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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Expose chunks in Plonk_verification_evals.t #14284

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Oct 10, 2023
Merged

Expose chunks in Plonk_verification_evals.t #14284

merged 2 commits into from
Oct 10, 2023

Conversation

mrmr1993
Copy link
Member

@mrmr1993 mrmr1993 commented Oct 5, 2023

This PR updates pickles for chunked polynomial commitments, as part of the work to enable chunking. This is an incremental step towards full chunking, and in particular this currently hard-codes the number of chunks as 1 in several places.

Checklist:

  • Dependency versions are unchanged
    • Notify Velocity team if dependencies must change in CI
  • Modified the current draft of release notes with details on what is completed or incomplete within this project
  • Document code purpose, how to use it
    • Mention expected invariants, implicit constraints
  • Tests were added for the new behavior
    • Document test purpose, significance of failures
    • Test names should reflect their purpose
  • All tests pass (CI will check this if you didn't)
  • Serialized types are in stable-versioned modules
  • Does this close issues? List them

@mrmr1993 mrmr1993 requested a review from a team as a code owner October 5, 2023 22:54
@mrmr1993
Copy link
Member Author

mrmr1993 commented Oct 5, 2023

!ci-build-me

dannywillems
dannywillems reviewed Oct 6, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@dannywillems dannywillems left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

First comments

src/lib/pickles/common.ml Show resolved Hide resolved
src/lib/pickles/common.ml Show resolved Hide resolved
src/lib/pickles/common.ml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/lib/pickles/common.ml Show resolved Hide resolved
src/lib/pickles/compile.ml Show resolved Hide resolved
dannywillems
dannywillems reviewed Oct 6, 2023
View reviewed changes
src/lib/pickles/wrap_verifier.ml
Some
{ non_zero = Boolean.(true_ &&& Point.finite p)
; point = Point.underlying p
{ non_zero = Boolean.(true_ &&& true_)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

See above

dannywillems
dannywillems reviewed Oct 6, 2023
View reviewed changes
src/lib/pickles/wrap_verifier.ml
Some
{ non_zero = Boolean.(keep &&& Point.finite p)
; point = Point.underlying p
{ non_zero = Boolean.(keep &&& true_)
Copy link
Member

@dannywillems dannywillems Oct 6, 2023 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Same than above. Why? Should it not be is_true or smth like this?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Point.finite p = false_ is unreachable, so we hard-code true_

dannywillems
dannywillems reviewed Oct 6, 2023
View reviewed changes
src/lib/pickles/wrap_verifier.ml
@@ -411,12 +417,18 @@ struct
[ `Finite of Inner_curve.t
| `Maybe_finite of Boolean.var * Inner_curve.t ]

let finite : t -> Boolean.var = function
let _finite : t -> Boolean.var = function
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

remove?

dannywillems
dannywillems reviewed Oct 6, 2023
View reviewed changes
src/lib/pickles/wrap_verifier.ml
| `Finite _ ->
Boolean.true_
| `Maybe_finite (b, _) ->
b

let assert_finite : t -> unit = function
| `Finite _ ->
()
Copy link
Member

@dannywillems dannywillems Oct 6, 2023 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Mmh. Are we sure of this? 🤔 I think a comment explaining wouldn't be too much.

@mrmr1993 mrmr1993 force-pushed the feature/more-chunks branch from cc60192 to 8e15884 Compare October 9, 2023 08:08
@mrmr1993 mrmr1993 mentioned this pull request Oct 10, 2023
Merged
7 tasks
@mrmr1993
Copy link
Member Author

!ci-build-me

This was referenced Oct 10, 2023
Open
Closed
dannywillems
dannywillems approved these changes Oct 10, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@dannywillems dannywillems left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Only have questions (asked before) and suggestions (opened follow-up).

@mrmr1993 mrmr1993 merged commit 695865f into develop Oct 10, 2023
@mrmr1993 mrmr1993 deleted the feature/more-chunks branch October 10, 2023 08:23
@querolita querolita mentioned this pull request Sep 17, 2024
Open
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@dannywillems dannywillems dannywillems approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@mrmr1993 @dannywillems