-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 193
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
Core/v2 #824
Core/v2 #824
Conversation
|
||
operatorCounts := []uint{4} | ||
|
||
numBlob := 1 // must be greater than 0 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
comment from @hopeyen: could we add more tests such as different number of blobs and blobs that would be considered invalid by the verifier?
NumChunks uint32 | ||
} | ||
|
||
func (p BlobVersionParameters) MaxNumOperators() uint32 { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is theoretical max number of operators based on the config, which is different from the max number of operators imposed on contracts. Do we need this method or just use what's on the contracts?
It's problematic if a BlobVersionParameters
is set in a way that allows max # operators smaller than what's configured onchain, so it looks like we already have to make sure the set of parameters allow the max # operators configured onchain when they're added
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Good callout. Since all of this will be on chain, what about having some on-chain checks to ensure consistency when any of these parameters are updated?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That's a good idea. Can you add a quick comment over BlobVersionParameters
that this is supposed to go onchain?
cc @0x0aa0
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Done
core/v2/assignment.go
Outdated
@@ -0,0 +1,123 @@ | |||
package corev2 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
should we just name the package v2
?
core/v2/utils.go
Outdated
@@ -0,0 +1,26 @@ | |||
package corev2 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
should we replace existing usages?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
lgtm, left some comments
lengthProofChan := make(chan LengthProofResult, 1) | ||
commitmentChan := make(chan CommitmentResult, 1) | ||
proofChan := make(chan ProofsResult, 1) | ||
commitmentsChan := make(chan commitmentsResult, 1) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Just making sure, the changes here are just refactors to allow us to expose GetFrames and GetCommitments. None of the functionality changes in any major way?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That's right!
Why are these changes needed?
v2 of core library
Checks