fix lookup keccak rotation to use max 16 limb #1034
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
hero78119
commented
Aug 25, 2025
| @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ args = [ | |||
| "--workspace", | |||
| ] | |||
| command = "cargo" | |||
| env = { RUST_MIN_STACK = "33554432" } | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
lookup_keccak involving some deep recursion when build the circuit. I think it's a existing issue, just the new change hit the threshold unluckily. With that, we temporarily increase RUST_MIN_STACK to make tests pass. It doesn't break functional correctness.
hero78119
force-pushed
the
feat/keccak_patch
branch
from
f87b99b to
98a23d3
Compare
hero78119
commented
Aug 25, 2025
|
|
||
| self.require_reps_equal::<32, _, _>( | ||
| self.require_reps_equal::<16, _, _>( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
key highlights: constrain on 16 bits limb individually instead of 32 bits (limb_16 + (1 << 16( * limb_16) because later are larger than some finite field characteristic, e.g. babybear
spherel
approved these changes
Aug 26, 2025
| if *size != 32 { | ||
| lk_multiplicity.assert_ux_in_u16(*size, rep[j]); | ||
| match *size { | ||
| 32 | 1 => (), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why not checking it when size is 1?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
because size 1 means bit check, and we compiled it into (1-expr)*expr with zero check already. So size 1 we can skip multiplicity += 1
Comment on lines
+1062
to
+1084
| match *size { | ||
| 32 => (), | ||
| 18 => { | ||
| self.assert_ux::<_, _, 18>(|| format!("{}_{}", name().into(), i), elem.clone())? | ||
| } | ||
| 16 => { | ||
| self.assert_ux::<_, _, 16>(|| format!("{}_{}", name().into(), i), elem.clone())? | ||
| } | ||
| 14 => { | ||
| self.assert_ux::<_, _, 14>(|| format!("{}_{}", name().into(), i), elem.clone())? | ||
| } | ||
| 8 => { | ||
| self.assert_ux::<_, _, 8>(|| format!("{}_{}", name().into(), i), elem.clone())? | ||
| } | ||
| 5 => { | ||
| self.assert_ux::<_, _, 5>(|| format!("{}_{}", name().into(), i), elem.clone())? | ||
| } | ||
| 1 => self.assert_bit(|| format!("{}_{}", name().into(), i), elem.clone())?, | ||
| _ => self.assert_ux_in_u16( | ||
| || format!("{}_{}", name().into(), i), | ||
| *size, | ||
| elem.clone(), | ||
| )?, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Shall we put this in a helper function?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes will do it in next PR #1036 to fix precompile e2e sound
github-merge-queue bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 26, 2025
To close #953 , build on top of #1034 ### prover latency > test on AMD 5900XT (32 cores) + 64GB RAM e2e with fibonacci. switch all to Babybear got around 5% improvement | Benchmark | Median Time (s) | Median Change (%) | |------------------------------|------------------|-----------------------------------| | fibonacci_max_steps_1048576 | 2.3926 | -3.13% (Performance has improved) | | fibonacci_max_steps_2097152 | 4.3848 | -3.61% (Performance has improved) | | fibonacci_max_steps_4194304 | 8.2578 | -4.77% (Performance has improved) | ### proof size babybear overall reduce ~20% proof size | Benchmark | Proof Size (MB) | Change (↓ better) | |------------------------------|-----------------|--------------------| | fibonacci_max_steps_1048576 | 1.36 | -19.53% | | fibonacci_max_steps_2097152 | 1.44 | -18.64% | | fibonacci_max_steps_4194304 | 1.51 | -18.38% | ### circuit stats ```diff +---------------+---------------+---------+-------+-----------+--------+------------+---------------------+ | opcode_name | num_instances | lookups | reads | witnesses | writes | 0_expr_deg | 0_expr_sumcheck_deg | +---------------+---------------+---------+-------+-----------+--------+------------+---------------------+ - | OPCODES TOTAL | 0 | 1498 | 210 | 2688 | 210 | [1: 360] | [2: 114] | + | OPCODES TOTAL | 0 | 1636 | 216 | 2940 | 216 | [1: 478] | [2: 378,3: 148] | ```
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
No description provided.