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

Problem: gas_used differs in getting of consensusParams when enable cache #605

Conversation

mmsqe
Copy link
Collaborator

@mmsqe mmsqe commented Aug 7, 2024

Revert "Problem: signature verification result not cache between incarnations of same tx (#565)"

This reverts commit 5a1594f.

Description

Closes: #XXXX


Author Checklist

All items are required. Please add a note to the item if the item is not applicable and
please add links to any relevant follow up issues.

I have...

  • included the correct type prefix in the PR title
  • confirmed ! in the type prefix if API or client breaking change
  • targeted the correct branch (see PR Targeting)
  • provided a link to the relevant issue or specification
  • reviewed "Files changed" and left comments if necessary
  • included the necessary unit and integration tests
  • added a changelog entry to CHANGELOG.md
  • updated the relevant documentation or specification, including comments for documenting Go code
  • confirmed all CI checks have passed

Reviewers Checklist

All items are required. Please add a note if the item is not applicable and please add
your handle next to the items reviewed if you only reviewed selected items.

I have...

  • confirmed the correct type prefix in the PR title
  • confirmed all author checklist items have been addressed
  • reviewed state machine logic, API design and naming, documentation is accurate, tests and test coverage

@mmsqe mmsqe requested a review from yihuang August 7, 2024 01:53
Copy link
Collaborator

@yihuang yihuang left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can you describe the issue first, and do we run out of options to fix it?

EDIT: I think it's fine to revert cosmos-sdk part, since the ethermint side is used most.

@yihuang yihuang self-requested a review August 7, 2024 02:03
@mmsqe mmsqe changed the title Problem: gas_used differs in set and get of consensusParams when enable cache Problem: gas_used differs in getting of consensusParams when enable cache Aug 7, 2024
@mmsqe
Copy link
Collaborator Author

mmsqe commented Aug 7, 2024

I'm not sure if we can align the gas_used since there'd be less GetConsensusParams when enable cache. Or do you mean we record the gas_used like f33944e

@@ -842,8 +842,8 @@ func (app *BaseApp) internalFinalizeBlock(ctx context.Context, req *abci.Request

func (app *BaseApp) executeTxs(ctx context.Context, txs [][]byte) ([]*abci.ExecTxResult, error) {
if app.txExecutor != nil {
return app.txExecutor(ctx, len(txs), app.finalizeBlockState.ms, func(i int, ms storetypes.MultiStore, incarnationCache map[string]any) *abci.ExecTxResult {
return app.deliverTxWithMultiStore(txs[i], i, ms, incarnationCache)
return app.txExecutor(ctx, len(txs), app.finalizeBlockState.ms, func(i int, ms storetypes.MultiStore) *abci.ExecTxResult {
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

txExecutor interface need to keep too.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

we just need get and set right? Do you mean keep txExecutor but pass nil?

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

stm executor will pass non-nil cache.

@mmsqe
Copy link
Collaborator Author

mmsqe commented Aug 8, 2024

Diff doesn't come from consensusParams but from auth ante handler which was fixed before

@mmsqe mmsqe closed this Aug 8, 2024
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.

2 participants