Repository navigation
perf(contract): contract should not store full attestation submission - #1663
Conversation
barakeinav1
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
overall look good,
I requested some changes (mainly nits, typo name etc..) ,
I also think you should add another test: (I didn't see something like it)
#[test]
fn re_verify_fails_after_allowed_hash_is_cleaned_up() {
// 1. Add allowed MPC hash H1 at time T0
// 2. Add participant attested with H1
// 3. Add new MPC hash H2 (upgrade)
// 4. Advance time > tee_upgrade_deadline_duration
// 5. cleanup_expired_hashes removes H1
// 6. re_verify_tee_participant fails
}
barakeinav1
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
approving with some comments to be address
We already have integration tests in place. |
netrome
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
A few blockers. We should understand better what's costing so much gas. Beyond this, we need to figure out how to introduce this change in a compatible way.
|
Carved out flaky test fix into #1695 |
55f3aec to
d84382b
Compare
669c61c to
ee42690
Compare
…not-store-full-attestation-submission
|
I open a bug for the issue I found: |
|
barakeinav1
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
overall look good.
2 blocking issue:
- I added some small typo fixes,
- Can you confirm that we have test coverage about expiration flows.
testing:
3 nodes setup is working, and gas cost is down !!!.
Also I opened a Bug: MPC node crashes if attestation submission happens before the node keys are added to the near account#1763.
so it can be handle separately if you prefer.
Thanks for spotting, fixed now.
Here:
|
closes #1629