[Merged by Bors] - Add fork choice EF tests #2737
Closed
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
paulhauner
added
ready-for-review
Member
Author
|
This is ready for review! (Pending one last CI run 🤞) |
michaelsproul
requested changes
Nov 3, 2021
Member
michaelsproul
left a comment
michaelsproul
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is awesome! Really nice clean implementation!
michaelsproul
added
waiting-on-author
Co-authored-by: Michael Sproul <[email protected]>
paulhauner
added
ready-for-review
Member
Author
|
Thanks for the comments! Everything is addressed, I think it's worth waiting for a clean CI run before jumping into a review though :) |
michaelsproul
added
ready-for-merge
Member
Author
|
bors r+ |
bors bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 8, 2021
## Issue Addressed Resolves #2545 ## Proposed Changes Adds the long-overdue EF tests for fork choice. Although we had pretty good coverage via other implementations that closely followed our approach, it is nonetheless important for us to implement these tests too. During testing I found that we were using a hard-coded `SAFE_SLOTS_TO_UPDATE_JUSTIFIED` value rather than one from the `ChainSpec`. This caused a failure during a minimal preset test. This doesn't represent a risk to mainnet or testnets, since the hard-coded value matched the mainnet preset. ## Failing Cases There is one failing case which is presently marked as `SkippedKnownFailure`: ``` case 4 ("new_finalized_slot_is_justified_checkpoint_ancestor") from /home/paul/development/lighthouse/testing/ef_tests/consensus-spec-tests/tests/minimal/phase0/fork_choice/on_block/pyspec_tests/new_finalized_slot_is_justified_checkpoint_ancestor failed with NotEqual: head check failed: Got Head { slot: Slot(40), root: 0x9183dbaed4191a862bd307d476e687277fc08469fc38618699863333487703e7 } | Expected Head { slot: Slot(24), root: 0x105b49b51bf7103c182aa58860b039550a89c05a4675992e2af703bd02c84570 } ``` This failure is due to #2741. It's not a particularly high priority issue at the moment, so we fix it after merging this PR.
|
Pull request successfully merged into unstable. Build succeeded: |
bors
bot
changed the title
This was referenced Nov 11, 2021
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.
Issue Addressed
Resolves #2545
Proposed Changes
Adds the long-overdue EF tests for fork choice. Although we had pretty good coverage via other implementations that closely followed our approach, it is nonetheless important for us to implement these tests too.
During testing I found that we were using a hard-coded
SAFE_SLOTS_TO_UPDATE_JUSTIFIEDvalue rather than one from theChainSpec. This caused a failure during a minimal preset test. This doesn't represent a risk to mainnet or testnets, since the hard-coded value matched the mainnet preset.Failing Cases
There is one failing case which is presently marked as
SkippedKnownFailure:This failure is due to #2741. It's not a particularly high priority issue at the moment, so we fix it after merging this PR.