Skip to content
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

Update to specs actors v0.9.6 #3603

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Sep 7, 2020
Merged

Update to specs actors v0.9.6 #3603

merged 9 commits into from
Sep 7, 2020

Conversation

arajasek
Copy link
Contributor

@arajasek arajasek commented Sep 7, 2020

  • Largely a "follow the pattern" PR
  • This introduces the go-state-types
  • Updates go-fil-markets to include non-blocking retrieval

@arajasek arajasek added the impact/consensus Impact: Consensus label Sep 7, 2020
@arajasek arajasek self-assigned this Sep 7, 2020
@arajasek arajasek mentioned this pull request Sep 7, 2020
9 tasks
Copy link
Contributor

@ZenGround0 ZenGround0 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

FYI a new change came in the last day extracting the adt.Empty type to go-state-types. When that merges I can put up another PR on lotus, or push a commit to this one if its still up.

@@ -300,7 +303,7 @@ type FullNode interface {
// StateMinerSectors returns info about the given miner's sectors. If the filter bitfield is nil, all sectors are included.
// If the filterOut boolean is set to true, any sectors in the filter are excluded.
// If false, only those sectors in the filter are included.
StateMinerSectors(context.Context, address.Address, *abi.BitField, bool, types.TipSetKey) ([]*ChainSectorInfo, error)
StateMinerSectors(context.Context, address.Address, *bitfield.BitField, bool, types.TipSetKey) ([]*ChainSectorInfo, error)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Because its an alias there's no difference but you if for some reason you wanted to keep using the specs-actors bitfield alias you can import it from specs-actors/actors/util here and everywhere else making this change.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Eeeh, I would've done that if I'd realised it earlier, but I don't think it's worth undoing?

@arajasek arajasek removed the impact/consensus Impact: Consensus label Sep 7, 2020
@arajasek arajasek force-pushed the asr/specs-for-0.6.0 branch from 816e58c to 529002c Compare September 7, 2020 19:48
@magik6k magik6k merged commit bea31fd into ntwk-0.6.0 Sep 7, 2020
@magik6k magik6k deleted the asr/specs-for-0.6.0 branch September 7, 2020 19:54
@@ -341,7 +341,7 @@ func (rt *Runtime) Send(to address.Address, method abi.MethodNum, m vmr.CBORMars
if m != nil {
buf := new(bytes.Buffer)
if err := m.MarshalCBOR(buf); err != nil {
rt.Abortf(exitcode.SysErrInvalidParameters, "failed to marshal input parameters: %s", err)
rt.Abortf(exitcode.ErrSerialization, "failed to marshal input parameters: %s", err)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is a consensus-affecting change. It should be behind a network version check.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@anorth This one "sneaked" in -- it doesn't break consensus pre-upgrade, (and won't break things moving forward).

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

How does it not break consensus? It'll change the error codes (or do those not go on chain?).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants