Skip to content

Conversation

@BeniaminDrasovean
Copy link
Contributor

Reasoning behind the pull request

Proposed changes

Testing procedure

Pre-requisites

Based on the Contributing Guidelines the PR author and the reviewers must check the following requirements are met:

  • was the PR targeted to the correct branch?
  • if this is a larger feature that probably needs more than one PR, is there a feat branch created?
  • if this is a feat branch merging, do all satellite projects have a proper tag inside go.mod?

Copy link
Contributor

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

Updates the mx-chain-core-go dependency reference to a newer pseudo-version, keeping this repository aligned with upstream core changes.

Changes:

  • Bump github.com/multiversx/mx-chain-core-go to v1.4.2-0.20260210103132-fc549fe6a7f4 in go.mod
  • Update corresponding checksums in go.sum

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 1 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated 1 comment.

File Description
go.mod Updates the required mx-chain-core-go version to a newer pseudo-version.
go.sum Refreshes module checksums to match the updated dependency version.

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

go.mod Outdated
github.com/mitchellh/mapstructure v1.5.0
github.com/multiversx/mx-chain-communication-go v1.3.0
github.com/multiversx/mx-chain-core-go v1.4.2-0.20260130090903-7407465d70c6
github.com/multiversx/mx-chain-core-go v1.4.2-0.20260210103132-fc549fe6a7f4
Copy link

Copilot AI Feb 10, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The PR description is still the unfilled template (no reasoning/proposed changes/testing procedure). Since this change bumps mx-chain-core-go to a new pseudo-version, please document what drove the update and what tests/commands were run (e.g., make test) so reviewers can assess impact.

Copilot uses AI. Check for mistakes.
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 10, 2026

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 66.66667% with 3 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 77.51%. Comparing base (0d8b216) to head (7aaa1c9).

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
outport/process/outportDataProvider.go 66.66% 3 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@                    Coverage Diff                     @@
##           feat/supernova-async-exec    #7690   +/-   ##
==========================================================
  Coverage                      77.51%   77.51%           
==========================================================
  Files                            882      882           
  Lines                         122753   122754    +1     
==========================================================
+ Hits                           95148    95157    +9     
+ Misses                         21261    21257    -4     
+ Partials                        6344     6340    -4     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

miiu96
miiu96 previously approved these changes Feb 10, 2026
Copy link
Contributor

@ssd04 ssd04 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This does not seem to be backwards compatible. StateAccesses in outport driver is not set anymore, it has to be set until supernova round is activated.

ssd04
ssd04 previously approved these changes Feb 10, 2026
miiu96
miiu96 previously approved these changes Feb 10, 2026
stateAccesses := odp.getStateAccessForRootHash(rootHash)
stateAccessesForBlock[hex.EncodeToString(headerHash)] = stateAccesses
return stateAccessesForBlock
return nil, stateAccesses
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

i think would help to still keep returning stateAccessesForBlock with one element in map before supernova, not nil, it would be easier to handle in integrators

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Done

@BeniaminDrasovean BeniaminDrasovean dismissed stale reviews from ssd04 and miiu96 via 7aaa1c9 February 10, 2026 15:53
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants