paranoid underflow protection without error handling #14044
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
terencechain
approved these changes
May 23, 2024
github-merge-queue
bot
removed this pull request from the merge queue due to no response for status checks
prestonvanloon
approved these changes
May 23, 2024
prestonvanloon
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 31, 2024
Co-authored-by: Kasey Kirkham <kasey@users.noreply.github.com> (cherry picked from commit 62b5c43)
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Another "not a bug, yet" change. I found this commit in a branch on my laptop. I meant to commit it in the PR where these blob request filtering methods were added but it got left out. Essentially I want to add this additional option for avoiding slot underflows, because it's good to be paranoid and prevent panics when subtracting slots, but it's also silly to have to handle errors when the underflow should be impossible based on other invariants. In this case the list of blocks has to be sorted by slot by p2p validation rules, so we should never fool the request bound calculation into picking a high slot lower than low slot, but this change makes sure that if some bug is introduced that breaks that invariant we at least won't panic.
What type of PR is this?
Bug fix