Skip to content

Conversation

@StefanBratanov
Copy link
Contributor

PR Description

As per ethereum/consensus-specs#4341 and ethereum/consensus-specs#4342

Fixed Issue(s)

N/A

Documentation

  • I thought about documentation and added the doc-change-required label to this PR if updates are required.

Changelog

  • I thought about adding a changelog entry, and added one if I deemed necessary.

Comment on lines -145 to +134
.orElseGet(() -> blobSchedule.getLast().maxBlobsPerBlock());
.orElseGet(specConfigFulu::getMaxBlobsPerBlock);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

not sure this is quite right, but then the previous isnt really either given they can go down... we can come back to this if its not causing issues, but i think we'd need to get the list and sort and find max blobs per block from schedule if we do need that value...

Comment on lines 169 to 179
// test deneb max blobs boundary
assertThat(miscHelpersFulu.getMaxBlobsPerBlock(UInt64.valueOf(269568))).isEqualTo(6);
assertThat(miscHelpersFulu.getMaxBlobsPerBlock(UInt64.valueOf(269569))).isEqualTo(6);
assertThat(miscHelpersFulu.getMaxBlobsPerBlock(UInt64.valueOf(269568)))
.isEqualTo(maxBlobsPerBlockElectra);
assertThat(miscHelpersFulu.getMaxBlobsPerBlock(UInt64.valueOf(269569)))
.isEqualTo(maxBlobsPerBlockElectra);
// last epoch of deneb
assertThat(miscHelpersFulu.getMaxBlobsPerBlock(UInt64.valueOf(364031))).isEqualTo(6);
assertThat(miscHelpersFulu.getMaxBlobsPerBlock(UInt64.valueOf(364031)))
.isEqualTo(maxBlobsPerBlockElectra);
// electra boundary
assertThat(miscHelpersFulu.getMaxBlobsPerBlock(UInt64.valueOf(364032))).isEqualTo(9);
assertThat(miscHelpersFulu.getMaxBlobsPerBlock(UInt64.valueOf(364032)))
.isEqualTo(maxBlobsPerBlockElectra);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

most of this test is meaningless now, we can just simplify

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

just removed it, we can add it again when we have an actual bpo schedule

Copy link
Contributor

@rolfyone rolfyone left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

some minor comments...

due to the old release having the list not being empty as a requirement, this does need to be listed as a breaking change again for changelog.

@StefanBratanov
Copy link
Contributor Author

some minor comments...

due to the old release having the list not being empty as a requirement, this does need to be listed as a breaking change again for changelog.

Added to changelog

@StefanBratanov StefanBratanov enabled auto-merge (squash) June 5, 2025 08:32
@StefanBratanov StefanBratanov merged commit 7ce9231 into Consensys:master Jun 5, 2025
15 of 16 checks passed
@StefanBratanov StefanBratanov deleted the remove_bpo_schedule branch June 5, 2025 09:02
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