-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 56
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.
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
Stable coprocessor order #665
Closed
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It's a little worse than this comment suggests. As far as I can see, this is adding the wrong data. Now, maybe in the LEM case, this wrong data is unnecessary. But a
Lang
is not specific to LEM or not-LEM. And consequently, it cannot be correct to construct one this way. This 'scalar ptr' must correspond to the symbol to which the coprocessor is bound. If LEM requires its own variant ofLang
, then that would need to be formalized somehow.This is not just academic. A
Lang
created as above could lead a non-LEM circuit to producing incorrect proofs. Such aLang
would be toxic and require very special handling. It shouldn't be possible to create such dangerous substances with the Lurk API.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The LEM pipeline indeed doesn't need the cached
ZPtr
for this.Would it be okay to have an
add_coprocessor_with_zptr
and allow the caller to provide theZPtr
? Then LEM would be able to feed it with whatever.