chore: deps: update FFI, FVM, and actors

[rjan90]

Related Issues

Towards nv22/lotus v1.26.0-rc1 release

Proposed Changes

Updates:

• FVM to 4.1.2
• FFI to v1.26.0-rc2
• Builtin-actors v13.0.0-rc.2

Checklist

Before you mark the PR ready for review, please make sure that:

• Commits have a clear commit message.
• PR title is in the form of of <PR type>: <area>: <change being made>
  • example: fix: mempool: Introduce a cache for valid signatures
  • PR type: fix, feat, build, chore, ci, docs, perf, refactor, revert, style, test
  • area, e.g. api, chain, state, market, mempool, multisig, networking, paych, proving, sealing, wallet, deps
• If the PR affects users (e.g., new feature, bug fix, system requirements change), update the CHANGELOG.md and add details to the UNRELEASED section.
• New features have usage guidelines and / or documentation updates in
  • Lotus Documentation
  • Discussion Tutorials
• Tests exist for new functionality or change in behavior
• CI is green

[Stebalien]

I have a branch (https://github.com/filecoin-project/lotus/tree/steb/update-fvm) that updates the FVM and addresses the breaking changes to the tracing API. That branch is currently based on master, but should I move it to feat/nv22?

[rjan90]

I have a branch (https://github.com/filecoin-project/lotus/tree/steb/update-fvm) that updates the FVM and addresses the breaking changes to the tracing API. That branch is currently based on master, but should I move it to feat/nv22?

Yeah, that would be ideal. Once feat/nv22 branch is more complete we will merge it back to master #11600.

[Stebalien]

Hm. That's not ideal as I want to make PRs that depend on these changes, and these PRs are not a part of nv22. I didn't realize the diff was that big.

Is there any reason not to make the PR against master then back merge? Do we not do back-merging to integration branches?

[rjan90]

Is there any reason not to make the PR against master then back merge? Do we not do back-merging to integration branches?

Oh, I see. Yeah, feel free to go with the path of PR against master then back merge

[aarshkshah1992]

@rjan90 PR looks good to me but we will need @Stebalien's changes from here before CI can be green.

[rvagg]

If I cherry-pick this in to feat/built-in-actor-events-api which requires the actor events work, and I add in #11611, and I run against filecoin-project/go-state-types#236 then it's all 👍. And I even get the right "balance" encoded form out of events which was that thing I fixed in actors yesterday:

Event<height=772, msg=bafy2bzacebadnt32yvrwugww64tymuv4zdpwl26hnv5et6js5oxxj3sokjjnq, emitter=f06, reverted=false, $type="verifier-balance", verifier=100, balance={"/":{"bytes":"ABdIdsDw"}}>

[rvagg]

Pulled in the v13.0.0-rc.2 commit to #11611 where, by the powers of both branches combined, we get 💚 . Merged that one in to feat/nv22 so we're all good now.