-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 325
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
Shanghai Planning #450
Comments
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
Yes! For future reference, the most up to date place for potential EIPs is https://github.com/ethereum/pm/issues. The comment quoted above will be out of date fairly quickly as we start planning Shanghai. |
Is the proposal to do all four of them in one fork? |
It's not necessary to do them all in one fork, @holiman , depending on how crowded the forks get and how long between forks. There was talk last year of having one fork devoted to the various EVM improvements which have been six years in the making, and all-in-all form a complete, safe and efficient control-flow facility. They make for a big meal, but no bigger than EIP-615 was. A reasonable order of inclusion would be as follows. These are essential for most of the remainder.
These provide static jumps and subroutines. EIP-4200 does not depend on EIP-2315. This specifies additional validation to constrain JUMP, JUMPI , static jumps and subroutines -- thus providing a higher level of safety than promised by EIP-615. It depends on the object format, validation, static jumps, and subroutines.
This is in early design stage. It provides multiple code sections, procedures with defined interfaces, and a frame stack for disciplined use of memory.
And these are independent of the others, and can be included independently. |
In ACD131, we discussed a large number of proposals for Shanghai and asked client teams for their general priorities. EIPs 3540, 3670 and 3860 were considered high priority and moved to CFI for Shanghai (PR). Beyond these, any change that could benefit Ethereum's scalability was considered high priority. The main options now are either the introduction of blob-carrying transactions or, if too complex, EIP-4488-style CALLDATA cost reduction. Additionally, an EIP to specify Beacon Chain withdrawals is expected soon. |
On ACD133, we agreed to move EIP-3651 to CFI for Shanghai. Commit: ethereum/execution-specs@ded8ebe |
I'd like to discuss specifically moving EIP-1153 to CFI in ACD 135 for the reasons:
|
To save some time, here are my thoughts around EIP-1153
|
After ACD135, client teams agreed to hold off considering new CFI EIPs until we are farther along in the merge work, see here |
Also EIP-4844 (Shard Blob Transactions) |
When will you upgrade in Shanghai? When can eth be extracted? |
What's do you mean extracted ?, withdraw ? |
See my thoughts about async planning here https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/shanghai-core-eip-consideration/10777 |
Also EIP-3074 |
Is Shanghai upgrades includes "Surge" / "Sharding" upgrades ? or between Merge and Surge ? @timbeiko |
@solomontan88 - I believe he means staked ETH. Thanks |
Shanghai is in the very early stages of planning with the scope of the changes getting into the HF still to be discussed, see the Magicians thread linked by Tim above, so there is no timeline on this yet. I guess it's safe to say that the Shanghai hardfork won't happen this year any more, also that it is somewhat likely that it will happen sometime next year. |
I'd like to discuss moving EIP-4844 to CFI in ACD 150 (Nov 24) for the reasons:
|
On ACD150, we moved the following EIPs to CFI:
PR: ethereum/execution-specs#656 On ACD149, we moved 1153 to CFI. |
On ACD151, the scope for Shanghai was finalized, see: ethereum/execution-specs#663 |
just expect! |
Update: Shanghai will go live on Sepolia on Tuesday, February 28, 2023 4:04:48 AM UTC |
Given we are now moving to testnets, I'll close this planning-related issue. |
Sept 19, 2022 Update
We discussed this issue on #616 and agreed to move forward with the process detailed here while ACD/CL calls are paused.
Original Issue Text
Using this issue to keep track about conversations related to Shanghai planning.
First discussed on ACD129, prompted by this comment:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: