Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

checkDaggerDataWithProof() should be replaced by unmaskWithEthash() #13

Open
qizhou opened this issue Mar 28, 2023 · 4 comments
Open

checkDaggerDataWithProof() should be replaced by unmaskWithEthash() #13

qizhou opened this issue Mar 28, 2023 · 4 comments
Assignees

Comments

@qizhou
Copy link
Contributor

qizhou commented Mar 28, 2023

  • checkProof should be done in the contract
  • Decode should be done in precompile
@LiuJiazheng LiuJiazheng self-assigned this Mar 28, 2023
@LiuJiazheng
Copy link
Collaborator

I made an intial version of it. Please have a check on this:
b3b870c

It merely provides a skeleton while two (obvious) questions remain:

  1. Have we finalized Ethash details? I leave a blank in corresponding area. Meanwhile, our current tests are based on "raw data" since before we never adapt an encoded/decoded version;
  2. If TestSystemContractDaggerHashimoto could be shifted in this shape, how does our precompile test could be? Or in a more concrete fashion, what, to be tested for a precompile simmulation?

@qizhou
Copy link
Contributor Author

qizhou commented Mar 29, 2023

Great! I will let @cyl19970726 follow up on this and see if we need more tests.

@qzhodl
Copy link

qzhodl commented Mar 30, 2023

some comments here: b3b870c#r106689902

@LiuJiazheng
Copy link
Collaborator

Yanlong is working on this based on my previous skeleton

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

No branches or pull requests

4 participants