Integrate Range Check 128 Builtin

[Gali-StarkWare]

This change is 

[Gali-StarkWare]

• Bitwise Builtin Files #381
• Integrate RC96 Builtin #367
• Add Range Check 96 Builtin Files #372
• Integrate Range Check 128 Builtin #357 👈 (View in Graphite)
• Add Range Check 128 Builtin Files #371
• main

This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking.

[semgrep-code-starkware-libs]

Detected 'unsafe' usage, please audit for secure usage

🚀 Removed in commit e66d428 🚀

[Gali-StarkWare]

Dismissed @semgrep-code-starkware-libs[bot] from a discussion.
Reviewable status: 0 of 6 files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @shaharsamocha7)

[shaharsamocha7]

Reviewed 1 of 1 files at r6, 6 of 7 files at r7, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: 7 of 8 files reviewed, 2 unresolved discussions (waiting on @alon-f, @andrewmilson, and @Gali-StarkWare)

---

stwo_cairo_prover/crates/prover/src/cairo_air/builtins_air.rs line 38 at r7 (raw file):

pub struct BuiltinsClaimGenerator {
    range_check_128_builtin_trace_generator: Option<range_check_builtin_bits_128::ClaimGenerator>,

consider to rename

Suggestion:

range_check_128

---

stwo_cairo_prover/crates/prover/src/cairo_air/builtins_air.rs line 47 at r7 (raw file):

                .map(|range_check_bits_128| {
                    range_check_builtin_bits_128::ClaimGenerator::new(
                        (range_check_bits_128.stop_ptr - range_check_bits_128.begin_addr).ilog2(),

Can you change this to checked_ilog2()?

Code quote:

(range_check_bits_128.stop_ptr - range_check_bits_128.begin_addr).ilog2(),

[Gali-StarkWare]

Reviewable status: 7 of 8 files reviewed, 2 unresolved discussions (waiting on @alon-f, @andrewmilson, and @shaharsamocha7)

---

stwo_cairo_prover/crates/prover/src/cairo_air/builtins_air.rs line 38 at r7 (raw file):

Previously, shaharsamocha7 wrote…

consider to rename

IMO it should stay the same for consistency with the other components (we can change all of them in a different PR if you want)

---

stwo_cairo_prover/crates/prover/src/cairo_air/builtins_air.rs line 47 at r7 (raw file):

Previously, shaharsamocha7 wrote…

Can you change this to checked_ilog2()?

Done.

[shaharsamocha7]

Reviewed all commit messages.
Reviewable status: 7 of 8 files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @alon-f, @andrewmilson, and @Gali-StarkWare)

---

stwo_cairo_prover/crates/prover/src/cairo_air/builtins_air.rs line 47 at r7 (raw file):

Previously, Gali-StarkWare wrote…

Done.

ty but the error message is incorrect

[Gali-StarkWare]

Reviewable status: 7 of 8 files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @alon-f, @andrewmilson, and @shaharsamocha7)

---

stwo_cairo_prover/crates/prover/src/cairo_air/builtins_air.rs line 47 at r7 (raw file):

Previously, shaharsamocha7 wrote…

ty but the error message is incorrect

checked_ilog2() returns None in case of a 0 input (and Some(log_size rounded down) else) so it's not a check for receiving a power of 2 from air-infra. Is this better?

[shaharsamocha7]

Reviewed all commit messages.
Reviewable status: 3 of 8 files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @alon-f, @andrewmilson, and @Gali-StarkWare)

---

stwo_cairo_prover/crates/prover/src/cairo_air/builtins_air.rs line 47 at r7 (raw file):

Previously, Gali-StarkWare wrote…

checked_ilog2() returns None in case of a 0 input (and Some(log_size rounded down) else) so it's not a check for receiving a power of 2 from air-infra. Is this better?

I don't understand, we want to make sure that this is a power of 2.

[shaharsamocha7]

Reviewed 5 of 5 files at r9.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @alon-f, @andrewmilson, and @Gali-StarkWare)

---

stwo_cairo_prover/crates/prover/src/cairo_air/builtins_air.rs line 54 at r9 (raw file):

                        (range_check_bits_128.stop_ptr - range_check_bits_128.begin_addr).ilog2(),
                        range_check_bits_128.begin_addr as u32,
                    )

consider to move this to a util function in a later pr.

Code quote:

                    assert!(
                        (range_check_bits_128.stop_ptr - range_check_bits_128.begin_addr)
                            .is_power_of_two(),
                        "range_check_bits_128 segment length is not a power of two"
                    );
                    range_check_builtin_bits_128::ClaimGenerator::new(
                        (range_check_bits_128.stop_ptr - range_check_bits_128.begin_addr).ilog2(),
                        range_check_bits_128.begin_addr as u32,
                    )

[Gali-StarkWare]

Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @alon-f and @andrewmilson)

---

stwo_cairo_prover/crates/prover/src/cairo_air/builtins_air.rs line 47 at r7 (raw file):

Previously, shaharsamocha7 wrote…

I don't understand, we want to make sure that this is a power of 2.

I know, now we do. Using checked_ilog2() wasn't enough

[Gali-StarkWare]

Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @alon-f, @andrewmilson, and @Gali-StarkWare)

---

stwo_cairo_prover/crates/prover/src/cairo_air/builtins_air.rs line 54 at r9 (raw file):

Previously, shaharsamocha7 wrote…

consider to move this to a util function in a later pr.

Will do

[Gali-StarkWare]

Merge activity

• Jan 27, 9:29 AM EST: A user started a stack merge that includes this pull request via Graphite.
• Jan 27, 9:31 AM EST: Graphite rebased this pull request as part of a merge.
• Jan 27, 10:33 AM EST: A user merged this pull request with Graphite.

[shaharsamocha7]

Reviewed 1 of 1 files at r10, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @alon-f and @andrewmilson)