feat: deprecate unnecessary opcodes #1563

glevco · 2026-01-21T14:23:25Z

Motivation

There are unused opcodes that were once created for a cancelled implementation. This PR defines a Feature Activation to remove them.

Acceptance Criteria

Add .venv to ignore of yamllint. It was complaining in my local env sometimes.
Create new Feature.OPCODES_V2 and respective setting HathorSettings.ENABLE_OPCODES_V2, defaulting to disabled.
Create OpcodeVersion, removing deprecated opcodes on V2, which is configured via feature activation.
- SignedData.checksig is set to use V2 directly, without feature activation. This is allowed since there are no blueprints with SignedData on mainnet.
- Mempool/relayed vertices use V2directly, so we reject txs with deprecated opcodes in the mempool.

Checklist

If you are requesting a merge into master, confirm this code is production-ready and can be included in future releases as soon as it gets merged

github-actions · 2026-01-22T19:50:01Z

Bencher Report

Branch	feat/remove-unused-opcodes
Testbed	ubuntu-22.04

Click to view all benchmark results

Benchmark	Latency	Benchmark Result minutes (m) (Result Δ%)	Lower Boundary minutes (m) (Limit %)	Upper Boundary minutes (m) (Limit %)
sync-v2 (up to 20000 blocks)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	1.70 m (-1.22%) Baseline: 1.72 m	1.55 m (91.12%)	2.06 m (82.31%)

🐰 View full continuous benchmarking report in Bencher

codecov · 2026-01-22T21:26:50Z

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 84.61538% with 12 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 85.76%. Comparing base (73d3e56) to head (3e32c9b).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
hathor/consensus/consensus.py	55.55%	10 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1563      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   86.27%   85.76%   -0.51%     
==========================================
  Files         437      437              
  Lines       33662    33707      +45     
  Branches     5269     5268       -1     
==========================================
- Hits        29042    28909     -133     
- Misses       3611     3796     +185     
+ Partials     1009     1002       -7

☔ 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.

msbrogli · 2026-01-23T20:24:19Z

hathor/p2p/sync_v2/transaction_streaming_client.py

                count_checkdatasig_op=False,
                nanocontracts=False,
                fee_tokens=False,
+                opcodes_version=OpcodesVersion.V1,


All these settings are weird to me.

Again, they're compatible with the base PR which is compatible with what's in master. All these are unused here, as this class only calls verify_basic.

msbrogli · 2026-01-23T20:25:42Z

hathor/transaction/scripts/opcode.py



-def execute_op_code(opcode: Opcode, context: ScriptContext) -> None:
+def execute_op_code(opcode: Opcode, context: ScriptContext, version: OpcodesVersion) -> None:


I'd rather refactor it to a class that will be first configured and then will execute the script. Maybe it's too much for this PR.

I agree we could do it in another PR.

msbrogli · 2026-01-23T20:27:45Z

hathor/verification/transaction_verifier.py

        """Verify inputs signatures and ownership and all inputs actually exist"""
+        self._verify_inputs(self._settings, tx, params, skip_script=skip_script)
+
+    @classmethod


Because this method doesn't use any instance attributes, so I can call TransactionVerifier._verify_inputs in the consensus mempool re-verification without having to inject the verifier instance there. The same structure was used for the _verify_sigops_output re-verification which is already in place.

msbrogli · 2026-01-23T20:33:04Z

hathor/consensus/consensus.py

+            try:
+                NanoHeaderVerifier._verify_nc_signature(self._settings, tx, params)
+            except Exception:
+                return False


Should we log the exception? I guess, nothing else should happen besides the tx failing the verification.

Done in 0dfe92e

The base branch was changed.

glevco self-assigned this Jan 21, 2026

glevco requested review from jansegre and msbrogli as code owners January 21, 2026 14:23

glevco added this to Hathor Network Jan 21, 2026

github-project-automation bot moved this to Todo in Hathor Network Jan 21, 2026

glevco moved this from Todo to In Progress (WIP) in Hathor Network Jan 21, 2026

glevco force-pushed the feat/remove-unused-opcodes branch 4 times, most recently from 6b863ed to 746d648 Compare January 22, 2026 19:42

glevco changed the base branch from master to refactor/consensus-features January 22, 2026 19:42

glevco force-pushed the feat/remove-unused-opcodes branch 7 times, most recently from d094ac2 to 10a4030 Compare January 22, 2026 21:01

glevco force-pushed the refactor/consensus-features branch 4 times, most recently from e4b1772 to 9fe977f Compare January 23, 2026 14:01

glevco force-pushed the feat/remove-unused-opcodes branch 4 times, most recently from fba3149 to ca88671 Compare January 23, 2026 15:12

glevco moved this from In Progress (WIP) to In Progress (Done) in Hathor Network Jan 23, 2026

glevco force-pushed the feat/remove-unused-opcodes branch from ca88671 to c7ccccb Compare January 23, 2026 18:43

msbrogli previously approved these changes Jan 23, 2026

View reviewed changes

github-project-automation bot moved this from In Progress (Done) to In Review (WIP) in Hathor Network Jan 23, 2026

glevco force-pushed the refactor/consensus-features branch from 9fe977f to 73d3e56 Compare January 24, 2026 20:20

glevco force-pushed the feat/remove-unused-opcodes branch from c7ccccb to 846a2b7 Compare January 26, 2026 14:27

jansegre deleted the branch master January 26, 2026 14:54

jansegre closed this Jan 26, 2026

github-project-automation bot moved this from In Review (WIP) to Waiting to be deployed in Hathor Network Jan 26, 2026

glevco moved this from Waiting to be deployed to In Review (Done) in Hathor Network Jan 26, 2026

glevco reopened this Jan 26, 2026

glevco changed the base branch from refactor/consensus-features to master January 26, 2026 14:56

glevco moved this from In Review (Done) to In Review (WIP) in Hathor Network Jan 26, 2026

glevco added 2 commits January 26, 2026 11:57

feat(script): deprecate unnecessary opcodes

07c33de

review changes

3e32c9b

glevco force-pushed the feat/remove-unused-opcodes branch from 0dfe92e to 3e32c9b Compare January 26, 2026 14:57

jansegre approved these changes Jan 26, 2026

View reviewed changes

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

feat: deprecate unnecessary opcodes #1563

feat: deprecate unnecessary opcodes #1563

glevco commented Jan 21, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Jan 22, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Jan 22, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

msbrogli Jan 23, 2026

Uh oh!

glevco Jan 26, 2026

Uh oh!

msbrogli Jan 23, 2026

Uh oh!

glevco Jan 26, 2026

Uh oh!

msbrogli Jan 23, 2026

Uh oh!

glevco Jan 26, 2026

Uh oh!

msbrogli Jan 23, 2026

Uh oh!

glevco Jan 26, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants



		def execute_op_code(opcode: Opcode, context: ScriptContext) -> None:
		def execute_op_code(opcode: Opcode, context: ScriptContext, version: OpcodesVersion) -> None:

feat: deprecate unnecessary opcodes #1563

Are you sure you want to change the base?

feat: deprecate unnecessary opcodes #1563

Conversation

glevco commented Jan 21, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Motivation

Acceptance Criteria

Checklist

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Jan 22, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Jan 22, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

glevco commented Jan 21, 2026 •

edited

Loading

github-actions bot commented Jan 22, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Jan 22, 2026 •

edited

Loading