DKG Result Submission Backward Compatibility #6827
Open
+169
−2
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## feature/efm-recovery #6827 +/- ##
=========================================================
- Coverage 41.81% 41.22% -0.59%
=========================================================
Files 1588 400 -1188
Lines 144098 39367 -104731
=========================================================
- Hits 60251 16231 -44020
+ Misses 78887 21807 -57080
+ Partials 4960 1329 -3631
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
AlexHentschel
approved these changes
Jan 3, 2025
| // submitResult_ProtocolV1 submits this node's locally computed DKG result (public key vector) | ||
| // to the FlowDKG smart contract, using the submission API associated with Protocol Version 1. | ||
| // Input public keys are expected to be either all nil or all non-nil. | ||
| // Deprecated: This function is a temporary measure to provide backward compatibility between Protocol Versions 1 and 2. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| // Deprecated: This function is a temporary measure to provide backward compatibility between Protocol Versions 1 and 2. | |
| // Deprecated: This is a temporary function to provide backward compatibility between Protocol Versions 1 and 2. |
Comment on lines
+329
to
+333
| // CASE 2: we aren't sure whether FlowDKG is v2 compatible - fallback to v1 submission | ||
| if err != nil { | ||
| c.Log.Warn().Err(err).Msg("unable to determine FlowDKG compatibility - falling back to v1 result submission") | ||
| return c.submitResult_ProtocolV1(groupPublicKey, publicKeys) | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is probably not a question that we can address as part of this PR. When reading these lines, I am wondering what would happen if the protocol was on version 2 already, but script execution failed and we would submit with version 1 ... not sure how unlikely that is and what the consequences could be. Probably something best to be discussed in person.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR implements backward-compatibility for DKG result submission. Addresses #6792
The implementation here uses differences in the smart contract to decide which transaction to use for result submission. Compared to the protocol-version-based approach described in the issue, this has the benefit that the smart contract upgrade does not need to be coordinated with the Protocol HCU.