------------------------------
IvcBench/Full/6             66891 ms        63569 ms            1
```
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant