test: refactor crosschain precompile test suite #794
Conversation
WalkthroughThe pull request introduces significant changes to the cross-chain functionality within the codebase. Key modifications include the restructuring of argument types and validation methods in Changes
Possibly related PRs
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? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
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)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (11)
x/crosschain/precompile/has_oracle_test.go (1)
65-67: Consider enhancing assertion readability
While the current implementation is correct, consider making the assertions more explicit for better test failure messages.
- result := suite.WithError(expectErr).HasOracle(suite.Ctx, args)
- suite.Require().Equal(tc.result, result)
+ result := suite.WithError(expectErr).HasOracle(suite.Ctx, args)
+ suite.Require().Equal(tc.result, result,
+ "HasOracle result mismatch for test case: %s", tc.name)solidity/contracts/test/CrosschainTest.sol (1)
94-100: Consider adding NatSpec documentation.
Adding NatSpec documentation for the new functions would improve the test contract's maintainability by clearly documenting:
- The purpose of each function
- Parameter descriptions
- Return value meanings
- Example usage in tests
Example for one function:
/// @notice Executes a cross-chain claim for testing
/// @param _chain The source chain identifier
/// @param _eventNonce The event nonce to execute
/// @return _result True if claim execution succeeded
function executeClaim(
string memory _chain,
uint256 _eventNonce
) external returns (bool _result)Also applies to: 102-111, 113-122
x/crosschain/precompile/bridge_call.go (1)
Line range hint 121-127: LGTM! Consider documenting field order.
The implementation correctly packs the fields in the required order. Consider adding a comment documenting the expected field order to make maintenance easier.
Add this comment above the method:
+// PackInput packs BridgeCallArgs fields in order: DstChain, Refund, Tokens, Amounts, To, Data, Value, Memo
func (m *BridgeCallMethod) PackInput(args fxcontract.BridgeCallArgs) ([]byte, error) {x/crosschain/precompile/crosschain.go (2)
Line range hint 126-132: LGTM! Consider adding input validation.
The implementation correctly packs the CrosschainArgs fields according to the ABI specification.
Consider adding basic input validation before packing:
func (m *CrosschainMethod) PackInput(args fxcontract.CrosschainArgs) ([]byte, error) {
+ // Validate required fields
+ if args.Amount == nil || args.Fee == nil {
+ return nil, errors.New("amount and fee must not be nil")
+ }
+ if args.Amount.Sign() < 0 || args.Fee.Sign() < 0 {
+ return nil, errors.New("amount and fee must be non-negative")
+ }
data, err := m.Method.Inputs.Pack(args.Token, args.Receipt, args.Amount, args.Fee, args.Target, args.Memo)
if err != nil {
return nil, err
}
return append(m.GetMethodId(), data...), nil
}Migration documentation needed for CrosschainMethod deprecation
The codebase shows that BridgeCallMethod is a direct replacement for CrosschainMethod with significant interface changes:
- Different method signature (
bridgeCallvscrossChain) - Different event structure (
BridgeCallEventvsCrossChain) - Different gas requirements (50,000 vs 40,000)
- New functionality for handling bridge calls with multiple tokens
Action items needed:
- Add deprecation notice with target removal version
- Document breaking changes in method signatures and events
- Provide migration examples in
CHANGELOG.md - Update integration tests to use new
BridgeCallMethod
🔗 Analysis chain
Line range hint 1-132: Document migration path from CrosschainMethod to BridgeCallMethod.
Since this code is marked as deprecated in favor of BridgeCallMethod, it would be helpful to:
- Add a comment explaining the migration timeline
- Document any breaking changes in the new implementation
- Provide migration examples for existing users
Let's check if migration documentation exists:
Let's check the content of these files to see if they contain migration documentation for BridgeCallMethod.
Let's check the implementation details of BridgeCallMethod to understand the migration path better.
Let's check how BridgeCallMethod is used in the contract.go file to understand the migration strategy.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Look for migration guides or documentation
fd -e md -e txt . | xargs rg -l "BridgeCallMethod|migration"
Length of output: 85
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check README and CHANGELOG for BridgeCallMethod migration details
echo "=== README.md ==="
rg -A 5 "BridgeCallMethod|migration" README.md || true
echo -e "\n=== CHANGELOG.md ==="
rg -A 5 "BridgeCallMethod|migration" CHANGELOG.md || true
# Also search for the BridgeCallMethod implementation
echo -e "\n=== BridgeCallMethod Implementation ==="
ast-grep --pattern 'type BridgeCallMethod struct {
$$$
}'
Length of output: 1279
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check BridgeCallMethod implementation and usage
echo "=== BridgeCallMethod Implementation ==="
rg -A 10 "func NewBridgeCallMethod" x/crosschain/precompile/bridge_call.go || true
echo -e "\n=== BridgeCallMethod Usage ==="
rg -l "BridgeCallMethod" || true
# Look for any upgrade/migration related files
echo -e "\n=== Migration Files ==="
fd -e go migration upgrades | xargs rg -l "BridgeCallMethod|CrosschainMethod" || true
Length of output: 1162
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check how BridgeCallMethod is registered and used
echo "=== Contract Registration ==="
rg -A 10 "BridgeCallMethod" x/crosschain/precompile/contract.go
# Check for any tests that might show migration examples
echo -e "\n=== Test Examples ==="
rg -A 10 "BridgeCallMethod" x/crosschain/precompile/bridge_call_test.go
# Look for any breaking changes between implementations
echo -e "\n=== Method Differences ==="
rg -A 5 "func \(m \*BridgeCallMethod\)" x/crosschain/precompile/bridge_call.go
Length of output: 4056
x/crosschain/precompile/contract_test.go (3)
33-40: Consider consolidating test entry points.
There are two similar test entry points which might cause confusion. Consider consolidating them or documenting the specific purpose of each.
50-54: Document the contract deployment condition.
The condition suite.crosschainAddr.String() != contract.StakingAddress needs documentation explaining why this check determines whether to deploy the contract.
Consider adding a comment explaining the purpose:
+ // Deploy crosschain contract only if we're not testing against the staking contract address
if suite.crosschainAddr.String() != contract.StakingAddress {Line range hint 81-96: Consider making keeper retrieval more type-safe.
The current implementation uses reflection and string manipulation which could be fragile. Consider:
- Using a more type-safe approach to keeper retrieval
- Defining chain names as constants to avoid string literals
Example improvement:
// Define constants
const (
EthChainID = "bridge-eth"
EthKeeper = "eth"
)
// Use type assertions instead of reflection where possible
func (suite *CrosschainPrecompileTestSuite) CrosschainKeepers() map[string]crosschainkeeper.Keeper {
keepers := make(map[string]crosschainkeeper.Keeper)
// Add type-safe keeper retrieval logic here
return keepers
}tests/crosschain_suite.go (1)
Line range hint 573-582: Consider improving error message.
The implementation looks good, but the error message could be more descriptive. Instead of just including the target parameter, consider adding context about what failed.
-suite.Require().NoError(err, target)
+suite.Require().NoError(err, fmt.Sprintf("failed to build transaction for target: %s", target))testutil/helpers/crosschain_precompile_suite.go (1)
30-34: Rename variable for clarity in WithError method
In the WithError method, the variable crosschainPrecompileKeeper may cause confusion as it suggests a keeper instance rather than the suite itself. Consider renaming it to suite for better clarity.
Apply this diff to improve readability:
func (s CrosschainPrecompileSuite) WithError(err error) CrosschainPrecompileSuite {
- crosschainPrecompileKeeper := s
- crosschainPrecompileKeeper.err = err
- return crosschainPrecompileKeeper
+ suite := s
+ suite.err = err
+ return suite
}contract/crosschain.go (1)
Line range hint 22-36: Clarify the deprecation of the newly introduced CrosschainArgs
The CrosschainArgs struct is being introduced but is marked as deprecated with the comment // Deprecated: After the upgrade to v8. Introducing a new type that is already deprecated might cause confusion. Is this intentional? If so, consider providing additional comments to explain its temporary usage and plan for deprecation, to aid future maintainability.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (18)
- contract/crosschain.go (6 hunks)
- contract/crosschain_precompile.go (1 hunks)
- solidity/contracts/test/CrosschainTest.sol (1 hunks)
- tests/contract/crosschain_test.sol.go (3 hunks)
- tests/crosschain_suite.go (2 hunks)
- testutil/helpers/crosschain_precompile_suite.go (1 hunks)
- x/crosschain/precompile/bridge_call.go (2 hunks)
- x/crosschain/precompile/bridge_call_test.go (1 hunks)
- x/crosschain/precompile/bridge_coin_amount.go (2 hunks)
- x/crosschain/precompile/contract_test.go (5 hunks)
- x/crosschain/precompile/crosschain.go (1 hunks)
- x/crosschain/precompile/execute_claim.go (1 hunks)
- x/crosschain/precompile/execute_claim_test.go (2 hunks)
- x/crosschain/precompile/has_oracle.go (2 hunks)
- x/crosschain/precompile/has_oracle_test.go (5 hunks)
- x/crosschain/precompile/is_oracle_online.go (2 hunks)
- x/crosschain/precompile/is_oracle_online_test.go (6 hunks)
- x/evm/keeper/keeper.go (0 hunks)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (1)
- x/evm/keeper/keeper.go
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 GitHub Check: lint
contract/crosschain_precompile.go
[failure] 76-76:
undefined: unpackRetIsOk (typecheck)
[failure] 76-76:
undefined: unpackRetIsOk) (typecheck)
[failure] 76-76:
undefined: unpackRetIsOk) (typecheck)
[failure] 76-76:
undefined: unpackRetIsOk) (typecheck)
[failure] 76-76:
undefined: unpackRetIsOk) (typecheck)
🪛 GitHub Check: test
contract/crosschain_precompile.go
[failure] 76-76:
undefined: unpackRetIsOk
🔇 Additional comments (52)
x/crosschain/precompile/execute_claim_test.go (2)
11-11: LGTM: Import changes align with type refactoring.
The change correctly imports the contract package to use the relocated ExecuteClaimArgs type.
28-31: LGTM: Argument type update maintains test integrity.
The update from types.ExecuteClaimArgs to contract.ExecuteClaimArgs correctly maintains the same test behavior, as evidenced by the unchanged expected hex output.
Let's verify that all usages of ExecuteClaimArgs have been consistently updated:
✅ Verification successful
All references to ExecuteClaimArgs have been consistently updated
The verification shows that all occurrences of ExecuteClaimArgs in the codebase are using either contract.ExecuteClaimArgs or fxcontract.ExecuteClaimArgs (which appears to be an alias), with no remaining references to the old types.ExecuteClaimArgs. This confirms that the type update has been consistently applied across the codebase.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify consistent usage of ExecuteClaimArgs across the codebase
# Expect: All occurrences should use contract.ExecuteClaimArgs, not types.ExecuteClaimArgs
# Search for any remaining references to types.ExecuteClaimArgs
rg "types\.ExecuteClaimArgs"
# Search for new references to contract.ExecuteClaimArgs
rg "contract\.ExecuteClaimArgs"
Length of output: 844
x/crosschain/precompile/has_oracle_test.go (3)
9-9: LGTM: Import changes align with type refactoring
The addition of the contract package import is consistent with the transition from crosschaintypes to contract.HasOracleArgs.
21-21: LGTM: Improved test suite naming
The rename to CrosschainPrecompileTestSuite provides better context and follows domain-driven naming conventions.
Line range hint 22-58: LGTM: Well-structured test cases with comprehensive coverage
The test cases effectively cover the main scenarios (valid oracle, missing oracle, invalid chain) with proper error handling and consistent argument types.
x/crosschain/precompile/has_oracle.go (3)
9-9: LGTM: Import changes align with the argument type migration.
The addition of the contract package import supports the transition from crosschaintypes to contract package for argument handling.
61-64: LGTM: UnpackInput changes maintain consistency with PackInput.
The method correctly uses contract.HasOracleArgs and maintains proper error handling through types.ParseMethodArgs.
53-59: Verify consistent usage of contract.HasOracleArgs across the codebase.
The change to use contract.HasOracleArgs looks good, but let's ensure this type is consistently used across all related files.
✅ Verification successful
All usages of HasOracleArgs are consistently using the contract package
The verification shows that all instances of HasOracleArgs in the codebase are using the contract package type. The type is properly used in:
- Main implementation in
x/crosschain/precompile/has_oracle.go - Test cases in
x/crosschain/precompile/has_oracle_test.go - Helper functions in
testutil/helpers/crosschain_precompile_suite.go - Type definition and validation in
contract/crosschain.go - Keeper implementation in
contract/crosschain_precompile.go
No instances of crosschaintypes.HasOracleArgs were found, confirming the refactoring is complete and consistent.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify consistent usage of HasOracleArgs type
# Test: Search for any remaining usage of crosschaintypes.HasOracleArgs
rg -l "crosschaintypes\.HasOracleArgs"
# Test: Verify all usages of contract.HasOracleArgs
rg -l "contract\.HasOracleArgs"
Length of output: 203
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the actual usage context in these files
rg "HasOracleArgs" -A 3 -B 3
Length of output: 5093
x/crosschain/precompile/is_oracle_online.go (3)
9-11: LGTM: Import changes align with type refactoring.
The addition of the contract package import while maintaining the crosschaintypes import is appropriate for the refactoring.
67-70: LGTM: Clean implementation of UnpackInput.
The implementation is concise, handles errors appropriately, and follows the standard pattern for ABI method argument parsing.
59-65: LGTM: Verify type consistency across codebase.
The transition to contract.IsOracleOnlineArgs is clean and maintains the original functionality.
Let's verify the consistent usage of the new type:
✅ Verification successful
Type transition is complete and consistent
The verification shows that:
- No instances of the old type
crosschaintypes.IsOracleOnlineArgsremain in the codebase - The new type
contract.IsOracleOnlineArgsis consistently used across all relevant files:- Main implementation in
is_oracle_online.go - Test cases in
is_oracle_online_test.go - Test utilities in
testutil/helpers/crosschain_precompile_suite.go
- Main implementation in
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for any remaining uses of crosschaintypes.IsOracleOnlineArgs
# and verify consistent usage of contract.IsOracleOnlineArgs
# Search for any remaining old type usage
echo "Checking for old type usage..."
rg "crosschaintypes\.IsOracleOnlineArgs"
# Search for new type usage to ensure consistency
echo "Checking new type usage..."
rg "contract\.IsOracleOnlineArgs"
Length of output: 1627
x/crosschain/precompile/bridge_coin_amount.go (3)
10-14: LGTM: Import changes align with type refactoring.
The addition of the fxcontract import is consistent with the migration from crosschaintypes to fxcontract for BridgeCoinAmountArgs.
Line range hint 68-73: LGTM: Clean implementation of UnpackInput with new type.
The implementation correctly uses evmtypes.ParseMethodArgs for ABI parsing and maintains proper error handling while transitioning to the new fxcontract type.
60-66: Verify callers of PackInput method.
The method signature change from crosschaintypes to fxcontract looks good, but we should ensure all callers have been updated.
✅ Verification successful
All callers have been updated to use the new type
The verification shows that all references to BridgeCoinAmountArgs are using the new fxcontract package type. The changes are consistent across:
- The precompile implementation in
x/crosschain/precompile/bridge_coin_amount.go - Test suites in
testutil/helpers/crosschain_precompile_suite.go - Contract interfaces in
contract/directory
No remaining references to the old crosschaintypes.BridgeCoinAmountArgs were found.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for any remaining references to crosschaintypes.BridgeCoinAmountArgs
# to ensure complete migration to fxcontract.BridgeCoinAmountArgs
rg -l "crosschaintypes\.BridgeCoinAmountArgs"
# Search for calls to PackInput to verify they use the new type
ast-grep --pattern 'PackInput($$$)'
Length of output: 85
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a broader search to find all usages of PackInput method
rg -A 2 "PackInput"
# Also search for any test files that might be using this method
fd -e test.go -x rg -l "PackInput" {}
# Search for any remaining references to crosschaintypes package
rg "crosschaintypes\."
# Look for BridgeCoinAmount related files
fd -t f "BridgeCoinAmount"
Length of output: 35975
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's search for BridgeCoinAmount usage and tests
rg -A 3 "BridgeCoinAmount"
# Look for test files containing BridgeCoinAmount
fd -e test.go -x rg -l "BridgeCoinAmount" {}
# Search for any imports or usage of the old type
rg "BridgeCoinAmountArgs"
Length of output: 10451
x/crosschain/precompile/is_oracle_online_test.go (4)
9-9: LGTM: Import changes align with refactoring goals
The addition of the contract package import is consistent with the migration of types from crosschaintypes to the contract package.
21-21: LGTM: Improved test suite naming
The rename to CrosschainPrecompileTestSuite provides better context and specificity about the test suite's purpose.
24-24: LGTM: Well-structured test cases with comprehensive coverage
The test cases effectively cover:
- Happy path (oracle online)
- Expected failures (oracle offline)
- Edge cases (oracle not found)
- Error conditions (invalid chain)
The type migration to contract.IsOracleOnlineArgs is consistently applied across all test cases.
Also applies to: 29-36, 41-48, 53-68
77-77: LGTM: Simplified test execution, but verify consistency
The simplified test execution using WithError().IsOracleOnline() is cleaner and more maintainable.
Let's verify if this pattern is consistently used across other test files:
✅ Verification successful
Let me search for more test files to get a comprehensive view of the testing patterns used.
Based on the search results, I can see that the WithError() pattern is consistently used in test files for error handling and test execution. The pattern appears in both has_oracle_test.go and is_oracle_online_test.go, which are the only test files using this pattern. This indicates that the pattern is being used consistently where appropriate.
LGTM: Consistent test pattern usage confirmed
The WithError().IsOracleOnline() pattern is consistently used across the crosschain test files where error handling is needed. The same pattern is also used in HasOracle tests, showing a uniform approach to test execution.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for other test files in the crosschain package to verify the consistent usage of WithError pattern
rg -g '*_test.go' "WithError\(" x/crosschain/
Length of output: 278
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for all test files in the crosschain package to understand the testing patterns
fd "_test.go$" x/crosschain/ --exec head -n 100 {}
Length of output: 54053
x/crosschain/precompile/execute_claim.go (2)
80-86: LGTM: Type migration looks correct
The change from crosschaintypes.ExecuteClaimArgs to fxcontract.ExecuteClaimArgs is consistent with the refactoring objective while maintaining the same packing logic.
88-92: LGTM: Verify type consistency across callers
The implementation correctly handles the new fxcontract.ExecuteClaimArgs type and maintains proper error handling.
Let's verify that all callers have been updated to handle the new return type:
✅ Verification successful
Let me search for callers of this UnpackInput method to verify type consistency.
Let me search for the actual usage of ExecuteClaimMethod to verify the callers.
Based on the search results, I can now provide a final response:
Type changes are properly handled across all callers
The ExecuteClaimMethod's UnpackInput implementation is correctly used in its only caller within the Run method of the same type. The type migration from crosschaintypes to fxcontract is complete with no remaining references to the old type.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for any remaining references to crosschaintypes.ExecuteClaimArgs
# and verify all UnpackInput method calls
rg -A 3 "UnpackInput.*ExecuteClaimArgs"
Length of output: 435
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for calls to UnpackInput method
rg -A 3 "UnpackInput\(" --type go
# Also search for any remaining references to crosschaintypes.ExecuteClaimArgs
# to ensure complete migration
rg "crosschaintypes\.ExecuteClaimArgs"
Length of output: 11152
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for ExecuteClaimMethod usage and its callers
rg -A 5 "ExecuteClaimMethod" --type go
# Also search for any code that handles the result of UnpackInput
rg -A 5 "UnpackInput.*ExecuteClaimArgs.*err :=" --type go
Length of output: 6334
solidity/contracts/test/CrosschainTest.sol (2)
94-100: LGTM! The new test functions are well-structured.
The new functions follow consistent patterns with the existing codebase and provide good test coverage for cross-chain oracle and claim functionality.
Also applies to: 102-111, 113-122
94-122: Verify ICrosschain interface compatibility.
Let's verify that the function signatures match the ICrosschain interface to ensure test compatibility.
✅ Verification successful
Function signatures in CrosschainTest.sol match ICrosschain interface perfectly
The implementation in CrosschainTest.sol exactly matches the function signatures defined in ICrosschain interface for:
executeClaim(string memory, uint256) external returns (bool)hasOracle(string memory, address) external view returns (bool)isOracleOnline(string memory, address) external view returns (bool)
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check if the new function signatures match the interface
# Find and display the ICrosschain interface definition
ast-grep --pattern 'interface ICrosschain {
$$$
function executeClaim(string memory, uint256) external returns (bool);
function hasOracle(string memory, address) external view returns (bool);
function isOracleOnline(string memory, address) external view returns (bool);
$$$
}'
Length of output: 288
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try to find the ICrosschain interface definition with a simpler pattern
ast-grep --pattern 'interface ICrosschain'
# Also search for the interface file using ripgrep
rg -l "interface ICrosschain"
# As a backup, let's look for these specific function declarations in any interface
ast-grep --pattern 'function executeClaim(string memory, uint256) external returns (bool)'
ast-grep --pattern 'function hasOracle(string memory, address) external view returns (bool)'
ast-grep --pattern 'function isOracleOnline(string memory, address) external view returns (bool)'
Length of output: 406
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Now that we found the interface file, let's examine its content
cat solidity/contracts/bridge/ICrosschain.sol
Length of output: 1823
x/crosschain/precompile/bridge_call.go (3)
Line range hint 109-114: LGTM! Clean and consistent type update.
The change maintains proper error handling while switching to the new type.
Line range hint 105-127: Verify all callers are updated to use fxcontract.BridgeCallArgs.
Since this is a type change from crosschaintypes.BridgeCallArgs to fxcontract.BridgeCallArgs, we should ensure all callers have been updated.
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for any remaining uses of the old type
# Test: Search for any remaining references to crosschaintypes.BridgeCallArgs
rg "crosschaintypes\.BridgeCallArgs"
# Test: Verify all callers are using the new type
rg "fxcontract\.BridgeCallArgs"105-107: LGTM! Verify type compatibility between packages.
The change from crosschaintypes.BridgeCallArgs to fxcontract.BridgeCallArgs looks correct.
Let's verify the type compatibility:
✅ Verification successful
Let me try a different approach to find the struct definitions:
Let me try one more search strategy to locate these struct definitions:
Based on the search results, I can now generate the final response:
Type change is correct and compatible
The change from crosschaintypes.BridgeCallArgs to fxcontract.BridgeCallArgs is safe. The struct definition found in contract/crosschain.go shows all the required fields (DstChain, Refund, Tokens, Amounts, To, Data, Value, Memo) that are used in the NewBridgeCallEvent method's implementation. The field types and their ABI tags match the usage in the method.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify that both types have compatible fields to ensure the refactor is safe
# Test: Compare struct fields between old and new types
ast-grep --pattern 'type BridgeCallArgs struct {
$$$
}'
Length of output: 624
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for BridgeCallArgs struct definition in both old and new packages
echo "=== Searching in crosschaintypes package ==="
rg -A 10 "type BridgeCallArgs struct" x/crosschain/types/
echo -e "\n=== Searching in fxcontract package ==="
rg -A 10 "type BridgeCallArgs struct" contracts/
Length of output: 355
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# First, let's find all Go files that might contain BridgeCallArgs
echo "=== Finding all potential Go files ==="
fd -e go
echo -e "\n=== Searching for BridgeCallArgs struct definition in all Go files ==="
rg -A 10 "type BridgeCallArgs struct"
Length of output: 14669
x/crosschain/precompile/crosschain.go (1)
118-124: LGTM! Verify callers are updated.
The transition to fxcontract.CrosschainArgs is implemented correctly with proper error handling.
Let's verify that all callers have been updated to handle the new return type:
✅ Verification successful
LGTM! The transition to fxcontract.CrosschainArgs is complete.
The verification shows:
- All usages of
CrosschainArgsin the codebase are now using the newfxcontract.CrosschainArgstype - The implementation in
crosschain.gofollows the same pattern as other precompile methods - No remaining references to the old
crosschaintypes.CrosschainArgswere found - Test files have been updated to use the new type
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for any remaining references to crosschaintypes.CrosschainArgs
# to ensure complete migration to fxcontract.CrosschainArgs
rg "crosschaintypes\.CrosschainArgs" -l
# Search for UnpackInput calls to verify proper error handling
ast-grep --pattern 'UnpackInput($$$)' -A 3
Length of output: 86
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a broader search for UnpackInput usage
rg "UnpackInput" -A 3
# Search for CrosschainArgs usage without namespace specificity
rg "CrosschainArgs" -A 3
# Look for test files that might use these types
fd "test.*\.go$" --exec grep -l "CrosschainArgs"
# Check imports in files that might use CrosschainArgs
rg "import.*crosschain" -A 5
Length of output: 17212
x/crosschain/precompile/contract_test.go (4)
17-17: LGTM: Import changes are well-organized.
The new import for test contracts is properly aliased and organized with related imports.
24-31: LGTM: Well-structured test suite definition.
The renamed test suite with added fields and embedded CrosschainPrecompileSuite follows Go best practices and clearly indicates its purpose.
Line range hint 63-79: LGTM: Robust block progression handling.
The Commit method properly handles block progression with appropriate error checking and UTC time updates.
Line range hint 109-137: LGTM: Well-structured test data generation.
The oracle generation methods provide comprehensive test data setup with proper relationships between oracles, bridgers, and external addresses.
x/crosschain/precompile/bridge_call_test.go (2)
152-152: LGTM! Clean type migration.
The change from types.BridgeCallArgs to contract.BridgeCallArgs is well-executed and aligns with the broader test suite refactoring effort. The test maintains its comprehensive validation while using the new type.
Line range hint 1-190: Well-structured and comprehensive test suite.
The test suite demonstrates excellent practices with:
- Comprehensive coverage of all bridge call functionality
- Clear separation of test cases for different aspects (ABI, inputs, outputs, events)
- Thorough validation of data structures and transformations
tests/crosschain_suite.go (1)
Line range hint 525-529: LGTM! Type migration looks good.
The change from crosschaintypes.ExecuteClaimArgs to contract.ExecuteClaimArgs is properly implemented and maintains the expected functionality.
testutil/helpers/crosschain_precompile_suite.go (8)
14-19: Struct definition is well-structured
The CrosschainPrecompileSuite struct is appropriately defined, embedding ContractBaseSuite and CrosschainPrecompileKeeper, and including an err field for error handling.
21-28: Constructor function initializes the suite correctly
The NewCrosschainPrecompileSuite function properly initializes the suite, sets up the base contract suite, and initializes the CrosschainPrecompileKeeper with the given caller and contract address.
36-42: Error handling is correctly implemented in requireError
The requireError method properly handles error assertions based on the presence of s.err, ensuring accurate test validations.
44-48: BridgeCoinAmount method is correctly implemented
The BridgeCoinAmount method correctly delegates the call to the CrosschainPrecompileKeeper and handles errors appropriately using requireError.
50-54: HasOracle method is correctly implemented
The HasOracle method accurately calls the HasOracle function of the CrosschainPrecompileKeeper and properly manages error handling.
56-60: IsOracleOnline method is correctly implemented
The implementation of IsOracleOnline correctly delegates to the CrosschainPrecompileKeeper and utilizes requireError for error management.
62-66: BridgeCall method implementation is appropriate
The BridgeCall method correctly executes the bridge call via the CrosschainPrecompileKeeper, handles the response, and manages errors.
68-72: ExecuteClaim method is correctly implemented
The ExecuteClaim method properly invokes the corresponding function in the CrosschainPrecompileKeeper and handles errors using requireError.
contract/crosschain.go (1)
1-1: Verify the impact of changing the package name
Changing the package name from types to contract may affect import paths throughout the codebase. Please ensure that all references to this package are updated accordingly to prevent compilation errors.
Run the following script to find all import statements of the old package:
contract/crosschain_precompile.go (6)
13-17: Struct CrosschainPrecompileKeeper is well-defined
The struct provides a clear encapsulation of the necessary fields for contract interaction, promoting modularity and maintainability.
19-28: Constructor NewCrosschainPrecompileKeeper correctly initializes the keeper
The constructor properly handles the default contract address and initializes the ABI, ensuring that the CrosschainPrecompileKeeper is set up correctly.
30-37: Function BridgeCoinAmount is correctly implemented
The function accurately queries the contract for the bridge coin amount associated with a specific token and target, handling errors appropriately.
39-46: Function HasOracle is correctly implemented
The function effectively checks for the existence of an oracle for a given chain and external address, returning the correct boolean result.
48-55: Function IsOracleOnline is correctly implemented
The function properly determines if an oracle is online for a specified chain and external address, handling the query and errors as expected.
57-68: Function BridgeCall handles contract interaction effectively
The function executes a bridge call to the contract with the provided arguments, unpacks the response correctly, and returns the event nonce.
tests/contract/crosschain_test.sol.go (4)
34-35: ABI and Binary Code Updated Appropriately
The ABI and Bin fields have been updated to include the new contract methods executeClaim, hasOracle, and isOracleOnline, reflecting the changes in the contract's interface.
267-296: HasOracle Function Implementation Added Correctly
The HasOracle function and its associated methods are correctly implemented. The function signatures, parameters, and return types match the Solidity contract, and error handling follows the established patterns.
298-327: IsOracleOnline Function Implementation Added Correctly
The IsOracleOnline function and its associated methods are properly added. The implementation aligns with the Solidity definition, and consistent error handling is maintained.
350-369: ExecuteClaim Function Implementation Added Correctly
The ExecuteClaim function is correctly implemented as a paid mutator transaction. The function parameters and transaction handling are consistent with other mutator methods in the contract bindings.
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
CrosschainArgsfor streamlined cross-chain transactions.CrosschainPrecompileKeeper.Bug Fixes
Documentation
Chores