#7603
#### Custody backfill sync service
Similar in many ways to the current backfill service. There may be ways to unify the two services. The difficulty there is that the current backfill service tightly couples blocks and their associated blobs/data columns. Any attempts to unify the two services should be left to a separate PR in my opinion.
#### `SyncNeworkContext`
`SyncNetworkContext` manages custody sync data columns by range requests separetly from other sync RPC requests. I think this is a nice separation considering that custody backfill is its own service.
#### Data column import logic
The import logic verifies KZG committments and that the data columns block root matches the block root in the nodes store before importing columns
#### New channel to send messages to `SyncManager`
Now external services can communicate with the `SyncManager`. In this PR this channel is used to trigger a custody sync. Alternatively we may be able to use the existing `mpsc` channel that the `SyncNetworkContext` uses to communicate with the `SyncManager`. I will spend some time reviewing this.
Co-Authored-By: Eitan Seri-Levi <eserilev@ucsc.edu>
Co-Authored-By: Eitan Seri- Levi <eserilev@gmail.com>
Co-Authored-By: dapplion <35266934+dapplion@users.noreply.github.com>
N/A
1. In the batch retry logic, we were failing to set the batch state to `AwaitingDownload` before attempting a retry. This PR sets it to `AwaitingDownload` before the retry and sets it back to `Downloading` if the retry suceeded in sending out a request
2. Remove all peer scoring logic from retrying and rely on just de priorotizing the failed peer. I finally concede the point to @dapplion 😄
3. Changes `block_components_by_range_request` to accept `block_peers` and `column_peers`. This is to ensure that we use the full synced peerset for requesting columns in order to avoid splitting the column peers among multiple head chains. During forward sync, we want the block peers to be the peers from the syncing chain and column peers to be all synced peers from the peerdb.
Also, fixes a typo and calls `attempt_send_awaiting_download_batches` from more places
Co-Authored-By: Pawan Dhananjay <pawandhananjay@gmail.com>
#8105 (to be confirmed)
I noticed a large number of failed discovery requests after deploying latest `unstable` to some of our testnet and mainnet nodes. This is because of a recent PeerDAS change to attempt to maintain sufficient peers across data column subnets - this shouldn't be enabled on network without peerdas scheduled, otherwise it will keep retrying discovery on these subnets and never succeed.
Also removed some unused files.
Co-Authored-By: Jimmy Chen <jchen.tc@gmail.com>
Co-Authored-By: Jimmy Chen <jimmy@sigmaprime.io>
Anchor currently depends on `lighthouse_network` for a few types and utilities that live within. As we use our own libp2p behaviours, we actually do not use the core logic in that crate. This makes us transitively depend on a bunch of unneeded crates (even a whole separate libp2p if the versions mismatch!)
Move things we require into it's own lightweight crate.
Co-Authored-By: Daniel Knopik <daniel@dknopik.de>
I just noticed that one of the tests i added in #7915 is incorrect, after it was running flaky for a bit.
This PR fixes the scenario and ensure the outcome will always be the same.
Closes:
- #7865
- #7855
Changes extracted from earlier PR #7876
This PR fixes two main things with a few other improvements mentioned below:
- Prevent Lighthouse from repeatedly sending `DataColumnByRoot` requests to an unsynced peer, causing lookup sync to get stuck
- Allows Lighthouse to send discovery requests if there isn't enough **synced** peers in the required sampling subnets - this fixes the stuck sync scenario where there isn't enough usable peers in sampling subnet but no discovery is attempted.
- Make peer discovery queries if custody subnet peer count drops below the minimum threshold
- Update peer pruning logic to prioritise uniform distribution across all data column subnets and avoid pruning sampling peers if the count is below the target threshold (2)
- Check sync status when making discovery requests, to make sure we don't ignore requests if there isn't enough synced peers in the required sampling subnets
- Optimise some of the `PeerDB` functions checking custody peers
- Only send lookup requests to peers that are synced or advanced
This method is a footgun because it truncates the list. It is the source of a recent bug:
- https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/pull/7927
- Delete uses of `RuntimeVariableList::from_vec` and replace them with `::new` which does validation and can fail.
- Propagate errors where possible, unwrap in tests and use `expect` for obviously-safe uses (in `chain_spec.rs`).
Adds the required boilerplate code for the Gloas (Glamsterdam) hard fork. This allows PRs testing Gloas-candidate features to test fork transition.
This also includes de-duplication of post-Bellatrix readiness notifiers from #6797 (credit to @dapplion)
Fixes#7926
This was a bug I introduced in #7890 and @pawanjay176 noticed it on some running nodes, and added a rpc test to confirm it.
The culprit is this line, where I failed to fill the vec to it's max size, so it doesn't calculate the max size properly, resulting in all `DataColumnByRoot` requests exceeding the max size during validation:
d24a6d2a45/consensus/types/src/chain_spec.rs (L1984)
The PR fixes this and includes new regression tests for this fix.
Was going to leave this as a comment on #7877 but when noticed it had already been merged.
we have `DEFAULT_TARGET_PEERS` which was set to 50 and only used on the `Default` impl for `peer_manager`'s `Config`, which then get's overridden by this `lighthouse_network::Config`s default
This PR unifies everything on `DEFAULT_TARGET_PEERS`
#7181
Instead of storing the network key as binary data we store it as hex, allowing users to modify it via the file.
We can read old-binary forms, however we will migrate binary to hex as it will be the new standard.
#7815
- removes all existing spans, so some span fields that appear in logs like `service_name` may be lost.
- instruments a few key code paths in the beacon node, starting from **root spans** named below:
* Gossip block and blobs
* `process_gossip_data_column_sidecar`
* `process_gossip_blob`
* `process_gossip_block`
* Rpc block and blobs
* `process_rpc_block`
* `process_rpc_blobs`
* `process_rpc_custody_columns`
* Rpc blocks (range and backfill)
* `process_chain_segment`
* `PendingComponents` lifecycle
* `pending_components`
To test locally:
* Run Grafana and Tempo with https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse-metrics/pull/57
* Run Lighthouse BN with `--telemetry-collector-url http://localhost:4317`
Some captured traces can be found here: https://hackmd.io/@jimmygchen/r1sLOxPPeg
Removing the old spans seem to have reduced the memory usage quite a lot - i think we were using them on long running tasks and too excessively:
<img width="910" height="495" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/5208bbe4-53b2-4ead-bc71-0b782c788669" />
This PR fixes a bug where wrong columns could get processed immediately after a CGC increase.
Scenario:
- The node's CGC increased due to additional validators attached to it (lets say from 10 to 11)
- The new CGC is advertised and new subnets are subscribed immediately, however the change won't be effective in the data availability check until the next epoch (See [this](ab0e8870b4/beacon_node/beacon_chain/src/validator_custody.rs (L93-L99))). Data availability checker still only require 10 columns for the current epoch.
- During this time, data columns for the additional custody column (lets say column 11) may arrive via gossip as we're already subscribed to the topic, and it may be incorrectly used to satisfy the existing data availability requirement (10 columns), and result in this additional column (instead of a required one) getting persisted, resulting in database inconsistency.
Fix Clippy for recently released Rust 1.90 beta. There may be more changes required when Rust 1.89 stable is released in a few days, but possibly not 🤞
N/A
During building an enr on startup, we weren't using the value in the custody context.
This was resulting in the enr value getting updated when the cgc updates, the change getting persisted, but getting set back to the default on restart.
This PR takes the value explicitly from the custody context.
Which issue # does this PR address?
Closes#7604
Improvements to range sync including:
1. Contain column requests only to peers that are part of the SyncingChain
2. Attribute the fault to the correct peer and downscore them if they don't return the data columns for the request
3. Improve sync performance by retrying only the failed columns from other peers instead of failing the entire batch
4. Uses the earliest_available_slot to make requests to peers that claim to have the epoch. Note: if no earliest_available_slot info is available, fallback to using previous logic i.e. assume peer has everything backfilled upto WS checkpoint/da boundary
Tested this on fusaka-devnet-2 with a full node and supernode and the recovering logic seems to works well.
Also tested this a little on mainnet.
Need to do more testing and possibly add some unit tests.
Closes#7467.
This PR primarily addresses [the P2P changes](https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/pull/9840) in [fusaka-devnet-2](https://fusaka-devnet-2.ethpandaops.io/). Specifically:
* [the new `nfd` parameter added to the `ENR`](https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/pull/9840)
* [the modified `compute_fork_digest()` changes for every BPO fork](https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/pull/9840)
90% of this PR was absolutely hacked together as fast as possible during the Berlinterop as fast as I could while running between Glamsterdam debates. Luckily, it seems to work. But I was unable to be as careful in avoiding bugs as I usually am. I've cleaned up the things *I remember* wanting to come back and have a closer look at. But still working on this.
Progress:
* [x] get it working on `fusaka-devnet-2`
* [ ] [*optional* disconnect from peers with incorrect `nfd` at the fork boundary](https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/4407) - Can be addressed in a future PR if necessary
* [x] first pass clean-up
* [x] fix up all the broken tests
* [x] final self-review
* [x] more thorough review from people more familiar with affected code
Lighthouse is currently loggign a lot errors in the `RPC` behaviour whenever a response is received for a request_id that no longer exists in active_inbound_requests. This is likely due to a data race or timing issue (e.g., the peer disconnecting before the response is handled).
This PR addresses that by removing the error logging from the RPC layer. Instead, RPC::send_response now simply returns an Err, shifting the responsibility to the main service. The main service can then determine whether the peer is still connected and only log an error if the peer remains connected.
Thanks @ackintosh for helping debug!
Update `SAMPLES_PER_SLOT` to be number of custody groups instead of data columns. This should have no impact on the current implementation as config currently maintains a `group:subnet:column` ratio of `1:1:1`. **In short, this PR doesn't change anything for Fusaka, but ensures compliance with the spec and potential future changes.**
I've added separate methods to compute sampling columns and custody groups for clarity: `spec.sampling_size_columns` and `spec.sampling_size_custod_groups`
See the clarifications in this PR for more details: https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/4251
This bug was first found and partially fixed by @VolodymyrBg in #7317 - this PR applies the same fix everywhere else.
The old logic updated the waker when it already matched the context, and did nothing when it was stale:
```rust
if waker.will_wake(cx.waker()) {
self.waker = Some(cx.waker().clone());
}
```
This is the wrong way around. We only want to update the waker if it doesn't match the current context:
```rust
if !waker.will_wake(cx.waker()) {
self.waker = Some(cx.waker().clone());
}
```
I don't think we've ever noticed any issues, but it’s a subtle bug that could lead to missed wakeups.
#6970
This allows for us to receive `SingleAttestation` over gossip and process it without converting. There is still a conversion to `Attestation` as a final step in the attestation verification process, but by then the `SingleAttestation` is fully verified.
I've also fully removed the `submitPoolAttestationsV1` endpoint as its been deprecated
I've also pre-emptively deprecated supporting `Attestation` in `submitPoolAttestationsV2` endpoint. See here for more info: https://github.com/ethereum/beacon-APIs/pull/531
I tried to the minimize the diff here by only making the "required" changes. There are some unnecessary complexities with the way we manage the different attestation verification wrapper types. We could probably consolidate this to one wrapper type and refactor this even further. We could leave that to a separate PR if we feel like cleaning things up in the future.
Note that I've also updated the test harness to always submit `SingleAttestation` regardless of fork variant. I don't see a problem in that approach and it allows us to delete more code :)
Resolves#6767
This PR implements a basic version of validator custody.
- It introduces a new `CustodyContext` object which contains info regarding number of validators attached to a node and the custody count they contribute to the cgc.
- The `CustodyContext` is added in the da_checker and has methods for returning the current cgc and the number of columns to sample at head. Note that the logic for returning the cgc existed previously in the network globals.
- To estimate the number of validators attached, we use the `beacon_committee_subscriptions` endpoint. This might overestimate the number of validators actually publishing attestations from the node in the case of multi BN setups. We could also potentially use the `publish_attestations` endpoint to get a more conservative estimate at a later point.
- Anytime there's a change in the `custody_group_count` due to addition/removal of validators, the custody context should send an event on a broadcast channnel. The only subscriber for the channel exists in the network service which simply subscribes to more subnets. There can be additional subscribers in sync that will start a backfill once the cgc changes.
TODO
- [ ] **NOT REQUIRED:** Currently, the logic only handles an increase in validator count and does not handle a decrease. We should ideally unsubscribe from subnets when the cgc has decreased.
- [ ] **NOT REQUIRED:** Add a service in the `CustodyContext` that emits an event once `MIN_EPOCHS_FOR_BLOB_SIDECARS_REQUESTS ` passes after updating the current cgc. This event should be picked up by a subscriber which updates the enr and metadata.
- [x] Add more tests
https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/issues/6875
- Enabled the linter in rate-limiter and fixed errors.
- Changed the type of `Quota::max_tokens` from `u64` to `NonZeroU64` because `max_tokens` cannot be zero.
- Added a test to ensure that a large value for `tokens`, which causes an overflow, is handled properly.
Currently `test_delayed_rpc_response` is flaky (possibly specific to Windows?), but I'm not sure why.
Enabled stdout logging in rpc_tests. Note that in nextest, std output is only displayed when a test fails.
Closes https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/issues/6895
We need sync to retry custody requests when a peer CGC updates. A higher CGC can result in a data column subnet peer count increasing from 0 to 1, allowing requests to happen.
Add new sync event `SyncMessage::UpdatedPeerCgc`. It's sent by the router when a metadata response updates the known CGC
- Re-opens https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/pull/6864 targeting unstable
Range sync and backfill sync still assume that each batch request is done by a single peer. This assumption breaks with PeerDAS, where we request custody columns to N peers.
Issues with current unstable:
- Peer prioritization counts batch requests per peer. This accounting is broken now, data columns by range request are not accounted
- Peer selection for data columns by range ignores the set of peers on a syncing chain, instead draws from the global pool of peers
- The implementation is very strict when we have no peers to request from. After PeerDAS this case is very common and we want to be flexible or easy and handle that case better than just hard failing everything.
- [x] Upstream peer prioritization to the network context, it knows exactly how many active requests a peer (including columns by range)
- [x] Upstream peer selection to the network context, now `block_components_by_range_request` gets a set of peers to choose from instead of a single peer. If it can't find a peer, it returns the error `RpcRequestSendError::NoPeer`
- [ ] Range sync and backfill sync handle `RpcRequestSendError::NoPeer` explicitly
- [ ] Range sync: leaves the batch in `AwaitingDownload` state and does nothing. **TODO**: we should have some mechanism to fail the chain if it's stale for too long - **EDIT**: Not done in this PR
- [x] Backfill sync: pauses the sync until another peer joins - **EDIT**: Same logic as unstable
### TODOs
- [ ] Add tests :)
- [x] Manually test backfill sync
Note: this touches the mainnet path!
closes https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/issues/5785
The diagram below shows the differences in how the receiver (responder) behaves before and after this PR. The following sentences will detail the changes.
```mermaid
flowchart TD
subgraph "*** After ***"
Start2([START]) --> AA[Receive request]
AA --> COND1{Is there already an active request <br> with the same protocol?}
COND1 --> |Yes| CC[Send error response]
CC --> End2([END])
%% COND1 --> |No| COND2{Request is too large?}
%% COND2 --> |Yes| CC
COND1 --> |No| DD[Process request]
DD --> EE{Rate limit reached?}
EE --> |Yes| FF[Wait until tokens are regenerated]
FF --> EE
EE --> |No| GG[Send response]
GG --> End2
end
subgraph "*** Before ***"
Start([START]) --> A[Receive request]
A --> B{Rate limit reached <br> or <br> request is too large?}
B -->|Yes| C[Send error response]
C --> End([END])
B -->|No| E[Process request]
E --> F[Send response]
F --> End
end
```
### `Is there already an active request with the same protocol?`
This check is not performed in `Before`. This is taken from the PR in the consensus-spec, which proposes updates regarding rate limiting and response timeout.
https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/3767/files
> The requester MUST NOT make more than two concurrent requests with the same ID.
The PR mentions the requester side. In this PR, I introduced the `ActiveRequestsLimiter` for the `responder` side to restrict more than two requests from running simultaneously on the same protocol per peer. If the limiter disallows a request, the responder sends a rate-limited error and penalizes the requester.
### `Rate limit reached?` and `Wait until tokens are regenerated`
UPDATE: I moved the limiter logic to the behaviour side. https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/pull/5923#issuecomment-2379535927
~~The rate limiter is shared between the behaviour and the handler. (`Arc<Mutex<RateLimiter>>>`) The handler checks the rate limit and queues the response if the limit is reached. The behaviour handles pruning.~~
~~I considered not sharing the rate limiter between the behaviour and the handler, and performing all of these either within the behaviour or handler. However, I decided against this for the following reasons:~~
- ~~Regarding performing everything within the behaviour: The behaviour is unable to recognize the response protocol when `RPC::send_response()` is called, especially when the response is `RPCCodedResponse::Error`. Therefore, the behaviour can't rate limit responses based on the response protocol.~~
- ~~Regarding performing everything within the handler: When multiple connections are established with a peer, there could be multiple handlers interacting with that peer. Thus, we cannot enforce rate limiting per peer solely within the handler. (Any ideas? 🤔 )~~
Resolves#6811
Rename `GOSSIP_MAX_SIZE` to `MAX_PAYLOAD_SIZE` and remove `MAX_CHUNK_SIZE` in accordance with the spec.
The spec also "clarifies" the message size limits at different levels. The rpc limits are equivalent to what we had before imo.
The gossip limits have additional checks.
I have gotten rid of the `is_bellatrix_enabled` checks that used a lower limit (1mb) pre-merge. Since all networks we run start from the merge, I don't think this will break any setups.
