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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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(protocol): fix issues in AssignmentHook #15486
feat(protocol): fix issues in AssignmentHook #15486
Changes from all commits
2b7ac76
bc34831
9b290ed
f768e9a
ba794ea
2b74b29
bea1787
1f02544
78b88c1
195780a
48036e0
08cab90
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
check TKO balance change strict using == rather than >=.
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.
@adaki2004 with this change, maybe we don't have to check "==" here?
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.
I still recommend having a strict equality, for two reasons
a) I don't see a benefit for transferring more than the liveness bond, it would increase the cost to the prover and the extra funds would be stuck in the TaikoL1 contract.
b) If multiple hooks are available which can transfer TKO to the TaikoL1 contract the proposer could attempt to use both e.g. If there is a third party hook, a proposer could attempt to use both hooks.
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.
I think this is a strict equalitsy, no ? (if NOT -> revert)
if (tko.balanceOf(address(this)) != tkoBalance + config.livenessBond) revert L1_LIVENESS_BOND_NOT_RECEIVED
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.
Yep this PR currently has a strict equality, which I currently see as a nicer solution. I was responding to @dantaik comment about potentially moving back to inequality.