## Issue Addressed
New lints for rust 1.65
## Proposed Changes
Notable change is the identification or parameters that are only used in recursion
## Additional Info
na
## Summary
The deposit cache now has the ability to finalize deposits. This will cause it to drop unneeded deposit logs and hashes in the deposit Merkle tree that are no longer required to construct deposit proofs. The cache is finalized whenever the latest finalized checkpoint has a new `Eth1Data` with all deposits imported.
This has three benefits:
1. Improves the speed of constructing Merkle proofs for deposits as we can just replay deposits since the last finalized checkpoint instead of all historical deposits when re-constructing the Merkle tree.
2. Significantly faster weak subjectivity sync as the deposit cache can be transferred to the newly syncing node in compressed form. The Merkle tree that stores `N` finalized deposits requires a maximum of `log2(N)` hashes. The newly syncing node then only needs to download deposits since the last finalized checkpoint to have a full tree.
3. Future proofing in preparation for [EIP-4444](https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-4444) as execution nodes will no longer be required to store logs permanently so we won't always have all historical logs available to us.
## More Details
Image to illustrate how the deposit contract merkle tree evolves and finalizes along with the resulting `DepositTreeSnapshot`
## Other Considerations
I've changed the structure of the `SszDepositCache` so once you load & save your database from this version of lighthouse, you will no longer be able to load it from older versions.
Co-authored-by: ethDreamer <37123614+ethDreamer@users.noreply.github.com>
* add capella gossip boiler plate
* get everything compiling
Co-authored-by: realbigsean <sean@sigmaprime.io
Co-authored-by: Mark Mackey <mark@sigmaprime.io>
* small cleanup
* small cleanup
* cargo fix + some test cleanup
* improve block production
* add fixme for potential panic
Co-authored-by: Mark Mackey <mark@sigmaprime.io>
## Issue Addressed
This reverts commit ca9dc8e094 (PR #3559) with some modifications.
## Proposed Changes
Unfortunately that PR introduced a performance regression in fork choice. The optimisation _intended_ to build the exit and pubkey caches on the head state _only if_ they were not already built. However, due to the head state always being cloned without these caches, we ended up building them every time the head changed, leading to a ~70ms+ penalty on mainnet.
fcfd02aeec/beacon_node/beacon_chain/src/canonical_head.rs (L633-L636)
I believe this is a severe enough regression to justify immediately releasing v3.2.1 with this change.
## Additional Info
I didn't fully revert #3559, because there were some unrelated deletions of dead code in that PR which I figured we may as well keep.
An alternative would be to clone the extra caches, but this likely still imposes some cost, so in the interest of applying a conservative fix quickly, I think reversion is the best approach. The optimisation from #3559 was not even optimising a particularly significant path, it was mostly for VCs running larger numbers of inactive keys. We can re-do it in the `tree-states` world where cache clones are cheap.
## Issue Addressed
Fix a bug in block production that results in blocks with 0 attestations during the first slot of an epoch.
The bug is marked by debug logs of the form:
> DEBG Discarding attestation because of missing ancestor, block_root: 0x3cc00d9c9e0883b2d0db8606278f2b8423d4902f9a1ee619258b5b60590e64f8, pivot_slot: 4042591
It occurs when trying to look up the shuffling decision root for an attestation from a slot which is prior to fork choice's finalized block. This happens frequently when proposing in the first slot of the epoch where we have:
- `current_epoch == n`
- `attestation.data.target.epoch == n - 1`
- attestation shuffling epoch `== n - 3` (decision block being the last block of `n - 3`)
- `state.finalized_checkpoint.epoch == n - 2` (first block of `n - 2` is finalized)
Hence the shuffling decision slot is out of range of the fork choice backwards iterator _by a single slot_.
Unfortunately this bug was hidden when we weren't pruning fork choice, and then reintroduced in v2.5.1 when we fixed the pruning (https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/releases/tag/v2.5.1). There's no way to turn that off or disable the filtering in our current release, so we need a new release to fix this issue.
Fortunately, it also does not occur on every epoch boundary because of the gradual pruning of fork choice every 256 blocks (~8 epochs):
01e84b71f5/consensus/proto_array/src/proto_array_fork_choice.rs (L16)01e84b71f5/consensus/proto_array/src/proto_array.rs (L713-L716)
So the probability of proposing a 0-attestation block given a proposal assignment is approximately `1/32 * 1/8 = 0.39%`.
## Proposed Changes
- Load the block's shuffling ID from fork choice and verify it against the expected shuffling ID of the head state. This code was initially written before we had settled on a representation of shuffling IDs, so I think it's a nice simplification to make use of them here rather than more ad-hoc logic that fundamentally does the same thing.
## Additional Info
Thanks to @moshe-blox for noticing this issue and bringing it to our attention.
## Issue Addressed
Closes https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/issues/2371
## Proposed Changes
Backport some changes from `tree-states` that remove duplicated calculations of the `proposer_index`.
With this change the proposer index should be calculated only once for each block, and then plumbed through to every place it is required.
## Additional Info
In future I hope to add more data to the consensus context that is cached on a per-epoch basis, like the effective balances of validators and the base rewards.
There are some other changes to remove indexing in tests that were also useful for `tree-states` (the `tree-states` types don't implement `Index`).
## Issue Addressed
While digging around in some logs I noticed that queries for validators by pubkey were taking 10ms+, which seemed too long. This was due to a loop through the entire validator registry for each lookup.
## Proposed Changes
Rather than using a loop through the register, this PR utilises the pubkey cache which is usually initialised at the head*. In case the cache isn't built, we fall back to the previous loop logic. In the vast majority of cases I expect the cache will be built, as the validator client queries at the `head` where all caches should be built.
## Additional Info
*I had to modify the cache build that runs after fork choice to build the pubkey cache. I think it had been optimised out, perhaps accidentally. I think it's preferable to have the exit cache and the pubkey cache built on the head state, as they are required for verifying deposits and exits respectively, and we may as well build them off the hot path of block processing. Previously they'd get built the first time a deposit or exit needed to be verified.
I've deleted the unused `map_state` function which was obsoleted by `map_state_and_execution_optimistic`.
## Issue Addressed
N/A
## Proposed Changes
With https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/pull/3214 we made it such that you can either have 1 auth endpoint or multiple non auth endpoints. Now that we are post merge on all networks (testnets and mainnet), we cannot progress a chain without a dedicated auth execution layer connection so there is no point in having a non-auth eth1-endpoint for syncing deposit cache.
This code removes all fallback related code in the eth1 service. We still keep the single non-auth endpoint since it's useful for testing.
## Additional Info
This removes all eth1 fallback related metrics that were relevant for the monitoring service, so we might need to change the api upstream.
## Issue Addressed
fixes lints from the last rust release
## Proposed Changes
Fix the lints, most of the lints by `clippy::question-mark` are false positives in the form of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/9518 so it's allowed for now
## Additional Info
## Issue Addressed
NA
## Proposed Changes
This PR attempts to fix the following spurious CI failure:
```
---- store_tests::garbage_collect_temp_states_from_failed_block stdout ----
thread 'store_tests::garbage_collect_temp_states_from_failed_block' panicked at 'disk store should initialize: DBError { message: "Error { message: \"IO error: lock /tmp/.tmp6DcBQ9/cold_db/LOCK: already held by process\" }" }', beacon_node/beacon_chain/tests/store_tests.rs:59:10
```
I believe that some async task is taking a clone of the store and holding it in some other thread for a short time. This creates a race-condition when we try to open a new instance of the store.
## Additional Info
NA
## Issue Addressed
NA
## Proposed Changes
This PR removes duplicated block root computation.
Computing the `SignedBeaconBlock::canonical_root` has become more expensive since the merge as we need to compute the merke root of each transaction inside an `ExecutionPayload`.
Computing the root for [a mainnet block](https://beaconcha.in/slot/4704236) is taking ~10ms on my i7-8700K CPU @ 3.70GHz (no sha extensions). Given that our median seen-to-imported time for blocks is presently 300-400ms, removing a few duplicated block roots (~30ms) could represent an easy 10% improvement. When we consider that the seen-to-imported times include operations *after* the block has been placed in the early attester cache, we could expect the 30ms to be more significant WRT our seen-to-attestable times.
## Additional Info
NA
## Issue Addressed
NA
## Proposed Changes
Fixes an issue introduced in #3574 where I erroneously assumed that a `crossbeam_channel` multiple receiver queue was a *broadcast* queue. This is incorrect, each message will be received by *only one* receiver. The effect of this mistake is these logs:
```
Sep 20 06:56:17.001 INFO Synced slot: 4736079, block: 0xaa8a…180d, epoch: 148002, finalized_epoch: 148000, finalized_root: 0x2775…47f2, exec_hash: 0x2ca5…ffde (verified), peers: 6, service: slot_notifier
Sep 20 06:56:23.237 ERRO Unable to validate attestation error: CommitteeCacheWait(RecvError), peer_id: 16Uiu2HAm2Jnnj8868tb7hCta1rmkXUf5YjqUH1YPj35DCwNyeEzs, type: "aggregated", slot: Slot(4736047), beacon_block_root: 0x88d318534b1010e0ebd79aed60b6b6da1d70357d72b271c01adf55c2b46206c1
```
## Additional Info
NA
## Proposed Changes
Improve the payload pruning feature in several ways:
- Payload pruning is now entirely optional. It is enabled by default but can be disabled with `--prune-payloads false`. The previous `--prune-payloads-on-startup` flag from #3565 is removed.
- Initial payload pruning on startup now runs in a background thread. This thread will always load the split state, which is a small fraction of its total work (up to ~300ms) and then backtrack from that state. This pruning process ran in 2m5s on one Prater node with good I/O and 16m on a node with slower I/O.
- To work with the optional payload pruning the database function `try_load_full_block` will now attempt to load execution payloads for finalized slots _if_ pruning is currently disabled. This gives users an opt-out for the extensive traffic between the CL and EL for reconstructing payloads.
## Additional Info
If the `prune-payloads` flag is toggled on and off then the on-startup check may not see any payloads to delete and fail to clean them up. In this case the `lighthouse db prune_payloads` command should be used to force a manual sweep of the database.
## Issue Addressed
Closes https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/issues/3556
## Proposed Changes
Delete finalized execution payloads from the database in two places:
1. When running the finalization migration in `migrate_database`. We delete the finalized payloads between the last split point and the new updated split point. _If_ payloads are already pruned prior to this then this is sufficient to prune _all_ payloads as non-canonical payloads are already deleted by the head pruner, and all canonical payloads prior to the previous split will already have been pruned.
2. To address the fact that users will update to this code _after_ the merge on mainnet (and testnets), we need a one-off scan to delete the finalized payloads from the canonical chain. This is implemented in `try_prune_execution_payloads` which runs on startup and scans the chain back to the Bellatrix fork or the anchor slot (if checkpoint synced after Bellatrix). In the case where payloads are already pruned this check only imposes a single state load for the split state, which shouldn't be _too slow_. Even so, a flag `--prepare-payloads-on-startup=false` is provided to turn this off after it has run the first time, which provides faster start-up times.
There is also a new `lighthouse db prune_payloads` subcommand for users who prefer to run the pruning manually.
## Additional Info
The tests have been updated to not rely on finalized payloads in the database, instead using the `MockExecutionLayer` to reconstruct them. Additionally a check was added to `check_chain_dump` which asserts the non-existence or existence of payloads on disk depending on their slot.
## Issue Addressed
NA
## Proposed Changes
I have observed scenarios on Goerli where Lighthouse was receiving attestations which reference the same, un-cached shuffling on multiple threads at the same time. Lighthouse was then loading the same state from database and determining the shuffling on multiple threads at the same time. This is unnecessary load on the disk and RAM.
This PR modifies the shuffling cache so that each entry can be either:
- A committee
- A promise for a committee (i.e., a `crossbeam_channel::Receiver`)
Now, in the scenario where we have thread A and thread B simultaneously requesting the same un-cached shuffling, we will have the following:
1. Thread A will take the write-lock on the shuffling cache, find that there's no cached committee and then create a "promise" (a `crossbeam_channel::Sender`) for a committee before dropping the write-lock.
1. Thread B will then be allowed to take the write-lock for the shuffling cache and find the promise created by thread A. It will block the current thread waiting for thread A to fulfill that promise.
1. Thread A will load the state from disk, obtain the shuffling, send it down the channel, insert the entry into the cache and then continue to verify the attestation.
1. Thread B will then receive the shuffling from the receiver, be un-blocked and then continue to verify the attestation.
In the case where thread A fails to generate the shuffling and drops the sender, the next time that specific shuffling is requested we will detect that the channel is disconnected and return a `None` entry for that shuffling. This will cause the shuffling to be re-calculated.
## Additional Info
NA
