Handle equivocations correctly #5
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
gnunicorn
approved these changes
Aug 28, 2018
src/bitfield.rs
Outdated
| let word_off = bit_idx / 64; | ||
| let bit_off = bit_idx % 64; | ||
|
|
||
| // TODO: if this isn't `Some`, something has gone really wrong. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes, please log this with warning or higher. I don't think it can happen at the moment, but IMHO stuff in here should scream loudly if it assumptions are not met.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Closes #4
This introduces a
bitfieldmodule, which is used to lazily attach bitfields for equivocating (double-voting) validators as soon as we have an equivocating validator. The bitfields are uninitialized in the general case and are fast. The node-weight addition logic has been altered to avoid double-counting any equivocated votes.The second, and probably most error-prone thing this does is to alter the logic for determining if a round is completable. The completable check sometimes needs to determine if any descendents of a block could possibly get 2/3+ vote-weight, and this PR alters the logic there to account for possible equivocations on blocks (i.e. not discounting any vote-weight which has already been spent).