Skip to content

docs(prover): allow 6->2 step-marker transition on the continuation path - #883

Open
MauroToscano wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix/step-marker-doc-continuation
Open

docs(prover): allow 6->2 step-marker transition on the continuation path#883
MauroToscano wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix/step-marker-doc-continuation

Conversation

@MauroToscano

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Summary

  • The doc comment on test_recursion_step_markers_observed_in_order defines the valid step-marker transitions as {1->2, 2->3, 3->4, 4->5, 5->6, 6->3} and states any other transition means the marker convention broke.
  • That set only covers the monolithic verify path. With fix(prover): emit missing marker on continuation verify paths #855, the continuation guest re-emits STEP_AIRS_AND_BUS_BALANCE_DONE before each epoch's multi_verify_views (continuation::verify_epoch) and once more before the global-memory verify (continuation::verify_global), making 6->2 a legitimate transition there.
  • Extends the comment to note the set is monolithic-only, so the documented invariant isn't read as universal (the test itself is unaffected — it runs the monolithic recursion-min guest, where the continuation markers never fire).

Test plan

  • Comment-only change; no code touched

The marker state machine documented on
test_recursion_step_markers_observed_in_order only covers the monolithic
verify path. Once the continuation verify paths emit
STEP_AIRS_AND_BUS_BALANCE_DONE (per epoch in verify_epoch and once in
verify_global, #855), 6->2 becomes a legitimate transition there. Note the
distinction so the documented invariant isn't read as universal.
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.

1 participant