Skip to content

[DNM] versi V3-activation test: YAP/glutton V3 scheduling + westend-100 epochs (stable2606)#12677

Open
iulianbarbu wants to merge 2 commits into
stable2606from
ib-glutton-v3-stable2606
Open

[DNM] versi V3-activation test: YAP/glutton V3 scheduling + westend-100 epochs (stable2606)#12677
iulianbarbu wants to merge 2 commits into
stable2606from
ib-glutton-v3-stable2606

Conversation

@iulianbarbu

@iulianbarbu iulianbarbu commented Jul 17, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Do not merge. CI-image vehicle for the versi V3 candidate-descriptor activation test — deployment PR: paritytech/parity-devnet#263. Based on the stable2606 tip.

What this provides in the versi stack

The test deploys a mixed stable-release network and flips node feature bit 4 (CandidateReceiptV3) live via sudo:

  • validators: 18× parity/polkadot:stable2512 (legacy collator protocol, truly v2-only) vs 18× parity/polkadot:stable2606 with --experimental-collator-protocol (2 of them bootnodes) — the legacy-vs-revamp interop axis rides along. V3 acceptance itself is gated purely by the node feature (backing's v3_ever_seen latch on finalized blocks), not by the flag;
  • para 2201: glutton-westend on released polkadot-parachain:v1.21.3 (stable2512 line), 3 cores;
  • para 2202: glutton-westend on released polkadot-parachain:stable2606, 3 cores;
  • para 2900: YAP with V3 scheduling enabled — the image built by this PR (paritypr/polkadot-parachain-debug), 3 cores. Idle until activation, then backed by the stable2606 cohort;
  • relay genesis code: the westend-staging runtime embedded in this PR's paritypr/polkadot-debug image.

Changes

  1. yet-another-parachain: enable V3 scheduling — accept-all VerifySchedulingSignature (V3_SCHEDULING_ENABLED = true), native relay-parent-offset 1 and velocity 12 untouched. No published runtime enables V3 (upstream it's a cargo feature of the cumulus test runtime only), hence this build.
  2. glutton-westend: same V3 enablement (native RPO 1, velocity 3) — spare V3 runtime option on the same image.
  3. westend: 100-slot fast-runtime epoch + proportional election phases — re-applies the westend hunks of [DNM] Hacks to obtain a rococo runtime with 10m session #8467 (westend-100) on stable2606, so the new versi genesis keeps the 10-minute sessions of the network it replaces (stock fast-runtime would give 2-minute sessions).

Upstream V3+offset coverage exists only on master and only at velocity 1 (scheduling_v3.rs), so YAP at RPO 1 / velocity 12 on a mixed 2512/2606 validator set is exactly the untested territory versi is meant to explore.

@cla-bot-2021

cla-bot-2021 Bot commented Jul 17, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

User @claude, please sign the CLA here.

Mirrors the westend hunks of the old versi genesis hack (#8467): 10-minute
sessions and proportional election phases in fast-runtime builds, so the
versi V3-activation network keeps the timing of the network it replaces.
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

This pull request is amending an existing release. Please proceed with extreme caution,
as to not impact downstream teams that rely on the stability of it. Some things to consider:

  • Backports are only for 'patch' or 'minor' changes. No 'major' or other breaking change.
  • Should be a legit fix for some bug, not adding tons of new features.
  • Must either be already audited or not need an audit.
Emergency Bypass

If you really need to bypass this check: add validate: false to each crate
in the Prdoc where a breaking change is introduced. This will release a new major
version of that crate and all its reverse dependencies and basically break the release.

Wires an accept-all VerifySchedulingSignature impl (V3_SCHEDULING_ENABLED =
true) into both testing runtimes, keeping their native relay parent offset 1
and velocities (3 / 12). No published runtime enables V3, so the versi
V3-activation test needs these images for its V3 parachain.
@iulianbarbu
iulianbarbu force-pushed the ib-glutton-v3-stable2606 branch from c6e2134 to 05b118f Compare July 17, 2026 15:50
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.

1 participant