Skip to content

Use copy() instead of byte-by-byte loop in MarshalSSZ#16483

Merged
satushh merged 1 commit into
developfrom
state-root-opt2
Mar 6, 2026
Merged

Use copy() instead of byte-by-byte loop in MarshalSSZ#16483
satushh merged 1 commit into
developfrom
state-root-opt2

Conversation

@satushh

@satushh satushh commented Mar 6, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

What type of PR is this?

Optimisation

What does this PR do? Why is it needed?

Use copy() instead of byte-by-byte loop in MarshalSSZ
Similar to #16222

@satushh satushh mentioned this pull request Mar 6, 2026
@satushh satushh marked this pull request as ready for review March 6, 2026 16:37
@prestonvanloon

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

why? Please update the description

@satushh

satushh commented Mar 6, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@prestonvanloon Updated the description.

The extra changes you probably saw before was because I was checking the changes of #16472 in this PR which was a standalone separate check of whether those e2e changes were working fine. That check went well and I meant to undo the changes from that e2e branch which is done now.

This PR itself is very simple change.

@satushh satushh added this pull request to the merge queue Mar 6, 2026
Merged via the queue into develop with commit 6826e77 Mar 6, 2026
29 checks passed
@satushh satushh deleted the state-root-opt2 branch March 6, 2026 18:44
syjn99 pushed a commit to syjn99/prysm that referenced this pull request Mar 13, 2026
…6483)

**What type of PR is this?**

Optimisation

**What does this PR do? Why is it needed?**

Use copy() instead of byte-by-byte loop in MarshalSSZ
Similar to OffchainLabs#16222
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.

2 participants