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

chore: Upgrade revm #5502

Closed
wants to merge 4 commits into from
Closed

chore: Upgrade revm #5502

wants to merge 4 commits into from

Conversation

clabby
Copy link
Collaborator

@clabby clabby commented Nov 20, 2023

Overview

Re-opened version of #5489, base of the PR stack for the Canyon hardfork in op-reth.

Upgrades revm to the head commit (as of Nov 20, 2023), which includes the Canyon hardfork definition.

Metadata
closes #5490

@clabby clabby marked this pull request as ready for review November 20, 2023 19:07
Copy link
Collaborator

@mattsse mattsse left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

need to check, new revm api.

in the meantime please remove trailing ;

inputs: &mut CallInputs,
) -> (InstructionResult, Gas, Bytes) {
) -> Option<(InterpreterResult, Range<usize>)> {
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

this api is kinda weird

Copy link
Collaborator Author

@clabby clabby Nov 21, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah I'm not convinced the ranges being passed are correct, just 0..0 atm to placehold... Need to read into what it signifies

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Return struct should definitely be added, Range represents output place to the memory (where to write it).

Option is there if we want to short circuit the call and immediately return.

I talked with @mattsse and I feel that a better solution is to freeze revm version inside reth, and just cherry-pick needed commits. This would skip this additional work on integration of breaking changes.

@clabby clabby closed this Nov 22, 2023
@clabby clabby deleted the cl/upgrade-revm-canyon branch December 2, 2023 23:32
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Upgrade revm in reth to a version including the Canyon hardfork
3 participants