Implicit ignore unsupported syscalls #52
Merged
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Description
There is a difference between Asterisc and Cannon when they face unsupported syscalls.
Because of this difference, I had to ignore syscalls explicitly to run op-program(#16).
But as op-program is updated after the PR, I found more syscalls used by op-program, which are not handled by Asterisc.
I think this behavior has a potential risk: we may have to update VM contract if we encounter new syscalls as op-program is updated. So I updated the default behavior of handling syscalls to no-op like Cannon.