Add epoch 3.0 #3954

cylewitruk · 2023-09-20T17:31:05Z

This PR aims to add the boilerplate code around Epoch 3.0 and Clarity 3.0 so that teams can start building feature gating as needed based on these.

I've made some assumptions, and I've added some TODO's and even todo!()'s in areas where it was either unclear, or obvious that something would need to be done (e.g. in chainstate where I know there's big changes coming).

If we can get this PR in an "OK" state for next, and make sure we have Github issues for each todo (ideally that we even add the issue number in a comment next to the todo, give me the issue number and I can do this), then I hope the chances of forgetting about any of those will be slim :)

So, please have a look through the todos and comment those which you can/will take and a link to the Github issue to track it. If I've missed any, please also comment where I've missed (or if you would like me to add a todo somewhere for you) and I'll add them :)

Keeping this as a draft for now.

codecov · 2023-09-20T17:32:18Z

Codecov Report

Merging #3954 (83de74f) into next (e17f094) will decrease coverage by 0.01%.
Report is 171 commits behind head on next.
The diff coverage is 0.00%.

❗ Current head 83de74f differs from pull request most recent head 4bc3b70. Consider uploading reports for the commit 4bc3b70 to get more accurate results

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             next    #3954      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage    0.16%    0.16%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         333      333              
  Lines      291078   291244     +166     
==========================================
  Hits          469      469              
- Misses     290609   290775     +166

Files	Coverage Δ
clarity/src/vm/analysis/mod.rs	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
...c/vm/analysis/type_checker/v2_1/tests/contracts.rs	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
testnet/stacks-node/src/run_loop/neon.rs	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
clarity/src/vm/analysis/type_checker/mod.rs	`0.00% <0.00%> (ø)`
...rity/src/vm/analysis/type_checker/v2_1/contexts.rs	`0.00% <0.00%> (ø)`
clarity/src/vm/costs/mod.rs	`0.00% <0.00%> (ø)`
clarity/src/vm/functions/mod.rs	`0.00% <0.00%> (ø)`
stackslib/src/chainstate/stacks/db/mod.rs	`0.00% <0.00%> (ø)`
stackslib/src/chainstate/stacks/db/transactions.rs	`0.00% <0.00%> (ø)`
stackslib/src/chainstate/stacks/index/storage.rs	`0.00% <0.00%> (ø)`
... and 13 more

📣 Codecov offers a browser extension for seamless coverage viewing on GitHub. Try it in Chrome or Firefox today!

cylewitruk · 2023-09-22T06:31:31Z

After some thought, I wonder if we shouldn't go for Clarity 2.1 instead of 3 here? From a language perspective, there isn't all that much that's changing (with the Wasm runtime), that change will mostly be an implementation detail.
Thoughts?

obycode · 2023-09-22T13:12:14Z

You're right that the runtime change should be an implementation detail, and can be epoch-gated rather than clarity version gated. We have discussed before that we'd like to push any clarity changes out after Nakamoto, unless absolutely necessary, just to avoid adding more complexity into an already very large change. So I'd say, if we can get away with it, we don't bump the clarity version at all yet.

cylewitruk · 2023-09-28T05:30:28Z

You're right that the runtime change should be an implementation detail, and can be epoch-gated rather than clarity version gated. We have discussed before that we'd like to push any clarity changes out after Nakamoto, unless absolutely necessary, just to avoid adding more complexity into an already very large change. So I'd say, if we can get away with it, we don't bump the clarity version at all yet.

Won't we have to bump the version due to changes in block-height and addition of tenure-height ?

obycode · 2023-09-28T12:26:30Z

Won't we have to bump the version due to changes in block-height and addition of tenure-height ?

I guess that's still an open question - #3943

kantai

Thanks for this! This looks good to me, left a couple of comments.

clarity/src/vm/functions/mod.rs

clarity/src/vm/costs/mod.rs

kantai · 2023-10-04T15:01:49Z

clarity/src/vm/types/signatures.rs

+            // TODO: Afaik we're not making any changes which should change this behavior?
+            // Maybe add a "Note for future epochs, Epochs >= 2.1 should use `admits_type_v2_1` function."
+            | StacksEpochId::Epoch30 => self.admits_type_v2_1(other),


Yep, agreed.

Removed todo and added note

clarity/src/vm/types/signatures.rs

stacks-common/src/types/mod.rs

kantai · 2023-10-04T15:05:09Z

stackslib/src/chainstate/coordinator/mod.rs

                                    return Ok(Some(pox_anchor));
                                }
                            }
+                            StacksEpochId::Epoch30 => todo!(), // Need input here


This should have the same behavior as Epochs 2.1 and 2.4 (for now: this will likely be changed in nakamoto, but in this PR, it should just share that behavior with 2.1-2.4).

Okay, moved into their match arm

kantai · 2023-10-04T15:05:45Z

stackslib/src/chainstate/stacks/db/blocks.rs

                    cur_epoch.start_height,
                )
            }
+            StacksEpochId::Epoch30 => todo!(), // Need input here


This should share the behavior of 2.1-2.4.

Okay, moved into their match arm

kantai · 2023-10-04T15:05:58Z

stackslib/src/chainstate/stacks/db/blocks.rs

                    pox_reward_cycle,
                    pox_start_cycle_info,
                ),
+                StacksEpochId::Epoch30 => todo!(), // Need input here


This should share the behavior of 2.4.

Okay, moved 3.0 into 2.4's match arm.

kantai · 2023-10-04T15:06:25Z

stackslib/src/chainstate/stacks/db/mod.rs

            StacksEpochId::Epoch22 => self.version == "3" || self.version == "4",
            StacksEpochId::Epoch23 => self.version == "3" || self.version == "4",
            StacksEpochId::Epoch24 => self.version == "3" || self.version == "4",
+            StacksEpochId::Epoch30 => todo!(), // Need input from Jude here


This should be the same as 2.1-2.4 for now.

Oki, copied

kantai · 2023-10-04T15:07:20Z

stackslib/src/clarity_vm/clarity.rs

    }

+    pub fn initialize_epoch_3_0(&mut self) -> Result<Vec<StacksTransactionReceipt>, Error> {
+        todo!()


This should just be Ok(vec![]) for now: once there's actual changes necessary for epoch initialization, they can be added.

Okay, updated!

CLAassistant · 2023-11-16T06:30:57Z

All committers have signed the CLA.

jcnelson · 2023-11-17T21:13:16Z

next now has both Epoch25 and Epoch30. Can I close this?

cylewitruk · 2023-11-19T07:25:52Z

next now has both Epoch25 and Epoch30. Can I close this?

Yup 🙂

jcnelson · 2023-11-20T17:38:46Z

Thanks for understanding 🙏

blockstack-devops · 2024-11-09T00:20:16Z

This pull request has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs.

cylewitruk added 2 commits September 20, 2023 19:22

chore: add epoch 3.0 and fix match statements, add todo's, etc.

8c9a8e4

chore: cargo fmt

83de74f

cylewitruk requested review from jcnelson, kantai and obycode September 20, 2023 17:31

kantai reviewed Oct 4, 2023

View reviewed changes

kantai mentioned this pull request Oct 6, 2023

Nakamoto staging blocks #3992

Merged

task: updated after comments from Aaron in PR #3954

4bc3b70

cylewitruk requested a review from kantai November 11, 2023 10:28

jcnelson closed this Nov 20, 2023

blockstack-devops added the locked label Nov 9, 2024

stacks-network locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Nov 9, 2024

Add epoch 3.0 #3954

Add epoch 3.0 #3954

Uh oh!

Conversation

cylewitruk commented Sep 20, 2023 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Sep 20, 2023 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

cylewitruk commented Sep 22, 2023

Uh oh!

obycode commented Sep 22, 2023

Uh oh!

cylewitruk commented Sep 28, 2023

Uh oh!

obycode commented Sep 28, 2023

Uh oh!

kantai left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

CLAassistant commented Nov 16, 2023 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

jcnelson commented Nov 17, 2023

Uh oh!

cylewitruk commented Nov 19, 2023

Uh oh!

jcnelson commented Nov 20, 2023

Uh oh!

blockstack-devops commented Nov 9, 2024

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

7 participants

cylewitruk commented Sep 20, 2023 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Sep 20, 2023 •

edited

Loading

CLAassistant commented Nov 16, 2023 •

edited

Loading