STR-1739: ASM Logs in CSM

[evgenyzdanovich]

Description

• additional adapters in the service framework for listeners service.
• integration of ASM Logs in the CSM.
• "servization" of CSM worker as a listener.

Note:
parts of the work were done with the use of Claude.

Type of Change

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature/Enhancement (non-breaking change which adds functionality or enhances an existing one)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
• Documentation update
• Refactor
• New or updated tests
• Dependency Update

Notes to Reviewers

Checklist

• I have performed a self-review of my code.
• I have commented my code where necessary.
• I have updated the documentation if needed.
• My changes do not introduce new warnings.
• I have added (where necessary) tests that prove my changes are effective or that my feature works.
• New and existing tests pass with my changes.
• I have disclosed my use of AI
  in the body of this PR.

Related Issues

[github-actions]

Commit: 801a821

SP1 Execution Results

program	cycles	success
EVM EE STF	1,173,192	✅
CL STF	330,693	✅
Checkpoint	2,422	✅

[delbonis]

Really happy with how this is coming along far. Main comments are on service input handling and logging.

Do you think you should make the change to how ServiceMonitor is defined in this PR or should we do it in a different one?

[evgenyzdanovich]

Do you think you should make the change to how ServiceMonitor is defined in this PR or should we do it in a different one?

@delbonis I don't have a strong opinion here.
I kept changes to crates/service within first and last commit (so far), so I can easily split it into a separate PR if needed.

[evgenyzdanovich]

@delbonis PTAL on service related stuff (I'll address logs tiny bit later).

[delbonis]

@evgenyzdanovich I don't see any other open PRs that use the monitor system right now so it's probably fine just to do it here, since this is close to being mergeable and it won't cause much complication.

[delbonis]

Changes to services look good, this is mostly nits, plus the other review comments.

[prajwolrg]

Apart from the log handling, looks good to me.

---

It seems you’ve intentionally avoided making major changes to the existing data structures and legacy code in this PR, which is fine. Maybe we should also keep a track of the changes that needs to be done in the upcoming PRs.

[evgenyzdanovich]

mostly finished working on this:

• rebased PR
• resolved most of the comments
• fixed tests

what's left is to resolve proof and checkpoint related stuff. I'll ask for a final review once it's ready.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 83.92102% with 114 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 75.35%. Comparing base (f2d6b5e) to head (66e4877).
⚠️ Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
crates/db-store-rocksdb/src/asm/db.rs	0.00%	26 Missing ⚠️
crates/db-store-rocksdb/src/client_state/db.rs	0.00%	23 Missing ⚠️
crates/service/src/status.rs	52.63%	18 Missing ⚠️
bin/strata-dbtool/src/cmd/chainstate.rs	78.94%	12 Missing ⚠️
crates/csm-worker/src/processor.rs	96.04%	11 Missing ⚠️
crates/storage/src/managers/client_state.rs	0.00%	8 Missing ⚠️
crates/consensus-logic/src/sync_manager.rs	88.00%	6 Missing ⚠️
crates/csm-worker/src/sync_actions.rs	90.32%	3 Missing ⚠️
crates/csm-worker/src/service.rs	92.59%	2 Missing ⚠️
crates/db-store-sled/src/asm/db.rs	89.47%	2 Missing ⚠️
... and 2 more

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1078      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   74.97%   75.35%   +0.38%     
==========================================
  Files         499      498       -1     
  Lines       42123    42406     +283     
==========================================
+ Hits        31580    31956     +376     
+ Misses      10543    10450      -93     

Flag	Coverage Δ
functional	53.69% <81.18%> (+0.46%)	⬆️
unit	55.01% <55.57%> (+1.33%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
bin/strata-client/src/main.rs	91.98% <100.00%> (-0.05%)	⬇️
...asm/subprotocols/checkpoint-v0/src/verification.rs	69.31% <100.00%> (+17.04%)	⬆️
crates/asm/worker/src/builder.rs	91.17% <100.00%> (-2.01%)	⬇️
crates/asm/worker/src/handle.rs	70.00% <100.00%> (+22.94%)	⬆️
crates/asm/worker/src/service.rs	88.13% <100.00%> (+1.34%)	⬆️
crates/consensus-logic/src/fork_choice_manager.rs	80.07% <ø> (+1.07%)	⬆️
crates/csm-worker/src/state.rs	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
crates/db/src/traits.rs	0.00% <ø> (ø)
crates/sequencer/src/block_template/handle.rs	86.56% <ø> (ø)
crates/service/src/builder.rs	92.72% <100.00%> (+30.90%)	⬆️
... and 15 more

... and 31 files with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[bewakes]

Great work! It's very good to see the service framework being used/enhanced. :)
There are some nits and suggestions, particularly to add unit tests.

[bewakes]

Approved the PR just to realize that this needs a rebase.

[prajwolrg]

The dbtools functional tests were consistently failing on this PR but are now passing.

The issue was identified in revert_checkpoint, where L1 entries were deleted but the corresponding ClientState entries were not. This behavior has been corrected.

Previously, the bug remained hidden because the CSM was the first consumer of L1 information. This is no longer the case, as the ASM now consumes it first. Since ASM entries should never be removed (as they remain unchanged once committed and processed), the ClientState must be cleaned up and reapplied instead.

It was also observed that similar changes are being introduced in this PR, so conflicts may need to be resolved in the PR whichever gets merged later.

[storopoli]

ACK