Skip to content

Defer payload processing to next block#5094

Merged
jtraglia merged 60 commits intoethereum:masterfrom
nflaig:deferred-payload-processing
Apr 16, 2026
Merged

Defer payload processing to next block#5094
jtraglia merged 60 commits intoethereum:masterfrom
nflaig:deferred-payload-processing

Conversation

@nflaig
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@nflaig nflaig commented Apr 10, 2026

Under the current gloas spec, a single block root can correspond to two different post-states depending on whether the payload has been seen. This breaks several spec invariants that hold on mainnet since phase0

  • Dependent root: execution requests (like consolidations) can change effective balances between the post-block and post-payload state, so the same block root no longer guarantees identical balance weighted assignments (eg. proposer_lookahead and ptc_window) across epoch boundaries
  • Checkpoint state: store_target_checkpoint_state uses the post-block state while fork choice may use the post-payload state, producing divergent epoch transitions and weakening FFG guarantees (@potuz may disagree). This affects justified balances in fork choice weight calculations which is currently underspecified as noted in Fork-choice justified balances in underspecified post-Gloas #5074
  • Weak subjectivity: is_within_weak_subjectivity_period and compute_weak_subjectivity_period operate on a checkpoint state that is now ambiguous due to the post-block state missing execution request effects

This PR defers execution payload processing (except verification) to the next beacon block's state_transition via a new process_parent_execution_payload function. process_execution_payload remains as a pure verification step on payload arrival. This eliminates the dual state architecture (block_states / payload_states) introduced in the current gloas spec and restores a single canonical post-state per block root, restoring all three invariants noted above without requiring more invasive changes like updating the Checkpoint type as proposed here as an alternative solution.

cc @wemeetagain, @ensi321, @twoeths

Comment thread specs/gloas/beacon-chain.md Outdated
Comment thread specs/gloas/fork-choice.md Outdated
Comment thread specs/gloas/fork-choice.md Outdated
@nflaig nflaig marked this pull request as ready for review April 10, 2026 15:08
Comment thread specs/gloas/fork-choice.md Outdated
Comment thread specs/gloas/beacon-chain.md Outdated
Comment thread specs/gloas/beacon-chain.md Outdated
Comment thread specs/gloas/beacon-chain.md Outdated
Comment thread specs/heze/fork-choice.md Outdated
Comment thread specs/gloas/beacon-chain.md Outdated
Comment thread specs/gloas/beacon-chain.md Outdated
Comment thread specs/heze/fork-choice.md
Comment thread specs/gloas/p2p-interface.md Outdated
Comment thread specs/gloas/beacon-chain.md Outdated
Comment thread specs/gloas/fork-choice.md Outdated
Comment thread specs/gloas/beacon-chain.md
Comment thread specs/gloas/fork-choice.md
Comment thread specs/gloas/fork-choice.md
@jtraglia
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

All, this PR has grown quite large (~100 comments & 60 commits). It's clear to me that (1) we agree that this is appropriate strategy and (2) it's in a good enough state to be merged. I'm sure there are little tweaks we can make, but let's merge this and follow up with smaller, more targeted PRs. Great work everyone!

@jtraglia jtraglia merged commit df04ae4 into ethereum:master Apr 16, 2026
15 checks passed
potuz added a commit to potuz/EIPs that referenced this pull request Apr 17, 2026
Nico has done extensive study of the EIP and merged ethereum/consensus-specs#5094 which is a considerable contribution.
ericsson49 added a commit to ericsson49/eth2.0-specs that referenced this pull request Apr 20, 2026
ericsson49 added a commit to ericsson49/eth2.0-specs that referenced this pull request Apr 20, 2026
jtraglia pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 20, 2026
The PR fixes a problem with the comptests generator, which was building
anchor block incorrectly in case of `gloas`. Related to #5094.
jtraglia pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 20, 2026
From the discussion with Lido on discord
[here](https://discord.com/channels/595666850260713488/1494024415896408154)
it would be helpful for them (and other protocols) to clarify how to get
consistent state on CL + EL after gloas.

Note, this is not something that changed in #5094, the pre-deduction of
withdrawals from validator balances before crediting them on the EL side
exists already in `alpha.4`.
nflaig added a commit to ChainSafe/lodestar that referenced this pull request Apr 21, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

gloas heze testing CI, actions, tests, testing infra

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.