forked from solana-labs/solana
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1k
CostTracker: Add a getter to expose cost by writable accounts #7920
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
Merged
tao-stones
merged 4 commits into
anza-xyz:master
from
ebin-mathews:get_cost_by_writable_accounts
Sep 5, 2025
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,8 @@ | ||
| use {solana_pubkey::Pubkey, std::collections::HashMap}; | ||
|
|
||
| /// Trait to help with post-analysis of a given block | ||
| pub trait CostTrackerPostAnalysis { | ||
| /// Only use in post-analyze to avoid lock contention | ||
| /// Do not use in the hot path | ||
| fn get_cost_by_writable_accounts(&self) -> &HashMap<Pubkey, u64, ahash::RandomState>; | ||
| } | ||
This file contains hidden or 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
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
if we already have the feature, is there a purpose in having the trait?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Requiring manually use trait to access that function is an additional safety for dev.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think it comes down to maintainability and making sure the get method is not used inadvertently.
The trait is kept behind a feature and the implementation as well.
So, if someone has to use it within agave code, the change would be very noticeable.
This should deter any such usage as it's not part of the vanilla struct and keeps it distinct.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
right but it's 2 things to do the same thing, prevent accidental usage. Just choose one I think
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can keep only the trait, if the general recommendation is not to use the feature gate.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
reverted the feature.
@tao-stones
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
i'll also vote of using trait. Ok without feature gate
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
if we actually cared about safety here, we'd use the type system and transform to a type that specifies the new method only after we've left the "hot path" not pray that dev reads a comment in a different file