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

[stable2412] Backport #6450 #6873

Closed

Conversation

paritytech-cmd-bot-polkadot-sdk[bot]

Backport #6450 into stable2412 from iulianbarbu.

See the documentation on how to use this bot.

@paritytech-cmd-bot-polkadot-sdk
Copy link
Author

Please cherry-pick the changes locally and resolve any conflicts.

git fetch origin backport-6450-to-stable2412
git worktree add --checkout .worktree/backport-6450-to-stable2412 backport-6450-to-stable2412
cd .worktree/backport-6450-to-stable2412
git reset --hard HEAD^
git cherry-pick -x 7cc5cdd0d98ae3466dc33b339197c169cf241fc0
git push --force-with-lease

@github-actions github-actions bot added the A3-backport Pull request is already reviewed well in another branch. label Dec 13, 2024
Copy link

This pull request is amending an existing release. Please proceed with extreme caution,
as to not impact downstream teams that rely on the stability of it. Some things to consider:

  • Backports are only for 'patch' or 'minor' changes. No 'major' or other breaking change.
  • Should be a legit fix for some bug, not adding tons of new features.
  • Must either be already audited or not need an audit.
Emergency Bypass

If you really need to bypass this check: add validate: false to each crate
in the Prdoc where a breaking change is introduced. This will release a new major
version of that crate and all its reverse dependencies and basically break the release.

@iulianbarbu iulianbarbu force-pushed the backport-6450-to-stable2412 branch from 48a8930 to 51f578a Compare December 13, 2024 10:26
@iulianbarbu iulianbarbu deleted the backport-6450-to-stable2412 branch December 13, 2024 10:29
…6450)

Get runtime's metadata, parse it and verify pallets list for a pallet
named `ParachainSystem` (for now), and block number to be the same for
both node and runtime. Ideally we'll add other pallets checks too, at
least a small set of pallets we think right away as mandatory for
parachain compatibility.
Closes: #5565

Runtime devs must be made aware that to be fully compatible with Omni
Node, certain naming conventions should be respected when defining
pallets (e.g we verify parachain-system pallet existence by searching
for a pallet with `name` `ParachainSystem` in runtime's metadata). Not
finding such a pallet will not influence the functionality yet, but by
doing these checks we could provide useful feedback for runtimes that
are clearly not implementing what's required for full parachain
compatibility with Omni Node.

- [x] parachain system check
- [x] check frame_system's metadata to ensure the block number in there
is the same as the one in the node side
- [x] add tests for the previous checking logic
- [x] update omni node polkadot-sdk docs to make these conventions
visible.
- [ ] add more pallets checks?

---------

Signed-off-by: Iulian Barbu <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Alexandru Vasile <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Michal Kucharczyk <[email protected]>
@iulianbarbu iulianbarbu reopened this Dec 13, 2024
@iulianbarbu
Copy link
Contributor

Closing this for now, will probably try it out in 2025 when I am back.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
A3-backport Pull request is already reviewed well in another branch.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants