STR-2613 restructure tx types

[delbonis]

Description

This PR is VERY INCOMPLETE.

This cleans up a bunch of issues that escaped notice with the tx types, especially meshing the chain types with the snark account update types. This more cleanly splits out the accumulator proofs that accompany update data into a separate structure as part of the full transaction, so that we can define a "txid" concept independently. There was a pretty significant issue where we separately describe the entry hash in an accumulator twice, once in the claim and once in the proof. This makes it easy for us to accidentally check one value but use a different one, when the value should simply not be provided twice.

Unfortunately this is quite more complicated than I anticipated, as it touches multiple crates and I haven't even gotten done finishing the main change itself yet!

Changes include:

• moving MessageEntry to strata-acct-types
• using RawMerkleProof in more places
• defining more parts of snark update txs in strata-ol-chain-types-new

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

Is this PR addressing any specification, design doc or external reference document?

• Yes
• No

If yes, please add relevant links:

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

[delbonis]

This is still partially in progress but the bulk of the work is done now. I want to rework tx assembly a bit to improve ergonomics and maybe clean up tests some more.

[bewakes]

Skimmed through the changes.

[bewakes]

SauTxPayload

This is not a good name. Let's not invent acronyms like this which are confusing and not widely known.

Can we drop Snark instead?

[delbonis]

Dropping "snark" from the name implies that it could be valid to update other types of accounts (like EE sequencer fee accounts) using this transaction type. I'm open to hearing other suggestions.

[github-actions]

Commit: a11f1ca

SP1 Execution Results

program	cycles	success
EVM EE STF	1,321,255	✅
Checkpoint	5,226	✅
Checkpoint New	882,889	✅

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 89.35361% with 112 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 65.40%. Comparing base (3356f55) to head (f7c4e5c).
⚠️ Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
crates/ol/mempool/src/state.rs	14.70%	29 Missing ⚠️
crates/acct-types/src/messages.rs	58.00%	21 Missing ⚠️
crates/ol/chain-types/src/transaction.rs	91.75%	15 Missing ⚠️
crates/ol/stf/src/proof_verification.rs	81.66%	11 Missing ⚠️
crates/ol/rpc/types/src/tx.rs	65.51%	10 Missing ⚠️
crates/ol/stf/src/test_utils.rs	93.75%	8 Missing ⚠️
crates/ol/block-assembly/src/block_assembly.rs	91.07%	5 Missing ⚠️
crates/ol/mempool/src/test_utils.rs	95.65%	3 Missing ⚠️
crates/ol/mempool/src/types.rs	96.29%	3 Missing ⚠️
crates/snark-acct-runtime/src/message.rs	0.00%	3 Missing ⚠️
... and 2 more

❗ There is a different number of reports uploaded between BASE (3356f55) and HEAD (f7c4e5c). Click for more details.

HEAD has 3 uploads less than BASE

Flag	BASE (3356f55)	HEAD (f7c4e5c)
unit	2	1
functional	2	0

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1508       +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage   84.34%   65.40%   -18.95%     
===========================================
  Files         802      802               
  Lines       75697    76340      +643     
===========================================
- Hits        63846    49927    -13919     
- Misses      11851    26413    +14562     

Flag	Coverage Δ
functional	?
unit	65.40% <89.35%> (-0.24%)	⬇️

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

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
bin/alpen-client/src/rpc_client.rs	33.83% <ø> (-60.91%)	⬇️
bin/strata/src/rpc/node_tests.rs	99.33% <100.00%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
crates/acct-types/src/accumulators.rs	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
crates/acct-types/src/effects.rs	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
crates/alpen-ee/block-assembly/src/block.rs	0.00% <ø> (-100.00%)	⬇️
crates/alpen-ee/common/src/traits/ol_client.rs	66.66% <ø> (ø)
...s/alpen-ee/common/src/traits/storage/exec_block.rs	99.71% <ø> (ø)
crates/alpen-ee/common/src/types/exec_record.rs	95.38% <ø> (-4.62%)	⬇️
...-ee/database/src/serialization_types/exec_block.rs	100.00% <ø> (ø)
...rates/alpen-ee/sequencer/src/block_builder/task.rs	32.34% <ø> (-65.96%)	⬇️
... and 37 more

... and 390 files with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

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