Skip to content

Comments

Gloas consensus: epoch processing, block signature verification, more tests#8808

Merged
mergify[bot] merged 7 commits intosigp:unstablefrom
michaelsproul:gloas-epoch-processing
Feb 13, 2026
Merged

Gloas consensus: epoch processing, block signature verification, more tests#8808
mergify[bot] merged 7 commits intosigp:unstablefrom
michaelsproul:gloas-epoch-processing

Conversation

@michaelsproul
Copy link
Member

@michaelsproul michaelsproul commented Feb 12, 2026 •
edited by eserilev
Loading

Proposed Changes

  • Implement process_builder_pending_payments in epoch processing for Gloas. Enable the new EF tests for this sub-component as well.
  • Update include_all_signatures_except_proposal for Gloas to safely include the execution payload bid signature (this was an omission in the previous bid PR).
  • Enable Gloas for all remaining EF tests by default. They all pass with the exception of the finality tests (see below).

Additional Info

  • Currently the finality tests are failing. I haven't yet checked whether this is because we're missing some part of block/epoch processing, or whether it's because we have a bug.

Note from Eitan: we were just missing a call to payload bid processing dbcda8e

@michaelsproul michaelsproul added work-in-progress PR is a work-in-progress gloas labels Feb 12, 2026
michaelsproul
michaelsproul commented Feb 12, 2026
View reviewed changes
testing/ef_tests/check_all_files_accessed.py Outdated
Comment on lines 53 to 59
Copy link
Member Author

@michaelsproul michaelsproul Feb 12, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We could delete a few more of these if all the tests except fork_choice pass.

Copy link
Member

@eserilev eserilev Feb 12, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Deleted the following:
"tests/./gloas/finality/.",
"tests/./gloas/networking/.",
"tests/./gloas/rewards/.",
"tests/./gloas/sanity/.",
"tests/./gloas/transition/.",

@michaelsproul michaelsproul mentioned this pull request Feb 12, 2026
Merged
@eserilev
Copy link
Member

eserilev commented Feb 12, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Gloas test vectors do not yet exist for:

  • fork_upgrade
  • kzg_inclusion_merkle_proof_validity
  • kzg_compute_cells_and_proofs
  • kzg_recover_cells_and_proofs
  • kzg_verify_cell_proof_batch
  • light_client_merkle_proof_validity
  • light_client_update
  • optimistic_sync
  • random

They are being disabled for now

@eserilev eserilev added ready-for-review The code is ready for review and removed work-in-progress PR is a work-in-progress labels Feb 12, 2026
eserilev
eserilev approved these changes Feb 12, 2026
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@eserilev eserilev left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Matches the spec, LGTM!

pawanjay176
pawanjay176 approved these changes Feb 12, 2026
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@pawanjay176 pawanjay176 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM. Neat and tidy.
The single_pass implementation looks equivalent to the spec implementation given that the effective_balance update is happening only after process_builder_pending_payments

dapplion
dapplion reviewed Feb 13, 2026
View reviewed changes
consensus/state_processing/src/per_epoch_processing/single_pass.rs
}

// NOTE: this could be a little more memory-efficient with some juggling to reuse parts
// of the persistent tree (could convert to list, use pop_front, convert back).
Copy link
Collaborator

@dapplion dapplion Feb 13, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The builder_pending_payments vector is tiny, doesn't matter much

dapplion
dapplion approved these changes Feb 13, 2026
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Collaborator

@dapplion dapplion left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Simple tidy change!

@jimmygchen jimmygchen added ready-for-merge This PR is ready to merge. and removed ready-for-review The code is ready for review labels Feb 13, 2026
@mergify mergify bot added the queued label Feb 13, 2026
@mergify
Copy link

mergify bot commented Feb 13, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Merge Queue Status

Rule: default

This pull request spent 30 minutes 19 seconds in the queue, including 28 minutes 19 seconds running CI.

Required conditions to merge
  • check-success=local-testnet-success
  • check-success=test-suite-success

mergify bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 13, 2026
@mergify
Merge of #8808
46b2dc2
@mergify mergify bot mentioned this pull request Feb 13, 2026
Closed
6 tasks
@mergify mergify bot merged commit 26db016 into sigp:unstable Feb 13, 2026
36 checks passed
@mergify mergify bot removed the queued label Feb 13, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@eserilev eserilev eserilev approved these changes

@pawanjay176 pawanjay176 pawanjay176 approved these changes

@dapplion dapplion dapplion approved these changes

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

gloas ready-for-merge This PR is ready to merge.

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@michaelsproul @eserilev @pawanjay176 @dapplion @jimmygchen