feat: Move block proving to the Store by sergerad · Pull Request #1579 · 0xMiden/node

sergerad · 2026-01-22T22:28:25Z

Context

The state transitions of blocks have changed such that signed (instead of proven) blocks are applied to Store state, leaving block proving to be done asynchronously some time after. The block proving logic is being moved out of the Block Producer so the the Store can managed asynchronous proving after signed blocks are committed to its state.

NOTE: Block proofs are not used in the PR. Follow-up work will be done to make proving deferred/asynchronous to the rest of the Store's apply_block() flow.

Relates to #1316.

Changes

Remove block prover client and block proving from the block producer.
Add block prover client and block proving to the Store.
Update the Store's ApplyBlock RPC endpoint to take data required to perform proving.
Add signature column to block_header table.

…ore-block-prove

bobbinth

Looks good! Thank you! I left some comments inline. As I mentioned in some of the comments, it may make sense to do a couple of "preparatory" PRs first and then rebase this PR on top of them. These would be:

A PR in miden-base to add SignedBlock.
A PR here to move apply_block() into a separate file.

proto/proto/types/blockchain.proto

proto/proto/internal/store.proto

crates/block-producer/src/block_builder/mod.rs

crates/block-producer/src/store/mod.rs

bobbinth · 2026-01-27T07:54:34Z

crates/store/src/server/block_prover_client.rs

+use miden_protocol::batch::OrderedBatches;
+use miden_protocol::block::{BlockHeader, BlockInputs, BlockProof};
+use miden_remote_prover_client::RemoteProverClientError;
+use miden_remote_prover_client::remote_prover::block_prover::RemoteBlockProver;


nit (and not for this PR): the namespacing here feels a bit "too nested" - e.g., could this not be just miden_remote_prover_client::block_prover::RemoteBlockProver?

Yea because we are doing pub mod block_prover; instead of pub use block_prover::BlockProver in miden_remote_prover_client. I can make a PR for that after this one.

crates/store/src/state/mod.rs

sergerad · 2026-01-27T18:56:26Z

it may make sense to do a couple of "preparatory" PRs first and then rebase this PR on top of them. These would be:

A PR in miden-base to add SignedBlock.

Bringing in SignedBlock is blocked while the node next branch is out of date with base next branch

bobbinth · 2026-01-27T19:37:02Z

Bringing in SignedBlock is blocked while the node next branch is out of date with base next branch

Should be already up to date - no? (#1595 got merged a few hours ago).

…ore-block-prove

crates/block-producer/src/block_builder/mod.rs

crates/store/src/server/block_prover_client.rs

proto/proto/internal/store.proto

crates/store/src/server/mod.rs

…ore-block-prove

crates/store/src/server/block_prover_client.rs

…ore-block-prove

bobbinth

Looks good! Thank you! I left few comments inline and some suggestions for future improvements.

proto/proto/internal/store.proto

crates/block-producer/src/block_builder/mod.rs

bobbinth · 2026-01-29T21:02:39Z

crates/store/src/state/apply_block.rs

+        let header = signed_block.header();
+        let body = signed_block.body();

+        // Validate that header and body match.


We should probably validate that the signature is valid since, theoretically, the store could receive a block with an invalid signature.

Not for this PR, but we could do this as a method on SignedBlock (in miden-base) - something like:

impl SignedBlock { pub fn validate_signature(&self) -> Result<(), SomeError> { ... } }

We could also do this at SignedBlock construction time - but not sure that's much better.

0xMiden/protocol#2382

Was thinking we could put it in the non-unchecked constructor and use it a bit earlier in the flow (before apply_block() is called here).

Anything else we would want to check in that constructor (the error enum is overkill if there is nothing else). If there is a fair bit of other stuff to check (compare header/body) then might be worth adding the validate_signature() fn rather than doing unnecessary checks in this stack for example.

bobbinth · 2026-01-29T21:03:56Z

crates/store/src/state/apply_block.rs

+        let tx_commitment = body.transactions().commitment();
        if header.tx_commitment() != tx_commitment {
            return Err(InvalidBlockError::InvalidBlockTxCommitment {
                expected: tx_commitment,
                actual: header.tx_commitment(),
            }
            .into());
        }


Related to the above comment, we could probably move this into SignedBlock as well - e.g., SignedBlock::validate_transaction_commitment(). Or this could also be done at construction time.

Added to constructor in base PR (above comment)

bobbinth · 2026-01-29T21:05:04Z

crates/store/src/state/apply_block.rs

@@ -78,20 +78,19 @@
            return Err(InvalidBlockError::NewBlockInvalidPrevCommitment.into());
        }


Along the same lines as the previous two comments: this could probably be moved into something like SignedBlock::validate_parent().

Added in same PR as above comments

crates/store/src/server/block_producer.rs

bobbinth · 2026-01-29T21:15:12Z

One other thing we should do once the structure is closer to its final shape is update the docs (and related diagrams) with the up-to-date explanation of the node's architecture. @sergerad - could you create an issue for this?

Add initial implementation from previous PR

5694bb2

sergerad mentioned this pull request Jan 22, 2026

feat: Move block proving to the Store #1472

Closed

sergerad changed the title ~~Add initial implementation from previous PR~~ feat: Move block proving to the Store Jan 22, 2026

Merge branch 'next' of github.com:0xMiden/miden-node into sergerad-st…

4c499eb

…ore-block-prove

sergerad mentioned this pull request Jan 26, 2026

Guardrails: Tx and Block Validation #1316

Open

12 tasks

sergerad added 7 commits January 27, 2026 10:03

Comment cleanup

00ceab7

Prove block in storeapi apply_block

1379b76

Use signature in schema fns

c6c0400

Update schema

fd3573b

Fix tests, changelog, machete

fb4b532

Merge stress test fns

a0e02f9

Refs to store client apply_block

0aff0f2

sergerad marked this pull request as ready for review January 27, 2026 01:11

sergerad requested review from Mirko-von-Leipzig, bobbinth and drahnr and removed request for Mirko-von-Leipzig and bobbinth January 27, 2026 01:11

bobbinth reviewed Jan 27, 2026

View reviewed changes

sergerad added 7 commits January 28, 2026 10:12

partial commit while updating deps

c3bf2a0

Merge branch 'next' of github.com:0xMiden/miden-node into sergerad-st…

1be1c37

…ore-block-prove

Fix deps

d4a9c2e

Conversion stubs

7ee6854

Conversion for block body

70d7175

Use signed block

0b22e76

Toml

c887d1b

sergerad added 2 commits January 28, 2026 14:13

Write whole signed block

c21a7d0

RM incorrect comments

48f1dd5

sergerad requested a review from bobbinth January 28, 2026 01:27

Fix changelog

5264211

Mirko-von-Leipzig reviewed Jan 28, 2026

View reviewed changes

sergerad added 8 commits January 29, 2026 09:47

Merge branch 'next' of github.com:0xMiden/miden-node into sergerad-st…

5f5fe3c

…ore-block-prove

Safety comment

009ccd9

RM sec param

364e7e3

Replace from with source err

811d29d

Pass Url into Store construction

3670182

Remove block inputs from apply block rpc call

354658a

Toml

0f1116e

Typo

ed8cdd1

sergerad requested a review from Mirko-von-Leipzig January 28, 2026 22:14

Mirko-von-Leipzig approved these changes Jan 29, 2026

View reviewed changes

crates/store/src/server/block_prover_client.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

sergerad added 4 commits January 29, 2026 20:57

Safety comments

25438bb

BlockProver fns

25ecc96

Merge branch 'next' of github.com:0xMiden/miden-node into sergerad-st…

6d263ba

…ore-block-prove

Merge branch 'next' of github.com:0xMiden/miden-node into sergerad-st…

4d95d66

…ore-block-prove

bobbinth approved these changes Jan 29, 2026

View reviewed changes

sergerad added 3 commits February 2, 2026 09:29

Fix proto order

911b0dc

Rename validate_block()

d4b5e62

Fix comment

4107125

sergerad force-pushed the sergerad-store-block-prove branch from 8f2fe60 to 4107125 Compare February 1, 2026 21:17

sergerad mentioned this pull request Feb 1, 2026

Update Node documentation and architecture diagrams #1625

Open

Lint and comment

e2d6f65

sergerad mentioned this pull request Feb 1, 2026

chore: Remove one level of nesting in remote prover client modules #1626

Merged

sergerad merged commit 1c44ed2 into next Feb 1, 2026
7 checks passed

sergerad deleted the sergerad-store-block-prove branch February 1, 2026 22:23

		@@ -78,20 +78,19 @@
		return Err(InvalidBlockError::NewBlockInvalidPrevCommitment.into());
		}

Conversation

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

Uh oh!

Context

Changes

Uh oh!

bobbinth left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

sergerad commented Jan 27, 2026

Uh oh!

bobbinth commented Jan 27, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

bobbinth left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

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!

Uh oh!

bobbinth commented Jan 29, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

sergerad commented Jan 22, 2026 •

edited

Loading