-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.4k
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
adds feature to enable chained Merkle shreds #34916
Merged
behzadnouri
merged 1 commit into
solana-labs:master
from
behzadnouri:enable-chained-merkle-shreds
Jan 27, 2024
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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.
could merge with
cluster_nodes::check_feature_activation
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 one uses a
root_bank
for less verbosity.This one uses
feature_set
andepoch_schedule
because holding onto root bank here has these issues: #33078We can't make
cluster_nodes
one call this one because it adds dependency oncore
crate which we want to avoid.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.
could we make the
cluster_nodes
one also usefeature_set
andepoch_schedule
so that both callers can use it?this code is also duplicated in
duplicate_shred_handler
, but becausecluster_nodes
is insolana-turbine
it would have added a circular dependency.perhaps the best thing would be to move this into
feature_set
so that everyone can use itThere 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.
The expanded form here is an unfortunate consequence of #33078 and is both more verbose and less self-contained; I feel like
cluster_nodes
one taking the root-bank as the argument is already the better code.I wouldn't suggest doing that because this one epoch lag is only relevant when working with raw shreds and we don't want to encourage using it in other instances.
Either way, this commit is only renaming existing code and adding a single argument. We can address the code duplication (which pre-exists this commit) separately.
We also need to keep the code change small, because if we are targeting v1.18 for these patches, then this needs to be backported.