Skip to content

Conversation

@dknopik
Copy link
Member

@dknopik dknopik commented May 6, 2025

dknopik added 2 commits May 6, 2025 11:29
- CK's dvt changes
- Remove `sign_validator_exit` from trait
@diegomrsantos
Copy link
Member

Could you please describe what "CK's dvt changes" means?

@dknopik
Copy link
Member Author

dknopik commented May 6, 2025

@diegomrsantos sorry, added a link

@diegomrsantos
Copy link
Member

@diegomrsantos sorry, added a link

Thank you. Could you please add a short motivation for the new code added? Unfortunately, I couldn't see a short description.

.executor(executor.clone())
//.enable_high_validator_count_metrics(config.enable_high_validator_count_metrics)
.distributed(true)
.attestation_selection_proof_config(SelectionProofConfig {
Copy link
Member

@diegomrsantos diegomrsantos May 6, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

[nit] Is this for aggregation? If so, maybe attestation_aggregation_selection_proof_config?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think this is too verbose. The word aggregation adds no additional information IMO.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

There's no proof for pure attestation, right?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

selection proofs are always for aggregations - so the word aggregation is redundant

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I try to think from the perspective of someone who doesn't know the domain very well.

@dknopik dknopik marked this pull request as draft May 7, 2025 06:15
@cla-assistant
Copy link

cla-assistant bot commented May 13, 2025

CLA assistant check
All committers have signed the CLA.

@diegomrsantos diegomrsantos requested a review from Copilot May 13, 2025 11:42
Copy link
Contributor

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull Request Overview

This PR updates the Lighthouse codebase by removing the deprecated sign_voluntary_exit functionality from the validator store, updating dependency revisions, and tweaking client timeout configurations and builder setups.

  • Removed the sign_voluntary_exit function from the validator store to match the updated trait.
  • Updated dependency revisions in Cargo.toml to use new commit hashes.
  • Modified client timeout calculations and replaced the distributed flag with explicit selection proof configuration settings.

Reviewed Changes

Copilot reviewed 4 out of 4 changed files in this pull request and generated 1 comment.

File Description
anchor/validator_store/src/lib.rs Removed the sign_voluntary_exit function to align with the updated trait requirements.
anchor/client/src/lib.rs Updated timeout constants and added selection proof configuration while revising imports.
Cargo.toml Updated dependency revisions to the new commit hash version (86a106b94) and gossipsub rev.
Comments suppressed due to low confidence (1)

anchor/client/src/lib.rs:495

  • The removal of the distributed(true) call is a significant change in behavior; please verify that the new selection proof configurations fully replace the previous distributed mode functionality.
.distributed(true)

@dknopik dknopik marked this pull request as ready for review May 13, 2025 14:40
Copy link
Member

@diegomrsantos diegomrsantos left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm, thanks!

@dknopik
Copy link
Member Author

dknopik commented May 14, 2025

Thank you. Could you please add a short motivation for the new code added? Unfortunately, I couldn't see a short description.

@diegomrsantos The Lighthouse code presently exhibits some behaviour regarding selection proofs that are both incompatible with SSV and Obol's DVT middleware, so these changes make it configurable to accommodate the needs of all three scenarios (SSV, Obol, and classic VC). See also sigp/lighthouse#7016 (comment) or ping me :)

@dknopik dknopik merged commit cb6b046 into sigp:unstable May 14, 2025
12 checks passed
@dknopik dknopik deleted the update-lh branch June 20, 2025 13:05
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