feat!: V27 update #3580
Draft
feat!: V27 update #3580
Conversation
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
…4d8a11a chore: Update generated Prover FRI GPU setup-data keys from branch evm-emulator/integration
## What ❔ Fixes unit tests for EVM emulator. ## Checklist - [x] PR title corresponds to the body of PR (we generate changelog entries from PRs). - [x] Tests for the changes have been added / updated. - [x] Code has been formatted via `zkstack dev fmt` and `zkstack dev lint`.
Co-authored-by: Vladislav Volosnikov <[email protected]>
## What ❔ Updates VM versions throughout the codebase. ## Checklist - [x] PR title corresponds to the body of PR (we generate changelog entries from PRs). - [x] Code has been formatted via `zkstack dev fmt` and `zkstack dev lint`.
perekopskiy
reviewed
Feb 21, 2025
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There are 2 places in multivm with use_evm_emulator=base_system_smart_contracts.evm_emulator.is_some() and I want to double-check they are fine:
EvmDeployTraceris instantiated based on this value, I think it's fine even if emulation is not actually enabled tracer will just not find anything- in
TransactionData:
let should_deploy_contract = if execute_tx.execute.contract_address.is_none() {
// Transactions with no `contract_address` should be filtered out by the API server,
// so this is more of a sanity check.
assert!(
use_evm_emulator,
"`execute.contract_address` not set for transaction {:?} with EVM emulation disabled",
common_data.hash()
);
U256([1, 0, 0, 0])
} else {
U256::zero()
};
So I understand better, if emulation is actually disabled will VM be able to gracefully process such transactions and if so what will happen: validation fail, VM be halted or tx revert?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Double-checking: are those bytecodes up-to-date i.e. compiled from era-contracts commit used in the PR?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Updated bytecodes, just in case. Used era-contracts commit isn't fully finalized yet
There was a problem hiding this comment.
let's keep this comment open until contracts are finalized
Detected VM performance changes
⚠ Detected differing instruction counts
Changes in number of opcodes executed indicate that the gas price of the benchmark has changed, which causes it to run out of gas at a different time. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
What ❔
Why ❔
Checklist
zkstack dev fmtandzkstack dev lint.