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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

chore(libzkp): upgrade to v0.9.13, support next hard fork transition #693

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Apr 8, 2024
Merged

chore(libzkp): upgrade to v0.9.13, support next hard fork transition #693

merged 5 commits into from
Apr 8, 2024

Conversation

lispc
Copy link

@lispc lispc commented Apr 7, 2024 •
edited by Thegaram
Loading

1. Purpose or design rationale of this PR

...

2. PR title

Your PR title must follow conventional commits (as we are doing squash merge for each PR), so it must start with one of the following types:

  • build: Changes that affect the build system or external dependencies (example scopes: yarn, eslint, typescript)
  • ci: Changes to our CI configuration files and scripts (example scopes: vercel, github, cypress)
  • docs: Documentation-only changes
  • feat: A new feature
  • fix: A bug fix
  • perf: A code change that improves performance
  • refactor: A code change that doesn't fix a bug, or add a feature, or improves performance
  • style: Changes that do not affect the meaning of the code (white-space, formatting, missing semi-colons, etc)
  • test: Adding missing tests or correcting existing tests

3. Deployment tag versioning

Has the version in params/version.go been updated?

  • This PR doesn't involve a new deployment, git tag, docker image tag, and it doesn't affect traces
  • Yes

4. Breaking change label

Does this PR have the breaking-change label?

  • This PR is not a breaking change
  • Yes

Thegaram
Thegaram previously approved these changes Apr 7, 2024
View reviewed changes
rollup/circuitcapacitychecker/libzkp/Cargo.toml Show resolved Hide resolved
colinlyguo
colinlyguo previously approved these changes Apr 7, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@colinlyguo colinlyguo left a comment •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

So we can merge this PR instead of #691?
looks like there will be a 0.10.x upgrade next.

@0xmountaintop
Copy link
Member

0xmountaintop commented Apr 8, 2024 •
edited
Loading

conclusion:

  1. v0.9.13 will not reject "sha256 treated as invalid op" (same behavior before hard fork)
  2. v0.9.13 will reject "sha256 treated as valid op" (dropped from txpool) (valid tx after hard fork but we drop it temporarily)
  3. then we upgrade to v0.10.0 after the fork
  4. both this PR and feat(libzkp): ccc v0.10.2 (enable sha256, remove StructLog.stack) #691 's c1fc87d are related to sha-256 but fix different things. this PR fixes the transition, feat(libzkp): ccc v0.10.2 (enable sha256, remove StructLog.stack) #691 fixes the overestimation and in feat(libzkp): ccc v0.10.2 (enable sha256, remove StructLog.stack) #691 we need to upgrade the circuits

@Thegaram Thegaram dismissed stale reviews from colinlyguo and themself via c129fe8 April 8, 2024 02:55
Thegaram
Thegaram previously approved these changes Apr 8, 2024
View reviewed changes
0xmountaintop
0xmountaintop previously approved these changes Apr 8, 2024
View reviewed changes
@github-actions github-actions bot dismissed stale reviews from 0xmountaintop and Thegaram via a7edc52 April 8, 2024 02:56
@0xmountaintop 0xmountaintop merged commit d0ff839 into develop Apr 8, 2024
7 checks passed
@0xmountaintop 0xmountaintop deleted the chore/libzkp-v0.9.13-sha256 branch April 8, 2024 03:09
@0xmountaintop 0xmountaintop mentioned this pull request Apr 10, 2024
Merged
3 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@0xmountaintop 0xmountaintop 0xmountaintop approved these changes

@Thegaram Thegaram Thegaram approved these changes

@colinlyguo colinlyguo colinlyguo left review comments

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@lispc @0xmountaintop @Thegaram @colinlyguo