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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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
test: enable spec tests related to eip-7549 #6741
test: enable spec tests related to eip-7549 #6741
Changes from 18 commits
6ddf100
14e6fd8
32e8ae0
f491628
39b259e
2ba9a22
8061a4d
c509eb0
c7f4b26
0ff25d9
cd74406
a4761e8
2cf273d
316a500
295642f
13878fa
bddcf2b
4285f75
8bcc864
6610dc1
3d88a33
8fc72da
8be57b1
323e74c
40b7eb7
3c6e2e6
ff0e397
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.
Curious why we would want to specify fork that we want to skip in a env variable
SPEC_FILTER_FORK
. What's the use case for this? I thinkdefaultSkipOpts
is serving quite wellThere 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.
Quickly run the spec tests for some forks. Whilde debugging, if we run for all forks it take too much time.
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.
@g11tech is this correct?
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.
The
committeeBits
is a bit vector so thebitLen
will always remain fixed which isMAX_COMMITTEES_PER_SLOT
. Hence if a chain is starting with initial validatorsless than MAX_COMMITTEES_PER_SLOT
the attestation check will never pass.So we actually need to get how many comittees actually participatd using
getTrueBitIndexes
.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.
The
if(committeeBitsLength > committeeCount)
check in electra-fork branch is wrong.The check is supposedly to be identical to this line of the spec. The reason is although committeeBits has a set length of 64, actual number of committees might be less than that. If the 60th bit is set, but there is only 40 committees, then this check needs to throw error
Here we actually want the position of the last set bit in
attestationElectra.committeeBits
. IflastCommitteeIndex
is greater thancommitteeCount
, then we throw error.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.
So something like this:
This is beyond the scope of this PR, happy to fix this in another PR. Maybe add a todo here for now. Thanks for catching it @nazarhussain @wemeetagain