Thank you for this PR but unfortunately this will break a few things. I made validation data to inject any para id coming from hrmp without relaychain which mean you can open the channel just by submitting and empty message parachain.submitHorizontalMessages(paraId, []). It's very easy implementation. I will like to drop this PR and address this differently.

It's very easy implementation. I will like to drop this PR and address this differently.

Ok, but notice that there are other two changes in this PR that would be still applicable?

• Fixing slot calculation for genesis with async backing
• Producing an extra block for DMP messages in case MessageQueue is used

Can I revert HRMP changes and keep those two?

Can you share what approach you will follow to address the issue?

• Fixing slot calculation for genesis with async backing

can you do another PR for this?

• Producing an extra block for DMP messages in case MessageQueue is used

I don't why need to build block

• Producing an extra block for DMP messages in case MessageQueue is used

I don't why need to build block

Message is processed in the next block after being received. Without building an extra block I can not assert the expected events.

but we already listen to downwardMessageQueues and trigger block building but if you start the chain with block-build-mode: manual then you have to manually build the block

but we already listen to downwardMessageQueues and trigger block building but if you start the chain with block-build-mode: manual then you have to manually build the block

Not sure if I understand, I think we are talking about different things. Soon, AssetHub runtimes will be using MessageQueue to handle received dmp messages. With that implementation, messages are actually processed in the next block they are included in the queue. If a new block is not automatically produced, the expected events coming from the XCM execution itself will not be emitted, and I wouldn't like to have to manually build another block. Ideally it should be an automated process.

I am already using for my tests another runtime that implements MessageQueue for dmp, therefore I would like to see this implemented in chopsticks.

Thanks, I wasn't aware. In that case we'll need to proper upgrade to MessageQueue with fallback to DMP

if you can upload latest assethub genesis it will help me a lot

Soon, AssetHub runtimes will be using MessageQueue to handle received dmp messages.

I don't think know if we need any change yet. We don't use DmpQueue so this doesn't affect us. I will check tomorrow if we need to upgrade anything

@NachoPal do you any example that doesn't work so I can look at?

I will check tomorrow if we need to upgrade anything

we don't need to change anything. parachain messages are injected into validation data

this is the reason the messageQeueue needs an extra block paritytech/polkadot-sdk#3709
basically messageQueue is broken and we need to deal with the consequences

This is already fixed and can be closed