Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

feat: cosmos v50 upgrade #179

Merged
merged 61 commits into from
Jan 31, 2025
Merged

feat: cosmos v50 upgrade #179

merged 61 commits into from
Jan 31, 2025

Conversation

skosito
Copy link
Contributor

@skosito skosito commented Jan 5, 2025

Follow up issues (I will open with more details after merging this PR)

  • refactor unit tests to reduce coupling between integration_tests.go and keeper tests (already done in cronos), this makes running some unit tests hard as integration_tests.go change keeper state and impact unit tests execution

  • uncomment test_upgrade and fix - this was already commented out before this PR, so probably not related

  • base fee in subscription related rpc methods is not contained in header events, should be refactored to use block and extract header from it

yihuang and others added 2 commits January 5, 2025 17:59
fix dependencies

fix build

upgrade protogen image

Co-authored-by: mmsqe <[email protected]>

wait for block properly

fix py-lint

fix test

fix py-lint
Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Jan 5, 2025

Important

Review skipped

More than 25% of the files skipped due to max files limit. The review is being skipped to prevent a low-quality review.

122 files out of 205 files are above the max files limit of 75. Please upgrade to Pro plan to get higher limits.

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.


Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR. (Beta)
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

tests/integration_tests/network.py Fixed Show fixed Hide fixed
tests/integration_tests/test_fee_history.py Fixed Show fixed Hide fixed
tests/integration_tests/test_tracers.py Fixed Show fixed Hide fixed
tests/integration_tests/test_upgrade.py Fixed Show fixed Hide fixed
tests/integration_tests/test_upgrade.py Fixed Show fixed Hide fixed
tests/integration_tests/test_upgrade.py Fixed Show fixed Hide fixed
tests/integration_tests/test_upgrade.py Fixed Show fixed Hide fixed
tests/integration_tests/test_websockets.py Fixed Show fixed Hide fixed
app/ante/fee_checker.go Fixed Show fixed Hide fixed
server/start.go Fixed Show fixed Hide fixed
x/evm/keeper/msg_server.go Fixed Show fixed Hide fixed
x/evm/keeper/state_transition.go Fixed Show fixed Hide fixed
x/evm/keeper/state_transition.go Fixed Show fixed Hide fixed
x/feemarket/keeper/abci.go Fixed Show fixed Hide fixed
x/feemarket/keeper/abci.go Fixed Show fixed Hide fixed
Comment on lines +964 to +971
for _, m := range app.ModuleManager.Modules {
if moduleWithName, ok := m.(module.HasName); ok {
moduleName := moduleWithName.Name()
if appModule, ok := moduleWithName.(appmodule.AppModule); ok {
modules[moduleName] = appModule
}
}
}

Check warning

Code scanning / CodeQL

Iteration over map Warning

Iteration over map may be a possible source of non-determinism
cmd/ethermintd/root.go Fixed Show fixed Hide fixed
func (am AppModule) BeginBlock(ctx sdk.Context, req abci.RequestBeginBlock) {
am.keeper.BeginBlock(ctx, req)
func (am AppModule) BeginBlock(ctx context.Context) error {
return am.keeper.BeginBlock(sdk.UnwrapSDKContext(ctx))

Check warning

Code scanning / CodeQL

Panic in BeginBock or EndBlock consensus methods Warning

path flow from Begin/EndBlock to a panic call
path flow from Begin/EndBlock to a panic call
x/evm/types/chain_config.go Fixed Show fixed Hide fixed
x/evm/types/msg.go Fixed Show fixed Hide fixed
if consParams != nil && consParams.Block.MaxGas > -1 {
gasLimit = big.NewInt(consParams.Block.MaxGas)
if consParams.Block == nil || consParams.Block.MaxGas <= -1 {
panic(fmt.Sprintf("get invalid consensus params: %s", consParams))

Check warning

Code scanning / CodeQL

Panic in BeginBock or EndBlock consensus methods Warning

Possible panics in BeginBock- or EndBlock-related consensus methods could cause a chain halt
store := k.storeService.OpenKVStore(ctx)
bz, err := store.Get(types.ParamsKey)
if err != nil {
panic(err)

Check warning

Code scanning / CodeQL

Panic in BeginBock or EndBlock consensus methods Warning

Possible panics in BeginBock- or EndBlock-related consensus methods could cause a chain halt
func (am AppModule) BeginBlock(ctx sdk.Context, req abci.RequestBeginBlock) {
am.keeper.BeginBlock(ctx, req)
func (am AppModule) BeginBlock(ctx context.Context) error {
return am.keeper.BeginBlock(sdk.UnwrapSDKContext(ctx))

Check warning

Code scanning / CodeQL

Panic in BeginBock or EndBlock consensus methods Warning

path flow from Begin/EndBlock to a panic call
path flow from Begin/EndBlock to a panic call
am.keeper.EndBlock(ctx, req)
return []abci.ValidatorUpdate{}
func (am AppModule) EndBlock(ctx context.Context) error {
return am.keeper.EndBlock(sdk.UnwrapSDKContext(ctx))

Check warning

Code scanning / CodeQL

Panic in BeginBock or EndBlock consensus methods Warning

path flow from Begin/EndBlock to a panic call
var InterfaceRegistry types.InterfaceRegistry

func customGetSignerFn(path string) func(msg proto.Message) ([][]byte, error) {
return func(msg proto.Message) ([][]byte, error) {
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

in cronos fork from is changed to be bytes instead of string, but for now we can keep it string with this custom signer func

// add rosetta
rootCmd.AddCommand(rosettaCmd.RosettaCommand(encodingConfig.InterfaceRegistry, encodingConfig.Codec))
autoCliOpts := tempApp.AutoCliOpts()
initClientCtx, _ = clientcfg.ReadDefaultValuesFromDefaultClientConfig(initClientCtx)

Check warning

Code scanning / gosec

Returned error is not propagated up the stack. Warning

Returned error is not propagated up the stack.
# )


# def test_cosmovisor_upgrade(custom_ethermint: Ethermint):
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

can you just @pytest.mark.skip? should minimize the diff and future merge conflicts

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ah I was looking at the specific commit. If it was commented out before I think this is fine. We have upgrade test coverage on the node side.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

yes it was commented out, i guess with same reasoning that we are testing upgrade anyways on node side, but will open the issue in any case to check this since it might uncover some hidden issue

Copy link
Member

@gartnera gartnera left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The cherry pick seems clean. Most of the extra diff comes from fixing the nix build and CI stuff.

@skosito
Copy link
Contributor Author

skosito commented Jan 24, 2025

The cherry pick seems clean. Most of the extra diff comes from fixing the nix build and CI stuff.

also because there were changes between our last cherry pick until this one that we didn't check in meantime, causing all kinds of issues with integration and unit tests

i will follow up on this in more details, but with future work, for this one i think it is fine

@skosito skosito merged commit 7ecd3d5 into main Jan 31, 2025
40 of 42 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants