STR-378 Semantic Information L1Block

[voidash]

Description

Puts the RelevantTx information in L1Tx db by modifying the filter relevancies logic.

Some fixes required :

• Inscription Parser doesn't take RollupName right now, which can be passed on
• RollupParams should have some constants like BTC bridge in amount, EE address length, federation addr but it is hardcoded right now. This is also simple fix
• Needs to remove warnings, lint fixes etc

Type of Change

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature/Enhancement (non-breaking change which adds functionality or enhances an existing one)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
• Documentation update
• Refactor

Checklist

• I have performed a self-review of my code.
• I have commented my code where necessary.
• I have updated the documentation if needed.
• My changes do not introduce new warnings.
• I have added tests that prove my changes are effective or that my feature works.
• New and existing tests pass with my changes.

Related Issues

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 82.32104% with 163 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 63.46%. Comparing base (d557f91) to head (b8a8cda).
Report is 3 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
crates/consensus-logic/src/l1_handler.rs	0.00%	82 Missing ⚠️
crates/tx-parser/src/deposit/mod.rs	0.00%	16 Missing ⚠️
crates/tx-parser/src/inscription.rs	86.32%	16 Missing ⚠️
crates/btcio/src/reader/filter.rs	92.09%	14 Missing ⚠️
crates/btcio/src/reader/query.rs	0.00%	12 Missing ⚠️
crates/btcio/src/reader/messages.rs	56.25%	7 Missing ⚠️
crates/tx-parser/src/deposit/common.rs	96.89%	4 Missing ⚠️
crates/primitives/src/l1.rs	66.66%	3 Missing ⚠️
crates/tx-parser/src/utils.rs	90.32%	3 Missing ⚠️
crates/tx-parser/src/deposit/deposit_request.rs	98.68%	2 Missing ⚠️
... and 3 more

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #298      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   63.01%   63.46%   +0.44%     
==========================================
  Files         196      204       +8     
  Lines       20628    21190     +562     
==========================================
+ Hits        12999    13448     +449     
- Misses       7629     7742     +113     

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
crates/btcio/src/writer/builder.rs	98.07% <100.00%> (+0.07%)	⬆️
crates/primitives/src/params.rs	42.85% <ø> (ø)
crates/primitives/src/tx.rs	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
crates/primitives/src/utils.rs	80.50% <100.00%> (ø)
crates/proof-impl/btc-blockspace/src/block.rs	90.75% <100.00%> (+0.07%)	⬆️
crates/rocksdb-store/src/l1/db.rs	98.17% <100.00%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
crates/test-utils/src/l2.rs	98.76% <100.00%> (+0.03%)	⬆️
crates/tx-parser/src/deposit/test_utils.rs	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
crates/tx-parser/src/deposit/deposit_tx.rs	98.03% <98.03%> (ø)
crates/tx-parser/src/deposit/error.rs	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 11 more

... and 7 files with indirect coverage changes

[bewakes]

Looks good, some comments.

[delbonis]

There's two issues here that I would want to resolve, but I'm not sure if it's a feasible lift to do it in here:

• It's entirely possible for a tx to both be a deposit request, a batch inscription reveal, and a checkpoint inscription reveal. The way the types and filtering are structured right now can't describe that, so it's possible we could end up in a situation where someone can prove that they did something right but the rollup can't understand it and we're stuck.
• We need to split the manifests into two different types, for a few reasons.
  • We need to be able to extract the raw batch data so that we can store it in the database and reconstruct states from it, but we really don't want to expose all of that into the CL prover because it's a large amount of data. We'd introduce a "short" version that only includes the BlobId that comes out of the prover (ideally we'd reuse the same types for consistency), which is all the CL STF cares about.
  • The "short" version also won't have the request transactions, since the rollup should only care about deposits after they're actually accepted.
  • We also want to break down the inscription types more, so that we have separate types for both blobs and the checkpoints. We could do that here right now, but it would involve making the inscription parsing messier.

I'm not sure what's feasible to of those parts to do here at this stage. Keep in mind some considerations in how the types are structured to make it easier to implement STR-274.

[delbonis]

When we rename something we have to rename all the identifiers that are derived from it. There's 3 different names that refer to the same concept now that need to be unified.

[delbonis]

Still pending formatting issue for fntest lints, can merge now.