fix: OZ ZKsync OS non interop v30, N-15 #1866
Conversation
0xValera
requested review from
StanislavBreadless and
vladbochok
as code owners
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".
| if (_newBatch.firstBlockTimestamp >= _newBatch.lastBlockTimestamp) { | ||
| revert NonIncreasingTimestamp(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The new NonIncreasingTimestamp guard now reverts when firstBlockTimestamp equals lastBlockTimestamp. A batch containing a single L2 block has identical first/last timestamps (the shared executor fixture initializes both to the batch timestamp in _Executor_Shared.t.sol), which previously committed successfully. With this change such batches will revert during commitBatchesSharedBridge, blocking valid one-block batches unless callers artificially bump the last timestamp.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
| if (_newBatch.lastBlockTimestamp > block.timestamp + COMMIT_TIMESTAMP_APPROXIMATION_DELTA) { | ||
| revert L2TimestampTooBig(); | ||
| } | ||
| if (_newBatch.firstBlockTimestamp >= _newBatch.lastBlockTimestamp) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not sure if we are going to merge this, but if we are - we need to use > here
2 participants
What ❔
Why ❔
Checklist