-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1k
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
Process blind withdrawals #11995
Process blind withdrawals #11995
Conversation
for i, withdrawal := range withdrawals { | ||
if withdrawal.Index != expected[i].Index { | ||
|
||
for i, withdrawal := range expectedWithdrawals { |
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.
This doesn't make any sense, you are comparing the same objects in each loop . Basically if a.Index != a.Index
, which will never be triggered.
…prysm into process-blind-withdrawals
Can you add a unit test to blinded/non-blinded cases where the root doesn't match the expected root? |
Done |
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.
Hi @terencechain , @saolyn and I just went through this together and the main feedback we have is that this PR should have a clear description of the changes and also why we need them. Also, a comment on ProcessWithdrawals that mentions this will work with both blinded and full execution data would be ideal. We also wanted to double check that both branches of the conditional added are covered in tests
…ss-blind-withdrawals
With a blind payload (i.e header), the withdrawal list is represented as a root. Given limited information, a node will not be able to process the state root using a withdrawal root. The node should use expected withdrawals in the state to process withdrawal when processing a blind payload.