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

refactor: replacing use of capsules 1.0 with pxe_db + nuking capsules 1.0 #11885

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Feb 11, 2025

Conversation

benesjan
Copy link
Contributor

@benesjan benesjan commented Feb 10, 2025

Capsules 1.0 where now only used in one place in the codebase and its use could have been replaced with pxe_db (which is to be renamed to capsules in a followup PR). I do that in this PR along with nuking capsules 1.0.

I will rename pxe_db to capsules in a follow-up PR.

Copy link
Contributor Author

This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking.

@benesjan benesjan force-pushed the 02-10-refactor_replacing_use_of_capsules_with_pxe_db branch from b54c276 to 7fa607e Compare February 10, 2025 16:10
@@ -33,8 +32,7 @@ pub contract ContractClassRegisterer {
};

// docs:start:import_pop_capsule
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The docs need to be updated. I plan on doing that in a follow-up PR once I rename pxe_db to capsules.

addCapsule(capsule: Fr[]): Promise<void> {
return this.pxe.addCapsule(capsule);
addCapsule(contract: AztecAddress, storageSlot: Fr, capsule: Fr[]): Promise<void> {
return this.pxe.addCapsule(contract, storageSlot, capsule);
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Kept the capsules name here as I will rename pxe_db to it in a followup PR.

@benesjan benesjan changed the title refactor: replacing use of capsules with pxe_db refactor: replacing use of capsules 1.0 with pxe_db + nuking capsules 1.0 Feb 10, 2025
@benesjan benesjan added the e2e-all CI: Enables this CI job. label Feb 10, 2025
@benesjan benesjan marked this pull request as ready for review February 10, 2025 16:21
@benesjan benesjan force-pushed the 02-10-refactor_replacing_use_of_capsules_with_pxe_db branch from 7fa607e to 7d28d49 Compare February 11, 2025 07:56
@AztecBot
Copy link
Collaborator

AztecBot commented Feb 11, 2025

Docs Preview

Hey there! 👋 You can check your preview at https://67ab478e3df3ac068c7bda9a--aztec-docs-dev.netlify.app

@benesjan benesjan requested a review from sklppy88 February 11, 2025 08:58
Copy link
Contributor

@sklppy88 sklppy88 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Have a small question, looks great! Love the nuking of more stuff on the interface ! Also unrelated to your pr but "storageslot" being used here as a term in the pxe db is weird to me when it already has connotations to contract storage.

let packed_public_bytecode: [Field; MAX_PACKED_PUBLIC_BYTECODE_SIZE_IN_FIELDS] =
unsafe { pop_capsule() };
let packed_public_bytecode: [Field; MAX_PACKED_PUBLIC_BYTECODE_SIZE_IN_FIELDS] = unsafe {
pxe_db::load(
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I know before we only had one logical storage slot for pub / priv / unconstrained due to capsule design, but does it make sense still given the new design ?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@benesjan benesjan Feb 11, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It worked before with the same storage slot so I didn't bother with changing it. Would change it if it for whatever reason becomes an issue.

@benesjan benesjan removed the e2e-all CI: Enables this CI job. label Feb 11, 2025
@benesjan benesjan enabled auto-merge (squash) February 11, 2025 12:25
@benesjan benesjan merged commit 72be678 into master Feb 11, 2025
52 checks passed
@benesjan benesjan deleted the 02-10-refactor_replacing_use_of_capsules_with_pxe_db branch February 11, 2025 13:05
sklppy88 pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 11, 2025
🤖 I have created a release *beep* *boop*
---


<details><summary>aztec-package: 0.76.2</summary>

##
[0.76.2](aztec-package-v0.76.1...aztec-package-v0.76.2)
(2025-02-11)


### Miscellaneous

* **logging:** Support explicit FORCE_COLOR parameter
([#11902](#11902))
([3b3f859](3b3f859))
</details>

<details><summary>barretenberg.js: 0.76.2</summary>

##
[0.76.2](barretenberg.js-v0.76.1...barretenberg.js-v0.76.2)
(2025-02-11)


### Miscellaneous

* **barretenberg.js:** Synchronize aztec-packages versions
</details>

<details><summary>aztec-packages: 0.76.2</summary>

##
[0.76.2](aztec-packages-v0.76.1...aztec-packages-v0.76.2)
(2025-02-11)


### Features

* Batch writes to the proving broker database
([#11900](#11900))
([608f887](608f887))


### Bug Fixes

* Cleanup also post test_kind.sh
([#11886](#11886))
([50cdb15](50cdb15))
* Dont skip wasm civc tests
([#11909](#11909))
([0395e0b](0395e0b))
* Note hash collision
([#11869](#11869))
([f289b7c](f289b7c))
* Orchestrator test
([#11901](#11901))
([f1bb51c](f1bb51c))
* Smt_verification: negative bitvecs, changed gates indicies.
acir_formal_proofs: noir-style signed division
([#11649](#11649))
([4146496](4146496))
* Update path of stern logs
([#11906](#11906))
([05afb5b](05afb5b))


### Miscellaneous

* Arm runner start fix
([#11903](#11903))
([6c83c40](6c83c40))
* Fixing the sizes of VMs in CIVC
([#11793](#11793))
([1afddbd](1afddbd))
* **logging:** Support explicit FORCE_COLOR parameter
([#11902](#11902))
([3b3f859](3b3f859))
* Misc fixes to devnet deploy flow
([#11738](#11738))
([bc4cca7](bc4cca7))
* Remove warnings from noir protocol circuits
([#11803](#11803))
([c6cc3d3](c6cc3d3))
* Replace relative paths to noir-protocol-circuits
([74d6e6a](74d6e6a))
* Replacing use of capsules 1.0 with pxe_db + nuking capsules 1.0
([#11885](#11885))
([72be678](72be678))
</details>

<details><summary>barretenberg: 0.76.2</summary>

##
[0.76.2](barretenberg-v0.76.1...barretenberg-v0.76.2)
(2025-02-11)


### Bug Fixes

* Note hash collision
([#11869](#11869))
([f289b7c](f289b7c))
* Smt_verification: negative bitvecs, changed gates indicies.
acir_formal_proofs: noir-style signed division
([#11649](#11649))
([4146496](4146496))


### Miscellaneous

* Fixing the sizes of VMs in CIVC
([#11793](#11793))
([1afddbd](1afddbd))
</details>

---
This PR was generated with [Release
Please](https://github.com/googleapis/release-please). See
[documentation](https://github.com/googleapis/release-please#release-please).
AztecBot added a commit to AztecProtocol/barretenberg that referenced this pull request Feb 12, 2025
🤖 I have created a release *beep* *boop*
---


<details><summary>aztec-package: 0.76.2</summary>

##
[0.76.2](AztecProtocol/aztec-packages@aztec-package-v0.76.1...aztec-package-v0.76.2)
(2025-02-11)


### Miscellaneous

* **logging:** Support explicit FORCE_COLOR parameter
([#11902](AztecProtocol/aztec-packages#11902))
([3b3f859](AztecProtocol/aztec-packages@3b3f859))
</details>

<details><summary>barretenberg.js: 0.76.2</summary>

##
[0.76.2](AztecProtocol/aztec-packages@barretenberg.js-v0.76.1...barretenberg.js-v0.76.2)
(2025-02-11)


### Miscellaneous

* **barretenberg.js:** Synchronize aztec-packages versions
</details>

<details><summary>aztec-packages: 0.76.2</summary>

##
[0.76.2](AztecProtocol/aztec-packages@aztec-packages-v0.76.1...aztec-packages-v0.76.2)
(2025-02-11)


### Features

* Batch writes to the proving broker database
([#11900](AztecProtocol/aztec-packages#11900))
([608f887](AztecProtocol/aztec-packages@608f887))


### Bug Fixes

* Cleanup also post test_kind.sh
([#11886](AztecProtocol/aztec-packages#11886))
([50cdb15](AztecProtocol/aztec-packages@50cdb15))
* Dont skip wasm civc tests
([#11909](AztecProtocol/aztec-packages#11909))
([0395e0b](AztecProtocol/aztec-packages@0395e0b))
* Note hash collision
([#11869](AztecProtocol/aztec-packages#11869))
([f289b7c](AztecProtocol/aztec-packages@f289b7c))
* Orchestrator test
([#11901](AztecProtocol/aztec-packages#11901))
([f1bb51c](AztecProtocol/aztec-packages@f1bb51c))
* Smt_verification: negative bitvecs, changed gates indicies.
acir_formal_proofs: noir-style signed division
([#11649](AztecProtocol/aztec-packages#11649))
([4146496](AztecProtocol/aztec-packages@4146496))
* Update path of stern logs
([#11906](AztecProtocol/aztec-packages#11906))
([05afb5b](AztecProtocol/aztec-packages@05afb5b))


### Miscellaneous

* Arm runner start fix
([#11903](AztecProtocol/aztec-packages#11903))
([6c83c40](AztecProtocol/aztec-packages@6c83c40))
* Fixing the sizes of VMs in CIVC
([#11793](AztecProtocol/aztec-packages#11793))
([1afddbd](AztecProtocol/aztec-packages@1afddbd))
* **logging:** Support explicit FORCE_COLOR parameter
([#11902](AztecProtocol/aztec-packages#11902))
([3b3f859](AztecProtocol/aztec-packages@3b3f859))
* Misc fixes to devnet deploy flow
([#11738](AztecProtocol/aztec-packages#11738))
([bc4cca7](AztecProtocol/aztec-packages@bc4cca7))
* Remove warnings from noir protocol circuits
([#11803](AztecProtocol/aztec-packages#11803))
([c6cc3d3](AztecProtocol/aztec-packages@c6cc3d3))
* Replace relative paths to noir-protocol-circuits
([74d6e6a](AztecProtocol/aztec-packages@74d6e6a))
* Replacing use of capsules 1.0 with pxe_db + nuking capsules 1.0
([#11885](AztecProtocol/aztec-packages#11885))
([72be678](AztecProtocol/aztec-packages@72be678))
</details>

<details><summary>barretenberg: 0.76.2</summary>

##
[0.76.2](AztecProtocol/aztec-packages@barretenberg-v0.76.1...barretenberg-v0.76.2)
(2025-02-11)


### Bug Fixes

* Note hash collision
([#11869](AztecProtocol/aztec-packages#11869))
([f289b7c](AztecProtocol/aztec-packages@f289b7c))
* Smt_verification: negative bitvecs, changed gates indicies.
acir_formal_proofs: noir-style signed division
([#11649](AztecProtocol/aztec-packages#11649))
([4146496](AztecProtocol/aztec-packages@4146496))


### Miscellaneous

* Fixing the sizes of VMs in CIVC
([#11793](AztecProtocol/aztec-packages#11793))
([1afddbd](AztecProtocol/aztec-packages@1afddbd))
</details>

---
This PR was generated with [Release
Please](https://github.com/googleapis/release-please). See
[documentation](https://github.com/googleapis/release-please#release-please).
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants