starknet_committer: compute and store accessed keys digest

[ArielElp]

No description provided.

[reviewable-StarkWare]

This change is 

[ArielElp]

• apollo_committer_types: add patricia proofs request and response types #13996 : 2 dependent PRs (#13997 , #13998 )
• starknet_committer: add patricia paths forest reader/writer traits #13995
• starknet_committer: define StarknetForestProofs serde #13994
• starknet_committer: compute and store accessed keys digest #13993 👈 (View in Graphite)
• starknet_committer: add utility that returns sorted leaf indices #13992
• starknet_committer: abstract fetch_all_patricia_paths #13991
• starknet_patricia_storage: two layer storage #13990
• starknet_committer: move fetch_patricia_paths tests #13960
• starknet_committer: fetch patricia paths tests #13959
• starknet_committer: support both layouts in fetch_patricia_paths #13958
• main

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

[cursor]

PR Summary

Medium Risk
Introduces a canonical hash over accessed trie indices used for OS/committer input; encoding mistakes would break cross-component agreement, but the logic is feature-gated and self-contained in this diff.

Overview
Adds an os_input Cargo feature (optional blake2 / digest) and accessed_keys_digest, which hashes a SortedLeavesRequest with BLAKE2s-256 using a fixed, length-prefixed encoding of class, contract, and per-contract storage NodeIndex values (storage contract keys sorted at hash time).

Also notes a future BTreeMap change for storage_sorted in Patricia path fetching.

^{Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 5ab5e3f. Bugbot is set up for automated code reviews on this repo. Configure here.}

[yoavGrs]

@yoavGrs reviewed 2 files and all commit messages, and made 1 comment.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on ArielElp).

---

crates/starknet_committer/src/db/serde_db_utils.rs line 60 at r1 (raw file):

) -> [u8; 32] {
    let mut class_hashes: Vec<ClassHash> = class_hashes.iter().copied().collect();
    class_hashes.sort();

In the previous PR you sort it. Define a "sorted" struct?

Code quote:

class_hashes.sort();

[dorimedini-starkware]

@dorimedini-starkware reviewed 1 file and all commit messages, and made 1 comment.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on ArielElp).

---

crates/starknet_committer/src/db/serde_db_utils.rs line 63 at r4 (raw file):

Previously, ArielElp wrote…

Hence the sort, sort unstable is just about ordering of equal elements

ah, right.
why not use a BTreeMap in your struct though?

[github-actions]

Artifacts upload workflows:

• Started at 2026-05-27T09:45:28Z
• Started at 2026-05-27T12:24:53Z
• Started at 2026-05-27T14:31:35Z

[ArielElp]

@ArielElp made 1 comment.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on dorimedini-starkware).

---

crates/starknet_committer/src/db/serde_db_utils.rs line 63 at r4 (raw file):

Previously, dorimedini-starkware wrote…

ah, right.
why not use a BTreeMap in your struct though?

The fields here eventually go to the various fetch_patricia_paths functions that expect HashMap, I didn't want to change multiple signatures just for the digest.

[dorimedini-starkware]

@dorimedini-starkware made 1 comment.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on ArielElp).

---

crates/starknet_committer/src/db/serde_db_utils.rs line 63 at r4 (raw file):

Previously, ArielElp wrote…

The fields here eventually go to the various fetch_patricia_paths functions that expect HashMap, I didn't want to change multiple signatures just for the digest.

mmmmm can you add a TODO to do it separately? I see no harm in changing all the signatures to BTreeMap, unless there is some storage-backed object that is already in storage with a HashMap or something non backwards-compatible like that

[ArielElp]

@ArielElp made 1 comment.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on dorimedini-starkware).

---

crates/starknet_committer/src/db/serde_db_utils.rs line 63 at r4 (raw file):

Previously, dorimedini-starkware wrote…

mmmmm can you add a TODO to do it separately? I see no harm in changing all the signatures to BTreeMap, unless there is some storage-backed object that is already in storage with a HashMap or something non backwards-compatible like that

Done.

[dorimedini-starkware]

@dorimedini-starkware reviewed 1 file and all commit messages, and resolved 1 discussion.
Reviewable status: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on ArielElp).

[dorimedini-starkware]

@dorimedini-starkware reviewed 1 file and all commit messages.
Reviewable status: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on ArielElp).