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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Expose v field in JSON-RPC in some transaction types #6819

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Mar 26, 2024
Merged

Expose v field in JSON-RPC in some transaction types #6819

merged 3 commits into from
Mar 26, 2024

Conversation

shemnon
Copy link
Contributor

@shemnon shemnon commented Mar 26, 2024

PR description

The execution API marks the v field as optional for EIP-2930 and EIP-1559 transactions, preferring the yParity feld. However, some tooling still depends on the presence of the v field. For those two transaction types both v and yParity will be returned now.

Fixed Issue(s)

Thanks for sending a pull request! Have you done the following?

  • Checked out our contribution guidelines?
  • Considered documentation and added the doc-change-required label to this PR if updates are required.
  • Considered the changelog and included an update if required.
  • For database changes (e.g. KeyValueSegmentIdentifier) considered compatibility and performed forwards and backwards compatibility tests

Locally, you can run these tests to catch failures early:

  • unit tests: ./gradlew build
  • acceptance tests: ./gradlew acceptanceTest
  • integration tests: ./gradlew integrationTest
  • reference tests: ./gradlew ethereum:referenceTests:referenceTests

@shemnon
Expose v field in JSON-RPC in some transaction types
999c267 
The execution API marks the `v` field as optional for EIP-2930 and
EIP-1559 transactions, preferring the `yParity` feld.  However, some
tooling still depends on the presence of the `v` field. For those two
transaction types both `v` and `yParity` will be returned now.

Signed-off-by: Danno Ferrin <[email protected]>
@shemnon shemnon mentioned this pull request Mar 26, 2024
Closed
usmansaleem
usmansaleem approved these changes Mar 26, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@usmansaleem usmansaleem left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@shemnon shemnon enabled auto-merge (squash) March 26, 2024 21:55
@shemnon shemnon merged commit 7df1732 into hyperledger:main Mar 26, 2024
42 checks passed
amsmota pushed a commit to Citi/besu that referenced this pull request Apr 16, 2024
@shemnon @amsmota
Expose v field in JSON-RPC in some transaction types (hyperledger#6819
4d3886e 
)

* Expose `v` field in JSON-RPC in some transaction types

The execution API marks the `v` field as optional for EIP-2930 and
EIP-1559 transactions, preferring the `yParity` feld.  However, some
tooling still depends on the presence of the `v` field. For those two
transaction types both `v` and `yParity` will be returned now.

Signed-off-by: Danno Ferrin <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: amsmota <[email protected]>
amsmota pushed a commit to Citi/besu that referenced this pull request Apr 16, 2024
@shemnon @amsmota
Expose v field in JSON-RPC in some transaction types (hyperledger#6819
914c952 
)

* Expose `v` field in JSON-RPC in some transaction types

The execution API marks the `v` field as optional for EIP-2930 and
EIP-1559 transactions, preferring the `yParity` feld.  However, some
tooling still depends on the presence of the `v` field. For those two
transaction types both `v` and `yParity` will be returned now.

Signed-off-by: Danno Ferrin <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: amsmota <[email protected]>
shemnon added a commit to shemnon/besu that referenced this pull request May 24, 2024
@shemnon
Undo hyperledger#6819 - make yParity and v match
4f6588a 
Undo PR hyperledger#6819 -
for 2030 and 1559 transactions both v and yParity will be provided,
and they will be the same number.

Signed-off-by: Danno Ferrin <[email protected]>
shemnon added a commit to shemnon/besu that referenced this pull request May 24, 2024
@shemnon
Undo hyperledger#6819 - make yParity and v match
1717019 
Undo PR hyperledger#6819 -
for 2030 and 1559 transactions both v and yParity will be provided,
and they will be the same number.

Signed-off-by: Danno Ferrin <[email protected]>
@shemnon shemnon mentioned this pull request May 24, 2024
Merged
8 tasks
shemnon added a commit to shemnon/besu that referenced this pull request May 24, 2024
@shemnon
Undo hyperledger#6819 - make yParity and v match
a0c0dfe 
Undo PR hyperledger#6819 -
for 2030 and 1559 transactions both v and yParity will be provided,
and they will be the same number.

Signed-off-by: Danno Ferrin <[email protected]>
shemnon added a commit to shemnon/besu that referenced this pull request May 24, 2024
@shemnon
Undo hyperledger#6819 - make yParity and v match
ddc54a9 
Undo PR hyperledger#6819 -
for 2030 and 1559 transactions both v and yParity will be provided,
and they will be the same number.

Signed-off-by: Danno Ferrin <[email protected]>
shemnon added a commit that referenced this pull request May 30, 2024
@shemnon
Undo #6819 - make yParity and v match (#7139)
e68c4e1 
Undo PR #6819 -
for 2030 and 1559 transactions both v and yParity will be provided,
and they will be the same number.

Signed-off-by: Danno Ferrin <[email protected]>
matthew1001 pushed a commit to kaleido-io/besu that referenced this pull request Jun 7, 2024
@shemnon @matthew1001
Expose v field in JSON-RPC in some transaction types (hyperledger#6819
77014d9 
)

* Expose `v` field in JSON-RPC in some transaction types

The execution API marks the `v` field as optional for EIP-2930 and
EIP-1559 transactions, preferring the `yParity` feld.  However, some
tooling still depends on the presence of the `v` field. For those two
transaction types both `v` and `yParity` will be returned now.

Signed-off-by: Danno Ferrin <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@usmansaleem usmansaleem usmansaleem approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@shemnon @usmansaleem