chore: add extra defensive check to SendPacket

[damiannolan]

Description

It's more than likely that this code path is unreachable in most cases, but having an extra defensive check is no harm.
Colin and I spoke about this a few weeks ago.

closes: #XXXX

---

Before we can merge this PR, please make sure that all the following items have been
checked off. If any of the checklist items are not applicable, please leave them but
write a little note why.

• Targeted PR against the correct branch (see CONTRIBUTING.md).
• Linked to GitHub issue with discussion and accepted design, OR link to spec that describes this work.
• Code follows the module structure standards and Go style guide.
• Wrote unit and integration tests.
• Updated relevant documentation (docs/).
• Added relevant godoc comments.
• Provide a conventional commit message to follow the repository standards.
• Include a descriptive changelog entry when appropriate. This may be left to the discretion of the PR reviewers. (e.g. chores should be omitted from changelog)
• Re-reviewed Files changed in the GitHub PR explorer.
• Review SonarCloud Report in the comment section below once CI passes.

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Bug Fixes
  • Improved error handling in packet sending to prevent sending packets using a client with zero height.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

This update introduces a crucial validation step in the SendPacket function, ensuring that packets are not sent when the associated client's blockchain height is zero. By adding this check, the system prevents potential errors or undefined behaviors resulting from attempts to transmit packets under invalid conditions, enhancing the robustness and reliability of the packet handling mechanism.

Changes

File	Summary
.../04-channel/keeper/packet.go	Added a check for latestHeight being zero before retrieving latestTimestamp in the SendPacket function. If latestHeight is zero, an error is returned.
.../04-channel/keeper/packet_test.go	Added a new test case named "client state zero height" in the TestSendPacket function to validate client and consensus state at height zero.

🐇✨
In the realm of code, where packets fly free,
A rabbit hopped in, with a fix full of glee.
"No more shall you send, with a height of nil,
For I've added a check, with my coding skill."
🌟🚫📦
"Rejoice!" said the rabbit, "for stability reigns,
Through the networks vast, across digital plains."
🌈🐰💻

---

Recent Review Details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between aa9a5b1 and 1f9d5b3.

Files selected for processing (1)

• modules/core/04-channel/keeper/packet_test.go (1 hunks)

Additional comments not posted (1)

modules/core/04-channel/keeper/packet_test.go (1)

148-165: Consider adding assertions to verify the expected behavior when SendPacket is called with a client state of zero height.

To ensure the test case accurately reflects the defensive check's impact, it would be beneficial to include assertions that confirm SendPacket behaves as expected under these conditions. This might involve checking for a specific error or ensuring that no packet is sent.

---

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

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

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>.
  • 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 generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.
  • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
  • @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.

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 as PR comments)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger a review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Additionally, you can add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.

CodeRabbit Configration 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.

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 1

[DimitrisJim]

seems sensible to me. agree with rabbit that a unit test to cov it would be sweet

[damiannolan]

Already looked at a unit test briefly but it seemed a little ughhh... have to set a consensus state at height zero to get around early return of Expired on the client status check. I'll see about adding one now

edit: done ✅

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed for 'ibc-go'

Issues
2 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
No data about Coverage
No data about Duplication

See analysis details on SonarCloud