Skip to content

Conversation

@xlc
Copy link
Contributor

@xlc xlc commented Oct 31, 2022

Closes #2948
On top of #2950. the additional diff is 20d9235

Not yet tested.
Will mark this ready once I successfully get it e2e working with AcalaNetwork/chopsticks#13

@xlc xlc requested a review from tomaka as a code owner October 31, 2022 09:10
@mergify
Copy link
Contributor

mergify bot commented Oct 31, 2022

⚠️ The sha of the head commit of this PR conflicts with #2950. Mergify cannot evaluate rules on this PR. ⚠️

@xlc xlc marked this pull request as draft October 31, 2022 09:11
@xlc xlc closed this Oct 31, 2022
@xlc xlc deleted the mock-signature-verify branch October 31, 2022 21:34
@xlc xlc restored the mock-signature-verify branch October 31, 2022 21:34
mergify bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 1, 2022
cc @xlc 
After looking at #2952, I
thought that the approach in this PR is a better idea.

As shown in the changes to `runtime_host.rs` and
`read_only_runtime_host.rs`, you now have a new variant called
`SignatureVerification` that allows you to overwrite the verification if
you so desire.

As I was implemented this PR, I noticed that the implementation of
`ext_crypto_ecdsa_verify` loads the message from the first parameter,
which is actually the signature. Oops. This is fixed at the same time.

Co-authored-by: mergify[bot] <37929162+mergify[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
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.

Ability to provide alternative implementation of host functions

1 participant