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

Handle empty aggregation bits as discussed in #1713 #1780

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
May 7, 2020
Merged

Conversation

protolambda
Copy link
Collaborator

@protolambda protolambda commented May 1, 2020

Fix #1713

Marking this as substantive, since it technically breaks existing behavior, if there is any attestation with 0 participants on-chain.

In the process of making the empty-participants case invalid, some tests didn't make sense anymore. Others were broken. Removed the invalid tests, fixed the broken ones, and added more testing (mostly related to rewards/penalties participation changes, re-using functions of the empty/almost-empty cases)

Edit: forced push 2nd commit that handles additional tests. Changed rng seeding to be different between test cases.

@protolambda protolambda added scope:CI/tests/pyspec post-freeze (substantive) Substantive consensus change non-critical for long-lived cross-client testnets labels May 1, 2020
@djrtwo
Copy link
Contributor

djrtwo commented May 4, 2020

Note that this change is a bit at odds with the comment here -- #1732 (comment)

If we go through with this PR and with #1732, we should probably explicitly disallow 0-participation aggregates on the gossip layer

Copy link
Contributor

@djrtwo djrtwo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This looks good.

Seems to be consensus that this is the way to go.

Note: This PR is a specific/explicit solution to attestation inclusion. 0xc0 sigs/emptiness will come up again in other contexts in Phase 1

@hwwhww hwwhww added this to the v0.12.0 milestone May 7, 2020
Copy link
Contributor

@djrtwo djrtwo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

handled a bit of minor PR feedback. ready for merge!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
post-freeze (substantive) Substantive consensus change non-critical for long-lived cross-client testnets scope:CI/tests/pyspec
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants