## Issue Addressed
Fix a bug introduced by #3696. The bug is not expected to occur frequently, so releasing this PR is non-urgent.
## Proposed Changes
* Add a variant to `StoreOp` that allows a raw KV operation to be passed around.
* Return to using `self.store.do_atomically` rather than `self.store.hot_db.do_atomically`. This streamlines the write back into a single call and makes our auto-revert work again.
* Prevent `import_block_update_shuffling_cache` from failing block import. This is an outstanding bug from before v3.4.0 which may have contributed to some random unexplained database corruption.
## Additional Info
In #3696 I split the database write into two calls, one to convert the `StoreOp`s to `KeyValueStoreOp`s and one to write them. This had the unfortunate side-effect of damaging our atomicity guarantees in case of a write error. If the first call failed, we would be left with the block in fork choice but not on-disk (or the snapshot cache), which would prevent us from processing any descendant blocks. On `unstable` the first call is very unlikely to fail unless the disk is full, but on `tree-states` the conversion is more involved and a user reported database corruption after it failed in a way that should have been recoverable.
Additionally, as @emhane observed, #3696 also inadvertently removed the import of the new block into the block cache. Although this seems like it could have negatively impacted performance, there are several mitigating factors:
- For regular block processing we should almost always load the parent block (and state) from the snapshot cache.
- We often load blinded blocks, which bypass the block cache anyway.
- Metrics show no noticeable increase in the block cache miss rate with v3.4.0.
However, I expect the block cache _will_ be useful again in `tree-states`, so it is restored to use by this PR.
## Issue Addressed
NA
## Description
We were missing an edge case when checking to see if a block is a descendant of the finalized checkpoint. This edge case is described for one of the tests in this PR:
a119edc739/consensus/proto_array/src/proto_array_fork_choice.rs (L1018-L1047)
This bug presented itself in the following mainnet log:
```
Jan 26 15:12:42.841 ERRO Unable to validate attestation error: MissingBeaconState(0x7c30cb80ec3d4ec624133abfa70e4c6cfecfca456bfbbbff3393e14e5b20bf25), peer_id: 16Uiu2HAm8RPRciXJYtYc5c3qtCRdrZwkHn2BXN3XP1nSi1gxHYit, type: "unaggregated", slot: Slot(5660161), beacon_block_root: 0x4a45e59da7cb9487f4836c83bdd1b741b4f31c67010c7ae343fa6771b3330489
```
Here the BN is rejecting an attestation because of a "missing beacon state". Whilst it was correct to reject the attestation, it should have rejected it because it attests to a block that conflicts with finality rather than claiming that the database is inconsistent.
The block that this attestation points to (`0x4a45`) is block `C` in the above diagram. It is a non-canonical block in the first slot of an epoch that conflicts with the finalized checkpoint. Due to our lazy pruning of proto array, `0x4a45` was still present in proto-array. Our missed edge-case in [`ForkChoice::is_descendant_of_finalized`](38514c07f2/consensus/fork_choice/src/fork_choice.rs (L1375-L1379)) would have indicated to us that the block is a descendant of the finalized block. Therefore, we would have accepted the attestation thinking that it attests to a descendant of the finalized *checkpoint*.
Since we didn't have the shuffling for this erroneously processed block, we attempted to read its state from the database. This failed because we prune states from the database by keeping track of the tips of the chain and iterating back until we find a finalized block. This would have deleted `C` from the database, hence the `MissingBeaconState` error.
