fix(gossipsub): Fix underflow when shuffling peers after prunning. #6183
Conversation
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
AgeManning
changed the title
jxs
reviewed
Oct 17, 2025
Member
jxs
left a comment
jxs
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
hey man thanks for this! Can we split these two into two different PR's and add CHANGELOG.md entries for each?
jxs
force-pushed
the
underflow-gossipsub
branch
from
fd7922c to
a41be07
Compare
jxs
force-pushed
the
underflow-gossipsub
branch
from
a41be07 to
3581061
Compare
jxs
changed the title
jxs
approved these changes
Oct 17, 2025
mergify bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 24, 2025
Split off from #6183, to quote: >I noticed two issues during testing. > >We allow our mesh to grow greater than mesh_n_high, intentionally >This looks like its intentional but I can't recall why we would have added it. I think its counter-intuitive to allow our mesh to grow larger than the specified parameter. I suspect we added it to prevent our mesh from being filled with inbound peers and potentially being eclipsed. I suspect the best approach here is to remove inbound peers in the mesh maintenance rather than exceeding the mesh_n_high configuration. Pull-Request: #6184.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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
I noticed two issues during testing.
mesh_n_high, intentionallyFor the first 1. This looks like its intentional but I can't recall why we would have added it. I think its counter-intuitive to allow our mesh to grow larger than the specified parameter. I suspect we added it to prevent our mesh from being filled with inbound peers and potentially being eclipsed. I suspect the best approach here is to remove inbound peers in the mesh maintenance rather than exceeding the mesh_n_high configuration.
For 2. There is an underflow which this PR prevents. It can be triggered for low mesh_n_high values, i.e 0. This shouldn't be a concern for regular users, but we shouldn't have code that can panic based on user configuration.