Skip to content
GitLab
  1. 29 Jan, 2021 1 commit
  3. 28 Jan, 2021 2 commits
  5. 27 Jan, 2021 4 commits
  7. 26 Jan, 2021 4 commits
  9. 21 Jan, 2021 1 commit
    • Shawn Tabrizi's avatar
      Update Weight for Pallet Staking including Kick (#2297) · dbbb8758
      Shawn Tabrizi authored 
      

* Update pallet_staking.rs

* cargo run --release --features=runtime-benchmarks -- benchmark --chain=polkadot-dev --steps=50 --repeat=20 --pallet=pallet_staking --extrinsic=* --execution=wasm --wasm-execution=compiled --heap-pages=4096 --header=./file_header.txt --output=./runtime/polkadot/src/weights/

* cargo run --release --features=runtime-benchmarks -- benchmark --chain=kusama-dev --steps=50 --repeat=20 --pallet=pallet_staking --extrinsic=* --execution=wasm --wasm-execution=compiled --heap-pages=4096 --header=./file_header.txt --output=./runtime/kusama/src/weights/

* cargo run --release --features=runtime-benchmarks -- benchmark --chain=westend-dev --steps=50 --repeat=20 --pallet=pallet_staking --extrinsic=* --execution=wasm --wasm-execution=compiled --heap-pages=4096 --header=./file_header.txt --output=./runtime/westend/src/weights/

Co-authored-by: default avatarParity Benchmarking Bot <admin@parity.io>
      dbbb8758
  11. 20 Jan, 2021 3 commits
  13. 18 Jan, 2021 2 commits
  15. 17 Jan, 2021 1 commit
  17. 16 Jan, 2021 1 commit
  19. 15 Jan, 2021 2 commits
  21. 14 Jan, 2021 3 commits
  23. 13 Jan, 2021 4 commits
    • asynchronous rob's avatar
      scheduler: handle re-scheduling around finalization correctly (#2257) · 9115d427
      asynchronous rob authored 
      

* scheduler: handle re-scheduling around finalization correctly

* also make sure parathreads get cleaned

* run scheduling in finalization

* Remove stray println!

* Update the schedule call site in inclusion inherent

* Clarify subtlety around SessionStartBlock

* Remove double semi-colon

* reschedule prior to `availability_cores` and in on-initialize

* improve docs

* fix line

* more doc reformat

* remove unneeded call

* avoid unnecessary scheduling on initialize

* split `clear` and `schedule

* Update runtime/parachains/src/scheduler.rs

Co-authored-by: Sergey Pepyakin's avatarSergei Shulepov <sergei@parity.io>

Co-authored-by: Sergey Pepyakin's avatarSergei Shulepov <sergei@parity.io>
      9115d427
    • Andronik Ordian's avatar
      Companion for substrate#7892 (#2262) · e5ee5748
      Andronik Ordian authored 
      * session_info: use correct authorities set

* bump rococo spec_version to 19

* "Update Substrate"

Co-authored-by: parity-processbot <>
      e5ee5748
    • Sergey Pepyakin's avatar
      HRMP channel deposits (#2225) · 4489b528
      Sergey Pepyakin authored 
      * Drive by fixes

The visibility modifiers are remnants of the previous structure where
HRMP wasn't a standalone module, by rather a submodule of the router
module.

* Add Currency assoc type to Config

This would allow us to reserve balance for deposits. This commit also
integrates the HRMP module in rococo, test-runtime and mocks to use the
balances pallet.

* Fix a bug that doesn't increment the age

In case the request is not confirmed, the age would be incremented but
not persisted.

* Fix cleaning the indexes

Before that change, the cleaning of the channel indexes was wrong, because it
naively removed entire rows that was pertaining to the para we delete.
This approach is flawed because it doesn't account for the rows that are
pertaining to other paras that contain the outgoing one.

This clearly violates the invariant imposed on the indexes, that all
the index rows must contain alive paras, but apart from that it also
lead to the situation where ingress index would contain the a different
set of channels that an egress have.

* Reserve currency for opening the channels

Note the ugly `unique_saturated_into` calls. The reason for them is the
currency trait accepts and defines the `Balance` associated type and the
deposit values are coming from the `HostConfiguration` where they are
defined using the `Balance`.

I figured that parameterising `HostConfiguration` would be annoying. On
the other hand, I don't expect these `unique_saturated_into` calls to
give us problems since it seems to be a reasonable assumption that this
module will be instantiated within a runtime where the Currency provided
will have a Balance that matches the one used in the configuration.

* Tests: Adapt `run_to_block` so that it submits a proper config

* Tests: exercise the deposit logic
      4489b528
    • Sergey Pepyakin's avatar
      Avoid inlining `update_config_member` (#2246) · d0703258
      Sergey Pepyakin authored 
      Closes #2241
      d0703258
  25. 12 Jan, 2021 4 commits
  27. 11 Jan, 2021 3 commits
  29. 06 Jan, 2021 4 commits
  31. 05 Jan, 2021 1 commit
    • Peter Goodspeed-Niklaus's avatar
      Reduce the inclusion inherent's actual weight if the block is already heavy (#2060) · 0508b6f2
      Peter Goodspeed-Niklaus authored 
      * don't modify inherent data on heavy block

* write up current thinking on block weight detection

* extract inherent inclusion check into its own function

* put heavy block check into runtime

* the `inclusion` inherent call is Operational, not Mandatory

This resolves a lot of the trickiness about this issue, because
we no longer need to override or supplant any existing proposer
logic; the existing logic should exhibit these behaviors:

- the `inclusion` inherent is prioritized over standard transactions
- but if it's too heavy, i.e. in case of runtime upgrade, it'll be
  dropped in favor of that.

It is my belief that allowing the proposer to just not include
this data won't have any adverse effects: it's equivalent to replacing
them with empty versions of themselves, which the `ProvideInherent`
impl already does.

* Revert "the `inclusion` inherent call is Operational, not Mandatory"

This reverts commit e58858d1.

* Revert "write up current thinking on block weight detection"

This reverts commit fd587b80.

* Revert "don't modify inherent data on heavy block"

This reverts commit 38299d3c

.

* add backed candidate block weight assumption to configuration

* Limit backed candidates according to a candidate weight heuristic.

This approach replaces making the inclusion inherent non-mandatory.
It's still not ideal in that we have to configure a heuristic for
how much each backed candidate 'weighs', instead of directly
measuring it somehow.

This approach also never truncates the signed bitfields. The
rationale for that depends on some assumptions:

- processing the signed bitfields is cheap compared to the
  backed candidates
- it is beneficial to the progress of the relay chain
  to update the signed bitfields even if not all backed candidates
  are updated

* simplify limit_backed_candidates and weight assumption

* don't trust the provisioner to fairly distribute candidates

* use saturating subtraction

* empty commit to restart ci

* use new mechanism for getting max block weight

* apply weight refunds to the inclusion inherent

This makes some assumptions about fundamental weights, which are
encapsulated as constants. From there, it lets Substrate know
what the actual computed weight of the inherent is.

* use a correct fixed weight for the inclusion inherent

Co-authored-by: thiolliere's avatarGuillaume Thiolliere <gui.thiolliere@gmail.com>

* use dynamic inclusion weight so we reduce calculated weight when excluding candidates

* don't double-count this intrinsic's weight in the block weight

* add unit tests of fn limit_backed_candidates

* add tests that the inclusion inherent's weight correctly updates

Co-authored-by: thiolliere's avatarGuillaume Thiolliere <gui.thiolliere@gmail.com>
      0508b6f2