chore: bump blockifier

[giladchase]

Not sure why those hashes changed, but it looks flaky --- will TAL on separate PR.

Other changes in Cargo.toml are alphabetization.

---

This change is 

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 83.38%. Comparing base (f212a77) to head (edca6a7).

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #466   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   83.38%   83.38%           
=======================================
  Files          37       37           
  Lines        1770     1770           
  Branches     1770     1770           
=======================================
  Hits         1476     1476           
  Misses        215      215           
  Partials       79       79           

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

[ArniStarkware]

crates/mempool_test_utils/src/starknet_api_test_utils.rs line 30 at r1 (raw file):

};

pub const VALID_L1_GAS_MAX_AMOUNT: u64 = 203484;

Why did that change?
(Is this the reason the hashes changed?)

Suggestion:

pub const VALID_L1_GAS_MAX_AMOUNT: u64 = 203483;

[ArniStarkware]

Reviewed 2 of 4 files at r1.
Reviewable status: 2 of 4 files reviewed, 2 unresolved discussions (waiting on @giladchase and @Yael-Starkware)

---

Cargo.toml line 38 at r1 (raw file):

axum = "0.6.12"
bincode = "1.3.3"
blockifier = { git = "https://github.com/starkware-libs/blockifier.git", rev = "32191d41" }

Is this an issue with the upcoming mono-repo migration?

Code quote:

blockifier = { git = "https://github.com/starkware-libs/blockifier.git", rev = "32191d41" }

[ArniStarkware]

crates/mempool_test_utils/src/starknet_api_test_utils.rs line 30 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, ArniStarkware (Arnon Hod) wrote…

Why did that change?
(Is this the reason the hashes changed?)

This is indeed the reason the hashes changed.

[giladchase]

Reviewable status: 2 of 4 files reviewed, 2 unresolved discussions (waiting on @ArniStarkware and @Yael-Starkware)

---

Cargo.toml line 38 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, ArniStarkware (Arnon Hod) wrote…

Is this an issue with the upcoming mono-repo migration?

Not sure, i think the migration was delayed due to issues.

The current commit is latest main, and prev commit is a few commits behind, also on main.

---

crates/mempool_test_utils/src/starknet_api_test_utils.rs line 30 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, ArniStarkware (Arnon Hod) wrote…

This is indeed the reason the hashes changed.

I'm not sure why this changed 🤔 I'm assuming this changes whenever the weights change?

[ArniStarkware]

Reviewed 2 of 4 files at r1, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @Yael-Starkware)

---

crates/mempool_test_utils/src/starknet_api_test_utils.rs line 30 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, giladchase wrote…

I'm not sure why this changed 🤔 I'm assuming this changes whenever the weights change?

I see updating this number is necessary (otherwise, we fail on MaxL1GasAmountExceeded).

[giladchase]

Reviewable status: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @Yael-Starkware)

---

crates/mempool_test_utils/src/starknet_api_test_utils.rs line 30 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, ArniStarkware (Arnon Hod) wrote…

I see updating this number is necessary (otherwise, we fail on MaxL1GasAmountExceeded).

yes yes, but i'm not sure why it was necessary 😓 probably something in the weights in the blockifier changed.

I'm not sure we should be exposed to this though, perhaps this can also be converted to _?

[ArniStarkware]

Reviewable status: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @Yael-Starkware)

---

crates/mempool_test_utils/src/starknet_api_test_utils.rs line 30 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, giladchase wrote…

yes yes, but i'm not sure why it was necessary 😓 probably something in the weights in the blockifier changed.

I'm not sure we should be exposed to this though, perhaps this can also be converted to _?

I'm not sure I understand. Do you suggest this number become a don't care? This is not easily possible.
This number is used only once in this file, in executable_resource_bounds_mapping. It is just a number that allows the tests to pass.

[ArniStarkware]

Reviewable status: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @Yael-Starkware)

---

crates/mempool_test_utils/src/starknet_api_test_utils.rs line 30 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, ArniStarkware (Arnon Hod) wrote…

I'm not sure I understand. Do you suggest this number become a don't care? This is not easily possible.
This number is used only once in this file, in executable_resource_bounds_mapping. It is just a number that allows the tests to pass.

PR dedicated to update number: #471

[giladchase]

Reviewable status: 0 of 4 files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @ArniStarkware and @Yael-Starkware)

---

crates/mempool_test_utils/src/starknet_api_test_utils.rs line 30 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, ArniStarkware (Arnon Hod) wrote…

PR dedicated to update number: #471

I guess i'm fine with it if it's just glue that makes things pass, but if this number changes between versions and causes tests to fail, then it is a bit problematic, since we shouldn't be exposed to blockifier internals in our unit tests.

[giladchase]

Reviewed 1 of 4 files at r1, 4 of 4 files at r2, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @Yael-Starkware)