-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 565
Verification of zkapp proofs prior to block creation #16809
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
Verification of zkapp proofs prior to block creation #16809
Conversation
0e4bb14
to
bc361b2
Compare
!ci-build-me |
Did a bunch of force-pushes to make commit message readable 😅 |
!ci-build-me |
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.
Main comment: collect_vk_assumptions
does all the necessary checks inside, no need to even consider what it returns.
done |
!ci-build-me |
ab92b4d
to
efdc495
Compare
!ci-build-me |
fb27a21
to
6e7035f
Compare
!ci-build-me |
But could we make it true, I wonder? To me it seems like we could by not
specifying the default argument outside of staged_ledger.ml.
…On Tue, Apr 1, 2025, 2:04 PM glyh ***@***.***> wrote:
***@***.**** commented on this pull request.
------------------------------
In src/lib/staged_ledger/staged_ledger.mli
<#16809 (comment)>:
> @@ -343,9 +351,12 @@ val all_work_pairs :
(** Statements of all the pending work in t*)
val all_work_statements_exn : t -> Transaction_snark_work.Statement.t list
+val dummy_transaction_pool_proxy : transaction_pool_proxy
image.png (view on web)
<https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/edf25680-30bf-41b8-a13f-72b6f80d3792>
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#16809 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAJ4IISVZISIUKR746NNEBD2XJ6EXAVCNFSM6AAAAAB2DZK4MGVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43YUDVNRWFEZLROVSXG5CSMV3GSZLXHMZDOMZSGQ3DAMJQHE>
.
You are receiving this because your review was requested.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
Could wrap it in an option I guess, need to check code to see if there's fancier ways. |
!ci-build-me |
A merge from |
…hash in a transaction_pool down to Staged_ledger.check_commands
…ter alternative of `Verifier.verify_commands` that utilizing the txn pool
…ed_ledger.check_commands`
…been taken care of; simplify `verify_command_against_pool` signature
…d `verify_command_against_pool` earlier), and put it into `Verifier.Common`
…Stage_ledger` to `Staged_ledger.Check_commands`
…eck_commands` module in staged_ledger
…nd` is slow, we'll come back to this later
76aa258
to
5827ed6
Compare
!ci-build-me |
1 similar comment
!ci-build-me |
This is a refactor of #16753, should be merged after #16796
This PR allow staged_ledger to have access to txn pool, so txns already in the pool could be verified faster utilizing the fact any txn in pool must already pass some other checks.