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

feat: implement challenger proving fault with zkVM proof #386

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Nov 5, 2024

Conversation

seolaoh
Copy link
Contributor

@seolaoh seolaoh commented Oct 28, 2024

Description

Implemented challenger to prove fault with zkVM proof for outputs after Kroma MPT time. There are some changes to the validator flags like below.

  • Changed Flags
    • VALIDATOR_CHALLENGER_POLL_INTERVAL [REQUIRED] -> VALIDATOR_CHALLENGE_POLL_INTERVAL [OPTIONAL]
    • VALIDATOR_PROVER_RPC [OPTIONAL] -> VALIDATOR_CHALLENGER_ZKEVM_PROVER_RPC [OPTIONAL]
    • VALIDATOR_FETCHING_PROOF_TIMEOUT [OPTIONAL] -> VALIDATOR_CHALLENGER_ZKEVM_NETWORK_TIMEOUT [OPTIONAL]
  • Added Flags
    • VALIDATOR_CHALLENGER_ZKVM_PROVER_RPC [OPTIONAL]
    • VALIDATOR_CHALLENGER_WITNESS_GENERATOR_RPC [OPTIONAL]

@seolaoh seolaoh self-assigned this Oct 28, 2024
@seolaoh seolaoh requested review from a team as code owners October 28, 2024 05:42
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Oct 28, 2024

Important

Review skipped

Auto reviews are disabled on base/target branches other than the default branch.

🗂️ Base branches to auto review (2)
  • dev
  • main

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.


Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

@seolaoh seolaoh force-pushed the feat/challenger-zkvm-proving branch from 3c9fe21 to ef26c20 Compare October 29, 2024 05:02
@seolaoh seolaoh force-pushed the feat/challenger-zkvm-proving branch from ef26c20 to bb39b82 Compare October 31, 2024 04:26
if err != nil {
return nil, fmt.Errorf("failed to fetch proof and pair(fault position blockNumber: %d): %w", targetBlockNumber.Uint64(), err)
}
proofResult, err := c.cfg.ZkVMProofFetcher.GetProof(ctx, blockHash, l1Head)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can't the zkVM prof response take a long time?
If the proof fetch timeout occurs, it will repeat the request again from witness.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@seolaoh seolaoh Nov 1, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

No, now challenger does not have to wait for the prover response with maintaining HTTP connection. Since the prover JSON-RPC interface has been changed like this, challenger can just send request and then continuously fetch the status of request processing. You can see the reflected changes of challenger logic in the code!

Copy link
Contributor

@kangsorang kangsorang left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

Copy link
Contributor

@0xbenyun 0xbenyun left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

Copy link
Contributor

@sm-stack sm-stack left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Could you also update the gas snapshot result?

kroma-validator/challenge/client.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
kroma-validator/challenger.go Show resolved Hide resolved
@seolaoh seolaoh requested a review from Pangssu November 4, 2024 12:17
@seolaoh seolaoh merged commit fa2f566 into feat/zkvm-fault-proof Nov 5, 2024
2 checks passed
@seolaoh seolaoh deleted the feat/challenger-zkvm-proving branch November 5, 2024 05:54
seolaoh added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 8, 2024
* feat(contracts): revive `getChallenge` method of `Colosseum`

* feat(validator): prove fault with witness generator, zkVM prover

* feat: verify zkVM program verification key

* fix: launch kroma-challenger in devnet

* chore(contracts): update bindings and snapshot

* feat: use rpc client for proof fetcher, witness generator
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 this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants