fix(apollo_reverts): change confusing info log

[noamsp-starkware]

No description provided.

[reviewable-StarkWare]

This change is 

[noamsp-starkware]

• fix(apollo_reverts): change confusing info log #4298 👈 (View in Graphite)
• main

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

[ShahakShama]

Reviewed all commit messages.
Reviewable status: 0 of 1 files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion

---

crates/apollo_reverts/src/lib.rs line 74 at r1 (raw file):

    info!(
        "Reverting {component_name} from storage height marker {storage_height_marker} to target \

Is this change because storage height marker is +1 than block? If yes, revert this change, rename the variables to be block_number and change revert_block_fn to be -1 than what it is right now

[ShahakShama]

Reviewed 1 of 1 files at r2, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @noamsp-starkware)

---

crates/apollo_reverts/src/lib.rs line 101 at r2 (raw file):

/// the block.
// This function will panic if the storage reader fails to revert.
pub fn revert_block(storage_writer: &mut StorageWriter, current_block_number: BlockNumber) {

Change this to current_block_marker

[noamsp-starkware]

Reviewable status: 0 of 1 files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @ShahakShama)

---

crates/apollo_reverts/src/lib.rs line 101 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, ShahakShama wrote…

Change this to current_block_marker

Changed to target_block_marker.

[ShahakShama]

Reviewed 1 of 1 files at r3, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @noamsp-starkware)

---

a discussion (no related file):
@DvirYo-starkware and @Yael-Starkware should review this as well

[DvirYo-starkware]

Reviewable status: 0 of 1 files reviewed, 3 unresolved discussions (waiting on @noamsp-starkware, @ShahakShama, and @Yael-Starkware)

---

crates/apollo_reverts/src/lib.rs line 74 at r4 (raw file):

    info!(
        "Reverting {component_name} from storage height marker {storage_height_marker} to target \

1. Here, you write marker, and in other logs, you don't explicitly say that
2. The config value revert_up_to_and_including is not a marker, but the logs are; this a bit weird
3. if you keep it without change, consider adding a variable that says that explicitly target_block_marker=revert_up_to_and_including,

Code quote:

storage height marker

---

crates/apollo_reverts/src/lib.rs line 93 at r4 (raw file):

         block in storage is {}.
         Starting eternal pending.",
        revert_up_to_and_including.0 - 1

If revert_up_to_and_including is 0, the number here will be -1.

Code quote:

revert_up_to_and_including.0 - 1

[noamsp-starkware]

Reviewable status: 0 of 1 files reviewed, 3 unresolved discussions (waiting on @DvirYo-starkware, @ShahakShama, and @Yael-Starkware)

---

crates/apollo_reverts/src/lib.rs line 74 at r4 (raw file):

Previously, DvirYo-starkware wrote…

1. Here, you write marker, and in other logs, you don't explicitly say that
2. The config value revert_up_to_and_including is not a marker, but the logs are; this a bit weird
3. if you keep it without change, consider adding a variable that says that explicitly target_block_marker=revert_up_to_and_including,

1. I tried keeping the messages close to how you wrote them in consensus_manager; see code snippet 1. I'll use both height and marker.
   2/3. I agree it looks a bit weird. I'll change this as you suggested.

Code snippet:

"Batcher height marker {batcher_height_marker} is not larger than the target height marker {target_batcher_height_marker}. No reverts are needed."
"Reverting batcher from block marker {batcher_height_marker} to block marker {target_batcher_height_marker}"
"Reverting batcher block at height {batcher_height}."
"Failed to revert block at height {batcher_height} in the batcher"

---

crates/apollo_reverts/src/lib.rs line 93 at r4 (raw file):

Previously, DvirYo-starkware wrote…

If revert_up_to_and_including is 0, the number here will be -1.

My bad.
Will handle this case.