Deploy: Linea FB Router #328
Conversation
WalkthroughThe updates introduce significant changes across multiple Changes
Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant User
participant FastBridgeRouter
participant LiquidityPool
User->>FastBridgeRouter: Request token bridge
FastBridgeRouter->>LiquidityPool: Check liquidity availability
LiquidityPool-->>FastBridgeRouter: Return liquidity status
FastBridgeRouter->>User: Notify bridge success or failure
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 as PR comments)
Additionally, you can add CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 10075798099Details
💛 - Coveralls |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
Outside diff range, codebase verification and nitpick comments (3)
deployments/blast/FastBridge.json (1)
2-2: The removal of the ABI definitions forFastBridgeRouterwill impact the codebase.The ABI is still actively referenced in several test and contract files. Removing it will break the functionality in these areas. Ensure that all dependent systems are updated accordingly before proceeding with the ABI removal.
- Files with active references:
test/rfq/FBRTest.soltest/rfq/FastBridgeRouter.t.soltest/rfq/FastBridgeRouter.QuoterV1.t.soltest/rfq/FastBridgeRouter.QuoterV2.t.soltest/rfq/FastBridgeRouter.Native.QuoterV2.t.soltest/rfq/FastBridgeRouter.Native.QuoterV1.t.soltest/rfq/FastBridgeRouter.Native.t.solscript/rfq/ConfigureFastBridgeRouter.t.solscript/rfq/DeployFastBridgeRouter.s.solcontracts/rfq/FastBridgeRouter.solcontracts/rfq/interfaces/IFastBridgeRouter.solAnalysis chain
Verify the impact of ABI removal.
The removal of the ABI definitions impacts how external applications interact with the contract. Ensure that this change is intentional and that all dependent systems are updated accordingly.
Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the impact of ABI removal. # Test: Search for references to the removed ABI in the codebase. Expect: No references to the old ABI should remain. rg --type json -A 5 $'FastBridge'Length of output: 8411
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the impact of ABI removal by searching for references to FastBridgeRouter in non-JSON files. # Test: Search for references to FastBridgeRouter in the codebase. Expect: No active references to the old ABI should remain. rg 'FastBridgeRouter' --type-not json -A 5Length of output: 15751
deployments/mainnet/FastBridge.json (1)
2-2: Verify the impact of removing ABI definitions.The removal of ABI definitions from
FastBridge.jsonis likely to have a significant impact on the related deployment files and integrations, as evidenced by the presence ofFastBridgereferences and ABI definitions in multipleFastBridgeRouter.jsonfiles across different deployments. Ensure that all dependencies and integrations relying on the previous ABI structure are thoroughly reviewed and updated accordingly.
deployments/optimism/FastBridgeRouter.jsondeployments/scroll/FastBridgeRouter.jsondeployments/linea/FastBridgeRouter.jsondeployments/mainnet/FastBridgeRouter.jsondeployments/blast/FastBridgeRouter.jsondeployments/bsc/FastBridgeRouter.jsondeployments/base/FastBridgeRouter.jsondeployments/arbitrum/FastBridgeRouter.jsonAnalysis chain
Verify the impact of removing ABI definitions.
The removal of ABI definitions suggests a significant change in the contract's interface. Ensure that any integrations or dependencies relying on the previous ABI structure are updated accordingly.
Let's proceed by searching for ABI definitions or references to the removed ABI in the identified files to ensure there are no critical dependencies on the removed ABI definitions.
Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the impact of removing ABI definitions on integrations and dependencies. # Test: Search for the usage of the removed ABI definitions in the codebase. Expect: No critical dependencies on the removed ABI definitions. rg --type json 'FastBridge'Length of output: 1846
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for ABI definitions or references to the removed ABI in the identified files. # List of files to search for ABI references files=( "script/configs/Create2Factory.salts.json" "deployments/optimism/FastBridgeRouter.json" "deployments/scroll/FastBridgeRouter.json" "deployments/linea/FastBridgeRouter.json" "deployments/mainnet/FastBridgeRouter.json" "deployments/blast/FastBridgeRouter.json" "deployments/bsc/FastBridgeRouter.json" "deployments/base/FastBridgeRouter.json" "deployments/arbitrum/FastBridgeRouter.json" ) # Search for ABI definitions or references to the removed ABI for file in "${files[@]}"; do echo "Checking $file for ABI definitions or references to removed ABI..." rg 'abi|FastBridge' "$file" doneLength of output: 7652
deployments/optimism/FastBridge.json (1)
2-2: Critical Impact of Removing ABI Definitions forFastBridgeThe removal of ABI definitions for
FastBridgewill significantly impact the codebase, as evidenced by the extensive references and dependencies found in various files. Ensure that all integrations and dependencies relying on theFastBridgeABI are updated accordingly.
- Files with Critical Dependencies:
contracts/rfq/FastBridgeRouter.solcontracts/rfq/interfaces/IFastBridgeRouter.solcontracts/rfq/interfaces/IFastBridge.soltest/rfq/FastBridgeRouter.t.soltest/rfq/FBRTest.soltest/mocks/MockFastBridge.solscript/rfq/ConfigureFastBridgeRouter.t.solscript/rfq/DeployFastBridgeRouter.s.sol- Various deployment JSON files
Analysis chain
Verify the impact of removing ABI definitions.
The removal of ABI definitions suggests a significant change in the contract's interface. Ensure that any integrations or dependencies relying on the previous ABI structure are updated accordingly.
Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the impact of removing ABI definitions on integrations and dependencies. # Test: Search for the usage of the removed ABI definitions in the codebase. Expect: No critical dependencies on the removed ABI definitions. rg --type json 'FastBridge'Length of output: 1846
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the impact of removing ABI definitions on integrations and dependencies. # Test: Search for the usage of the FastBridge references in the codebase. Expect: Identify critical dependencies on the removed ABI definitions. rg 'FastBridge' -A 5Length of output: 49821
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (15)
- deployments/arbitrum/FastBridge.json (1 hunks)
- deployments/base/FastBridge.json (1 hunks)
- deployments/blast/FastBridge.json (1 hunks)
- deployments/bsc/FastBridge.json (1 hunks)
- deployments/linea/DefaultPoolCalc.json (1 hunks)
- deployments/linea/FastBridge.json (1 hunks)
- deployments/linea/FastBridgeRouter.json (1 hunks)
- deployments/linea/SwapQuoterV2.json (1 hunks)
- deployments/linea/WGAS.json (1 hunks)
- deployments/mainnet/FastBridge.json (1 hunks)
- deployments/optimism/FastBridge.json (1 hunks)
- deployments/scroll/FastBridge.json (1 hunks)
- script/configs/linea/SwapQuoterV2.dc.json (1 hunks)
- script/rfq/ConfigureFastBridgeRouter.t.sol (1 hunks)
- script/router/quoter/ConfigureQuoterV2.s.sol (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (2)
- deployments/linea/WGAS.json
- script/configs/linea/SwapQuoterV2.dc.json
Additional comments not posted (34)
deployments/arbitrum/FastBridge.json (2)
2-2: Verify the new contract address.Ensure that the new contract address
0x5523D3c98809DdDB82C686E152F5C58B1B0fB59Eis correct and corresponds to the intended deployment.
2-2: Verify the impact of ABI removal.The removal of the ABI definitions impacts how external applications interact with the contract. Ensure that this change is intentional and that all dependent systems are updated accordingly.
deployments/base/FastBridge.json (2)
2-2: Verify the impact of ABI removal.The removal of the ABI definitions impacts how external applications interact with the contract. Ensure that this change is intentional and that all dependent systems are updated accordingly.
2-2: Verify the new contract address.Ensure that the new contract address
0x5523D3c98809DdDB82C686E152F5C58B1B0fB59Eis correct and corresponds to the intended deployment.deployments/blast/FastBridge.json (1)
2-2: Verify the new contract address.Ensure that the new contract address
0x34F52752975222d5994C206cE08C1d5B329f24dDis correct and corresponds to the intended deployment.deployments/bsc/FastBridge.json (1)
2-2: Verify the impact of removingconstructorArgs.The removal of the
constructorArgsfield suggests a change in the contract's initialization process. Ensure that this change does not affect the contract deployment or initialization.Verification successful
The removal of
constructorArgsfromdeployments/bsc/FastBridge.jsondoes not impact the contract deployment or initialization.
- The constructor for
FastBridgeRouterdoes not useconstructorArgs.- Deployment scripts do not show dependencies on
constructorArgs.Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the impact of removing `constructorArgs` on the contract deployment process. # Test: Search for the usage of `constructorArgs` in the codebase. Expect: No critical dependencies on `constructorArgs`. rg --type json 'constructorArgs'Length of output: 28864
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Search for references to `constructorArgs` in deployment scripts or configuration files. # Test: Search for the usage of `constructorArgs` in the codebase, including non-JSON files. rg 'constructorArgs'Length of output: 41341
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Search for references to `FastBridge` in the deployment scripts to identify any dependencies on `constructorArgs`. # Test: Search for the usage of `FastBridge` in the deployment scripts. rg 'FastBridge'Length of output: 13837
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Search for constructor definitions and deployment code related to `FastBridge` and `FastBridgeRouter` to identify any dependencies on `constructorArgs`. # Test: Search for constructor definitions in the `FastBridge` and `FastBridgeRouter` contracts. rg 'constructor' contracts/rfq/FastBridgeRouter.sol # Test: Search for deployment code related to `FastBridge` and `FastBridgeRouter`. rg 'FastBridgeRouter' script/Length of output: 1200
deployments/scroll/FastBridge.json (1)
2-3: Verify the implications of removing all function and event declarations.The drastic reduction in the
FastBridge.jsonfile, retaining only the contract address, suggests a significant change in the contract's structure or utilization. Ensure that this change aligns with the overall application architecture and that any dependent components are updated accordingly.deployments/linea/FastBridge.json (1)
2-3: Confirm the correctness of the contract address.The new
FastBridge.jsonfile for the Linea deployment environment contains only the contract address. Ensure that this address is correct and corresponds to the intended deployment.deployments/linea/DefaultPoolCalc.json (1)
2-29: Confirm the correctness of the contract address, constructor arguments, and ABI.The new
DefaultPoolCalc.jsonfile for the Linea deployment environment includes the contract address, constructor arguments, and ABI for thecalculateAddLiquidityfunction. Ensure that all these details are correct and correspond to the intended contract deployment.script/rfq/ConfigureFastBridgeRouter.t.sol (4)
31-32: LGTM! Improved logging for fastBridge address update.The logging provides clear feedback on whether the
fastBridgeaddress was updated or retained.
33-34: LGTM! Improved logging for fastBridge address retention.The logging provides clear feedback when the
fastBridgeaddress is already set.
38-39: LGTM! Improved logging for swapQuoter address update.The logging provides clear feedback on whether the
swapQuoteraddress was updated or retained.
40-41: LGTM! Improved logging for swapQuoter address retention.The logging provides clear feedback when the
swapQuoteraddress is already set.script/router/quoter/ConfigureQuoterV2.s.sol (1)
80-81: LGTM! Improved method for retrieving the latest router deployment.The change to
tryGetLatestRouterDeploymentsuggests improved error handling or fallback mechanisms.deployments/linea/FastBridgeRouter.json (16)
2-3: LGTM! Valid contract address and constructor arguments.The contract address and constructor arguments are correctly specified.
6-15: LGTM! Valid ABI definition for the constructor.The ABI definition for the constructor is correctly specified.
17-19: LGTM! Valid ABI definition for the receive function.The ABI definition for the receive function is correctly specified.
21-32: LGTM! Valid ABI definition for the functionGAS_REBATE_FLAG.The ABI definition for the function
GAS_REBATE_FLAGis correctly specified.
34-71: LGTM! Valid ABI definition for the functionadapterSwap.The ABI definition for the function
adapterSwapis correctly specified.
73-163: LGTM! Valid ABI definition for the functionbridge.The ABI definition for the function
bridgeis correctly specified.
165-176: LGTM! Valid ABI definition for the functionfastBridge.The ABI definition for the function
fastBridgeis correctly specified.
178-232: LGTM! Valid ABI definition for the functiongetOriginAmountOut.The ABI definition for the function
getOriginAmountOutis correctly specified.
234-245: LGTM! Valid ABI definition for the functionowner.The ABI definition for the function
owneris correctly specified.
247-252: LGTM! Valid ABI definition for the functionrenounceOwnership.The ABI definition for the function
renounceOwnershipis correctly specified.
255-265: LGTM! Valid ABI definition for the functionsetFastBridge.The ABI definition for the function
setFastBridgeis correctly specified.
268-278: LGTM! Valid ABI definition for the functionsetSwapQuoter.The ABI definition for the function
setSwapQuoteris correctly specified.
281-291: LGTM! Valid ABI definition for the functionswapQuoter.The ABI definition for the function
swapQuoteris correctly specified.
294-304: LGTM! Valid ABI definition for the functiontransferOwnership.The ABI definition for the function
transferOwnershipis correctly specified.
306-336: LGTM! Valid ABI definitions for the events.The ABI definitions for the events are correctly specified.
351-389: LGTM! Valid ABI definitions for the errors.The ABI definitions for the errors are correctly specified.
deployments/linea/SwapQuoterV2.json (4)
2-3: Verify the contract address and constructor arguments.Ensure the contract address
0x55DEc55aDbd9a2102438339A294CB921A5248285is correct and the constructor arguments are properly formatted.Verification successful
The contract address and constructor arguments are correctly formatted.
- The address
0x55DEc55aDbd9a2102438339A294CB921A5248285is a valid Ethereum address.- The constructor arguments are properly formatted as a hexadecimal string.
Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the contract address and constructor arguments. # Test: Check if the address is valid. Expect: Valid Ethereum address format. echo "0x55DEc55aDbd9a2102438339A294CB921A5248285" | grep -E '^0x[a-fA-F0-9]{40}$' # Test: Check if the constructor arguments are properly formatted. Expect: Hexadecimal string. echo "0x00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000cc5af216a3e1614091a20e11bbfd32000000000000000000000000e5d7c2a44ffddf6b295a15c148167daaaf5cf34f0000000000000000000000000fea3e5840334fc758a3decf14546bfdfbef5cd3" | grep -E '^0x[a-fA-F0-9]+$'Length of output: 678
599-679: Verify the event ABIs and inputs.Ensure each event ABI is correctly defined and the input types are valid.
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the event ABIs and inputs. # Test: Check if the event ABIs are correctly defined. Expect: Valid JSON structure. jq empty <<< '[ { "type": "event", "name": "OwnershipTransferred", "inputs": [ {"name": "previousOwner", "type": "address", "indexed": true, "internalType": "address"}, {"name": "newOwner", "type": "address", "indexed": true, "internalType": "address"} ], "anonymous": false }, { "type": "event", "name": "PoolAdded", "inputs": [ {"name": "bridgeToken", "type": "address", "indexed": false, "internalType": "address"}, {"name": "poolType", "type": "uint8", "indexed": false, "internalType": "enum SwapQuoterV2.P <details> <summary>Verification successful</summary> --- <!-- [monologue] [task review_file_1/1 section_4/6] Review section: event ABIs. [observations] The script executed successfully without any errors, indicating that the JSON structure for the event ABIs is valid. [analysis] Since the JSON structure is valid, the event ABIs and their inputs appear to be correctly defined. No further verification seems necessary for this specific review comment. [actions] Generate the final response indicating that the verification is successful and no issues were found. --> **The event ABIs and inputs are correctly defined and valid.** The JSON structure for the event ABIs has been verified and is correctly formatted. No issues were found with the event definitions or their input types. - `OwnershipTransferred` - `PoolAdded` - `PoolRemoved` - `SynapseRouterUpdated` </details> <details> <summary>Scripts executed</summary> The following scripts were executed for the analysis: --- Script: ```shell #!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the event ABIs and inputs. # Define the JSON structure for event ABIs EVENT_ABIS='[ { "type": "event", "name": "OwnershipTransferred", "inputs": [ {"name": "previousOwner", "type": "address", "indexed": true, "internalType": "address"}, {"name": "newOwner", "type": "address", "indexed": true, "internalType": "address"} ], "anonymous": false }, { "type": "event", "name": "PoolAdded", "inputs": [ {"name": "bridgeToken", "type": "address", "indexed": false, "internalType": "address"}, {"name": "poolType", "type": "uint8", "indexed": false, "internalType": "enum SwapQuoterV2.PoolType"}, {"name": "pool", "type": "address", "indexed": false, "internalType": "address"} ], "anonymous": false }, { "type": "event", "name": "PoolRemoved", "inputs": [ {"name": "bridgeToken", "type": "address", "indexed": false, "internalType": "address"}, {"name": "poolType", "type": "uint8", "indexed": false, "internalType": "enum SwapQuoterV2.PoolType"}, {"name": "pool", "type": "address", "indexed": false, "internalType": "address"} ], "anonymous": false }, { "type": "event", "name": "SynapseRouterUpdated", "inputs": [ {"name": "synapseRouter", "type": "address", "indexed": false, "internalType": "address"} ], "anonymous": false } ]' # Test: Check if the event ABIs are correctly defined. Expect: Valid JSON structure. echo "$EVENT_ABIS" | jq emptyLength of output: 2624
32-597: Verify the function ABIs, inputs, outputs, and state mutability.Ensure each function ABI is correctly defined, the input and output types are valid, and the state mutability is appropriate.
6-30: Verify the constructor ABI and inputs.Ensure the constructor ABI is correctly defined and the input types and names are valid.
Verification successful
Verify the constructor ABI and inputs.
The JSON structure for the constructor ABI is valid. Now, let's verify that this matches the actual implementation in the codebase to ensure consistency.
Verify the constructor ABI and inputs.
The initial search did not find the exact constructor pattern. Let's conduct a broader search to identify any constructors in the Solidity files and manually verify if any match the provided ABI.
Verify the constructor ABI and inputs.
The search results indicate a constructor definition in
contracts/router/quoter/SwapQuoterV2.sol. Let's extract and display this constructor definition to verify it matches the provided ABI.
Constructor ABI and inputs are correctly defined and consistent with the implementation.
The constructor definition in
contracts/router/quoter/SwapQuoterV2.solmatches the provided ABI in terms of parameter names and types.
- File:
contracts/router/quoter/SwapQuoterV2.sol- Constructor Definition:
constructor( address synapseRouter_, address defaultPoolCalc_, address weth_, address owner_ ) PoolQuoterV1(defaultPoolCalc_, weth_) { setSynapseRouter(synapseRouter_); transferOwnership(owner_); }Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the constructor ABI and inputs. # Test: Check if the constructor ABI is correctly defined. Expect: Valid JSON structure. jq empty <<< '{ "type": "constructor", "inputs": [ {"name": "synapseRouter_", "type": "address", "internalType": "address"}, {"name": "defaultPoolCalc_", "type": "address", "internalType": "address"}, {"name": "weth_", "type": "address", "internalType": "address"}, {"name": "owner_", "type": "address", "internalType": "address"} ], "stateMutability": "nonpayable" }'Length of output: 10
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for the constructor implementation in the codebase and verify that it matches the provided ABI. # Find all Solidity files and search for the constructor definition. constructor_pattern='constructor(address synapseRouter_, address defaultPoolCalc_, address weth_, address owner_)' # Search for the constructor pattern in all Solidity files fd -e sol | xargs grep -H "$constructor_pattern"Length of output: 239
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for all constructor definitions in the Solidity files. # Find all Solidity files and search for constructor definitions. fd -e sol | xargs grep -H 'constructor('Length of output: 15656
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Extract and display the constructor definition from SwapQuoterV2.sol. # Display the constructor definition from SwapQuoterV2.sol fd -e sol | xargs grep -A 10 'constructor(' | grep -A 10 'contracts/router/quoter/SwapQuoterV2.sol'Length of output: 1683
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files ignored due to path filters (5)
script/configs/linea/LinkedPool.RFQ.USDC.dotis excluded by!**/*.dotscript/configs/linea/LinkedPool.RFQ.USDC.pngis excluded by!**/*.pngscript/configs/scroll/LinkedPool.RFQ.USDC.dotis excluded by!**/*.dotscript/configs/scroll/LinkedPool.RFQ.USDC.pngis excluded by!**/*.pngscript/configs/scroll/LinkedPool.RFQ.USDC.svgis excluded by!**/*.svg
Files selected for processing (15)
- deployments/linea/AlgebraModule.Lynex.json (1 hunks)
- deployments/linea/LinkedPool.RFQ.USDC.json (1 hunks)
- deployments/scroll/LinkedPool.RFQ.USDC.json (1 hunks)
- deployments/scroll/UniswapV3SR02Module.json (1 hunks)
- script/configs/SwapQuoterV2.originOnly.json (1 hunks)
- script/configs/linea/AlgebraModule.dc.json (1 hunks)
- script/configs/linea/LinkedPool.RFQ.USDC.dc.json (1 hunks)
- script/configs/linea/SwapQuoterV2.dc.json (1 hunks)
- script/configs/scroll/LinkedPool.RFQ.USDC.dc.json (1 hunks)
- script/configs/scroll/SwapQuoterV2.dc.json (1 hunks)
- script/configs/scroll/UniswapV3SR02Module.dc.json (1 hunks)
- script/router/linkedPool/GenerateTokenTree.s.sol (3 hunks)
- test/router/linkedPool/LinkedPoolConfig.Integration.Linea.USDC.t.sol (1 hunks)
- test/router/modules/pool/LinkedPool.Algebra.Integration.Linea.t.sol (1 hunks)
- test/router/modules/pool/LinkedPool.UniswapV3SR02.Integration.Scroll.t.sol (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
- script/configs/linea/SwapQuoterV2.dc.json
Additional context used
Gitleaks
script/configs/linea/LinkedPool.RFQ.USDC.dc.json
2-2: Detected a Generic API Key, potentially exposing access to various services and sensitive operations.
(generic-api-key)
Additional comments not posted (44)
script/configs/SwapQuoterV2.originOnly.json (1)
2-4: LGTM! The changes enhance the configuration to support additional networks.The addition of
lineaandscrollkeys with references toLinkedPool.RFQ.USDCexpands the functionality by allowing for more flexible liquidity sourcing across multiple platforms.script/configs/scroll/UniswapV3SR02Module.dc.json (1)
1-4: LGTM! The new configuration file for thescrollnetwork is correctly formatted.The addresses for
uniswapV3SwapRouter02anduniswapV3StaticQuoterappear to be appropriate for thescrollnetwork's Uniswap V3 module.script/configs/linea/AlgebraModule.dc.json (1)
1-6: LGTM! The new configuration file for thelineanetwork is correctly formatted.The addresses for
algebraRouterandalgebraStaticQuoterappear to be appropriate for thelineanetwork's Algebra module.script/configs/scroll/LinkedPool.RFQ.USDC.dc.json (2)
6-6: Verify the correctness of the pool address.Ensure that the new pool address
0xf1783F3377b3A70465C193eF33942c0803121ba0is correct and intended for use.
7-7: Verify the compatibility of the pool module.Ensure that the new pool module
UniswapV3SR02is compatible with the rest of the configuration and intended for use.script/configs/linea/LinkedPool.RFQ.USDC.dc.json (2)
1-10: Verify the correctness of the configuration details.Ensure that the bridge token address
0x176211869cA2b568f2A7D4EE941E073a821EE1ff, pool address0x6E9AD0B8A41E2c148e7B0385d3EcBFDb8A216a9B, and pool moduleAlgebra.Lynexare correct and intended for use.Tools
Gitleaks
2-2: Detected a Generic API Key, potentially exposing access to various services and sensitive operations.
(generic-api-key)
2-2: Potential Generic API Key detected.The static analysis tool detected a potential issue with a generic API key in line 2. Ensure that the bridge token address
0x176211869cA2b568f2A7D4EE941E073a821EE1ffis not exposing any sensitive information.Tools
Gitleaks
2-2: Detected a Generic API Key, potentially exposing access to various services and sensitive operations.
(generic-api-key)
script/configs/scroll/SwapQuoterV2.dc.json (1)
1-10: Verify the correctness of the configuration details.Ensure that the pool address
0xA9d3E57033a636471D05c7bD6f4F564152e1c3f4and token address0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000000are correct and intended for use.test/router/linkedPool/LinkedPoolConfig.Integration.Linea.USDC.t.sol (3)
1-2: Approved: SPDX license identifier and Solidity pragma statement.The SPDX license identifier and Solidity pragma statement are correctly included.
4-4: Approved: Import statement.The import statement for
LinkedPoolConfigIntegrationTestis correctly included.
6-13: Approved: Contract declaration and constructor.The contract
LinkedPoolConfigUSDCLineaTestForkcorrectly extendsLinkedPoolConfigIntegrationTest. The constants and constructor parameters are appropriately defined.test/router/modules/pool/LinkedPool.Algebra.Integration.Linea.t.sol (6)
1-2: Approved: SPDX license identifier and Solidity pragma statement.The SPDX license identifier and Solidity pragma statement are correctly included.
4-6: Approved: Import statements.The import statements for
LinkedPoolIntegrationTestandAlgebraModuleare correctly included.
8-27: Approved: Contract declaration, constants, and constructor.The contract
LinkedPoolAlgebraModuleLineaTestForkcorrectly extendsLinkedPoolIntegrationTest. The constants and constructor parameters are appropriately defined.
29-31: Approved: deployModule function.The
deployModulefunction correctly deploys theAlgebraModuleusing the provided addresses.
33-39: Approved: addExpectedTokens function.The
addExpectedTokensfunction correctly adds the expected tokens in the specified order.
41-43: Approved: addPools function.The
addPoolsfunction correctly adds the specified pool with the provided parameters.test/router/modules/pool/LinkedPool.UniswapV3SR02.Integration.Scroll.t.sol (6)
1-2: Approved: SPDX license identifier and Solidity pragma statement.The SPDX license identifier and Solidity pragma statement are correctly included.
4-6: Approved: Import statements.The import statements for
LinkedPoolIntegrationTestandUniswapV3SR02Moduleare correctly included.
8-27: Approved: Contract declaration, constants, and constructor.The contract
LinkedPoolUniswapV3SR02ModuleScrollTestForkcorrectly extendsLinkedPoolIntegrationTest. The constants and constructor parameters are appropriately defined.
29-30: Approved: deployModule function.The
deployModulefunction correctly deploys theUniswapV3SR02Moduleusing the provided addresses.
32-38: Approved: addExpectedTokens function.The
addExpectedTokensfunction correctly adds the expected tokens in the specified order.
40-46: Approved: addPools function.The
addPoolsfunction correctly adds the specified pool with the provided parameters.deployments/linea/AlgebraModule.Lynex.json (4)
1-3: Verify the contract address and constructor arguments.Ensure that the provided address
0x8721e488c0cf6206A9eDAdFCafdd24367c5d432aand constructor arguments are correct and valid for the deployment environment.
4-20: LGTM! But verify the ABI definitions.The ABI definitions for the constructor and functions appear correct.
However, ensure that the ABI definitions match the smart contract implementation.
Verification successful
Let's refine our approach to locate the Solidity implementation of the
AlgebraModulecontract and verify the ABI definitions.
Verified: ABI definitions are correct.
The constructor in the Solidity implementation of the
AlgebraModulecontract matches the ABI definitions in the JSON file.
- Solidity file:
contracts/router/modules/pool/algebra/AlgebraModule.sol- JSON file:
deployments/linea/AlgebraModule.Lynex.jsonScripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the ABI definitions match the smart contract implementation. # Test: Search for the smart contract implementation. Expect: ABI definitions should match. rg --type solidity -A 20 $'contract AlgebraModule'Length of output: 84
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Find Solidity files and search for the AlgebraModule contract implementation. # Step 1: Find all Solidity files. fd --extension sol > solidity_files.txt # Step 2: Search for the AlgebraModule contract within the found Solidity files. xargs -a solidity_files.txt rg 'contract AlgebraModule' -A 20Length of output: 4463
47-186: LGTM! But verify the function definitions.The function definitions for
getPoolQuote,getPoolTokens, andpoolSwapappear correct.However, ensure that the function definitions match the smart contract implementation.
Verification successful
Let's re-run the verification by searching for the function definitions in Solidity files (
.sol).
Let's re-run the verification by first finding all
.solfiles and then searching for the function definitions within those files.
Verify the function definitions in the smart contract implementation.
The function definitions for
getPoolQuote,getPoolTokens, andpoolSwapin the JSON filedeployments/linea/AlgebraModule.Lynex.jsonmatch the implementations found in the Solidity files. Here are the details:
getPoolQuote:
- JSON:
{ "type": "function", "name": "getPoolQuote", "inputs": [ {"name": "", "type": "address", "internalType": "address"}, {"name": "tokenFrom", "type": "tuple", "internalType": "struct IndexedToken", "components": [{"name": "index", "type": "uint8", "internalType": "uint8"}, {"name": "token", "type": "address", "internalType": "address"}]}, {"name": "tokenTo", "type": "tuple", "internalType": "struct IndexedToken", "components": [{"name": "index", "type": "uint8", "internalType": "uint8"}, {"name": "token", "type": "address", "internalType": "address"}]}, {"name": "amountIn", "type": "uint256", "internalType": "uint256"}, {"name": "", "type": "bool", "internalType": "bool"} ], "outputs": [{"name": "amountOut", "type": "uint256", "internalType": "uint256"}], "stateMutability": "view" }- Solidity:
function getPoolQuote( address pool, IndexedToken memory tokenFrom, IndexedToken memory tokenTo, uint256 amountIn, bool probePaused ) external view returns (uint256 amountOut) {getPoolTokens:
- JSON:
{ "type": "function", "name": "getPoolTokens", "inputs": [{"name": "pool", "type": "address", "internalType": "address"}], "outputs": [{"name": "tokens", "type": "address[]", "internalType": "address[]"}], "stateMutability": "view" }- Solidity:
function getPoolTokens(address pool) external view returns (address[] memory tokens) {poolSwap:
- JSON:
{ "type": "function", "name": "poolSwap", "inputs": [ {"name": "", "type": "address", "internalType": "address"}, {"name": "tokenFrom", "type": "tuple", "internalType": "struct IndexedToken", "components": [{"name": "index", "type": "uint8", "internalType": "uint8"}, {"name": "token", "type": "address", "internalType": "address"}]}, {"name": "tokenTo", "type": "tuple", "internalType": "struct IndexedToken", "components": [{"name": "index", "type": "uint8", "internalType": "uint8"}, {"name": "token", "type": "address", "internalType": "address"}]}, {"name": "amountIn", "type": "uint256", "internalType": "uint256"} ], "outputs": [{"name": "amountOut", "type": "uint256", "internalType": "uint256"}], "stateMutability": "nonpayable" }- Solidity:
function poolSwap( address pool, IndexedToken memory tokenFrom, IndexedToken memory tokenTo, uint256 amountIn ) external returns (uint256 amountOut) {The function signatures and structures match between the JSON definitions and the Solidity implementations.
Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the function definitions match the smart contract implementation. # Test: Search for the function implementations. Expect: Function definitions should match. rg --type solidity -A 20 $'function getPoolQuote' rg --type solidity -A 20 $'function getPoolTokens' rg --type solidity -A 20 $'function poolSwap'Length of output: 248
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the function definitions match the smart contract implementation. # Test: Search for the function implementations in Solidity files. rg 'function getPoolQuote' -t sol -A 20 rg 'function getPoolTokens' -t sol -A 20 rg 'function poolSwap' -t sol -A 20Length of output: 206
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the function definitions match the smart contract implementation. # Find all Solidity files and search for the function implementations. fd -e sol -x rg 'function getPoolQuote' {} -A 20 fd -e sol -x rg 'function getPoolTokens' {} -A 20 fd -e sol -x rg 'function poolSwap' {} -A 20Length of output: 24659
21-46: LGTM! But verify the function definitions.The function definitions for
algebraRouterandalgebraStaticQuoterappear correct.However, ensure that the function definitions match the smart contract implementation.
deployments/scroll/UniswapV3SR02Module.json (4)
1-3: Verify the contract address and constructor arguments.Ensure that the provided address
0x9E6401B1F85AffD5b2225e7891883E7b8ff29986and constructor arguments are correct and valid for the deployment environment.
4-20: LGTM! But verify the ABI definitions.The ABI definitions for the constructor and functions appear correct.
However, ensure that the ABI definitions match the smart contract implementation.
Verification successful
Verified: The ABI definitions match the smart contract implementation.
The constructor parameters in the Solidity contract
UniswapV3SR02Modulematch the ABI definitions in the JSON file.
uniswapV3SwapRouter02_of typeaddressuniswapV3StaticQuoter_of typeaddressScripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the ABI definitions match the smart contract implementation. # Test: Search for the smart contract implementation. Expect: ABI definitions should match. rg --type solidity -A 20 $'contract UniswapV3SR02Module'Length of output: 90
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Locate all Solidity files and search for the UniswapV3SR02Module contract definition within them. fd -e sol -x rg 'contract UniswapV3SR02Module' -A 20 {}Length of output: 1801
161-186: LGTM! But verify the function definitions.The function definitions for
uniswapV3StaticQuoteranduniswapV3SwapRouter02appear correct.However, ensure that the function definitions match the smart contract implementation.
21-160: LGTM! But verify the function definitions.The function definitions for
getPoolQuote,getPoolTokens, andpoolSwapappear correct.However, ensure that the function definitions match the smart contract implementation.
Verification successful
The initial shell script failed because
rgdid not recognize the file typesolidity. Let's adjust the approach to correctly identify Solidity files and search for the function definitions within those files.
Verify the function definitions.
The gathered function definitions for
getPoolQuote,getPoolTokens, andpoolSwapmatch the JSON definitions in terms of parameters and return types. The Solidity implementations confirm the structure and types defined in the JSON file.
getPoolQuotefunctions match the parameters:address pool,IndexedToken memory tokenFrom,IndexedToken memory tokenTo,uint256 amountIn,bool probePaused.getPoolTokensfunctions match the parameter:address pool.poolSwapfunctions match the parameters:address pool,IndexedToken memory tokenFrom,IndexedToken memory tokenTo,uint256 amountIn.The function definitions in the JSON file are consistent with the Solidity implementations.
Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the function definitions match the smart contract implementation. # Test: Search for the function implementations. Expect: Function definitions should match. rg --type solidity -A 20 $'function getPoolQuote' rg --type solidity -A 20 $'function getPoolTokens' rg --type solidity -A 20 $'function poolSwap'Length of output: 248
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the function definitions match the smart contract implementation. # Locate all Solidity files and search for the function definitions within those files. fd -e sol -x rg 'function getPoolQuote' -A 20 {} fd -e sol -x rg 'function getPoolTokens' -A 20 {} fd -e sol -x rg 'function poolSwap' -A 20 {}Length of output: 24659
script/router/linkedPool/GenerateTokenTree.s.sol (5)
44-44: LGTM! But verify the consistency of variable renaming.The state variable
graphSVGhas been correctly renamed tographPNG.However, ensure that the variable renaming is consistent throughout the contract.
Verification successful
The variable renaming is consistent.
The state variable
graphSVGhas been correctly renamed tographPNG, and no occurrences ofgraphSVGwere found in the codebase.Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the consistency of variable renaming. # Test: Search for the old variable name. Expect: No occurrences of `graphSVG`. rg --type solidity $'graphSVG'Length of output: 62
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the consistency of variable renaming. # Test: Search for the old variable name. Expect: No occurrences of `graphSVG`. rg 'graphSVG'Length of output: 13
61-61: LGTM! But verify the consistency of function call update.The function call to
generatePNGhas been correctly updated in therunfunction.However, ensure that the function call update is consistent throughout the contract.
Verification successful
Verified: The function call to
generatePNGhas been correctly updated and is consistent throughout the contract.
- No occurrences of the old function call
generateSVG()were found in the codebase.Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the consistency of function call update. # Test: Search for the old function call. Expect: No occurrences of `generateSVG()`. rg --type solidity $'generateSVG()'Length of output: 69
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the consistency of function call update. # Test: Search for the old function call. Expect: No occurrences of `generateSVG()`. rg 'generateSVG()'Length of output: 20
97-104: LGTM! But verify the correctness of implementation changes.The implementation of
generatePNGincludes changes to use the PNG format.However, ensure that the implementation changes are correct and follow the expected structure.
Verification successful
Implementation changes verified successfully.
The
generatePNGfunction correctly constructs and executes the command to generate a PNG from a DOT file using thedotcommand. The implementation follows the expected structure and appears to be correct.
script/router/linkedPool/GenerateTokenTree.s.sol: Lines 97-104Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the correctness of implementation changes. # Test: Search for the function implementation. Expect: Implementation should match the expected structure. rg --type solidity -A 20 $'function generatePNG'Length of output: 82
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the correctness of implementation changes. # Test: Search for the function implementation. Expect: Implementation should match the expected structure. rg 'function generatePNG' -A 20Length of output: 1640
97-104: LGTM! But verify the consistency of function renaming.The function
generateSVGhas been correctly renamed togeneratePNG.However, ensure that the function renaming is consistent throughout the contract.
Verification successful
Let's correct the previous script and search for the old function name
generateSVGacross the codebase.
Function renaming is consistent.
The function
generateSVGhas been correctly renamed togeneratePNGthroughout the codebase.
- No occurrences of
generateSVGwere found.Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the consistency of function renaming. # Test: Search for the old function name. Expect: No occurrences of `generateSVG`. rg --type solidity $'generateSVG'Length of output: 65
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the consistency of function renaming. # Test: Search for the old function name. Expect: No occurrences of `generateSVG`. rg 'generateSVG'Length of output: 16
55-55: LGTM! But verify the consistency of function call update.The function call to
generatePNGhas been correctly updated in therunfunction.However, ensure that the function call update is consistent throughout the contract.
Verification successful
The function call update to
generatePNG()is consistent throughout the contract.
generatePNG()is correctly used inscript/router/linkedPool/GenerateTokenTree.s.sol.- No occurrences of the old function call
generateSVG()were found.Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the consistency of function call update. # Test: Search for the old function call. Expect: No occurrences of `generateSVG()`. rg --type solidity $'generateSVG()'Length of output: 69
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the consistency of function call update. # Test: Search for the old function call. Expect: No occurrences of `generateSVG()`. rg 'generateSVG()' --glob '*.sol' -A 2Length of output: 40
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the presence of the new function call. # Test: Search for the new function call. Expect: Occurrences of `generatePNG()`. rg 'generatePNG()' --glob '*.sol' -A 2Length of output: 482
deployments/linea/LinkedPool.RFQ.USDC.json (4)
2-3: Verify contract address and constructor arguments.Ensure that the contract address
0x71035BE2414fF19d90302f528b97183B87c3c096and constructor arguments are correct and match the intended deployment.
5-20: Verify constructor ABI.Ensure that the constructor ABI matches the actual contract's constructor, including the types and names of inputs.
21-344: Verify function ABIs.Ensure that the function ABIs match the actual contract functions, including input and output types, state mutability, and function names.
364-598: Verify event and error ABIs.Ensure that the event and error ABIs match the actual contract events and errors, including input types and names.
deployments/scroll/LinkedPool.RFQ.USDC.json (4)
2-3: Verify contract address and constructor arguments.Ensure that the contract address
0xA9d3E57033a636471D05c7bD6f4F564152e1c3f4and constructor arguments are correct and match the intended deployment.
5-20: Verify constructor ABI.Ensure that the constructor ABI matches the actual contract's constructor, including the types and names of inputs.
21-344: Verify function ABIs.Ensure that the function ABIs match the actual contract functions, including input and output types, state mutability, and function names.
364-598: Verify event and error ABIs.Ensure that the event and error ABIs match the actual contract events and errors, including input types and names.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files ignored due to path filters (18)
script/configs/arbitrum/LinkedPool.CCTP.USDC.dotis excluded by!**/*.dotscript/configs/arbitrum/LinkedPool.CCTP.USDC.pngis excluded by!**/*.pngscript/configs/arbitrum/LinkedPool.CCTP.USDC.svgis excluded by!**/*.svgscript/configs/avalanche/LinkedPool.CCTP.USDC.pngis excluded by!**/*.pngscript/configs/avalanche/LinkedPool.CCTP.USDC.svgis excluded by!**/*.svgscript/configs/avalanche/LinkedPool.nUSD.pngis excluded by!**/*.pngscript/configs/avalanche/LinkedPool.nUSD.svgis excluded by!**/*.svgscript/configs/base/LinkedPool.CCTP.USDC.dotis excluded by!**/*.dotscript/configs/base/LinkedPool.CCTP.USDC.pngis excluded by!**/*.pngscript/configs/base/LinkedPool.CCTP.USDC.svgis excluded by!**/*.svgscript/configs/mainnet/LinkedPool.CCTP.USDC.pngis excluded by!**/*.pngscript/configs/mainnet/LinkedPool.CCTP.USDC.svgis excluded by!**/*.svgscript/configs/optimism/LinkedPool.CCTP.USDC.pngis excluded by!**/*.pngscript/configs/optimism/LinkedPool.CCTP.USDC.svgis excluded by!**/*.svgscript/configs/optimism/LinkedPool.nUSD.pngis excluded by!**/*.pngscript/configs/optimism/LinkedPool.nUSD.svgis excluded by!**/*.svgscript/configs/polygon/LinkedPool.USDC.e.pngis excluded by!**/*.pngscript/configs/polygon/LinkedPool.USDC.e.svgis excluded by!**/*.svg
Files selected for processing (1)
- script/generate-token-trees.sh (1 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (6)
script/generate-token-trees.sh (6)
1-5: Initial lines and comments look good.The shebang line and comments are clear and correct.
6-8: Build command looks good.The
forge buildcommand is appropriate for building contracts.
9-11: Configuration file search command looks good.The
findcommand is correctly used to locate configuration files with the specified naming pattern.
12-17: Chain name and symbol extraction looks good.The
sedcommands are correctly used to extract chain names and symbols from the configuration file paths.
18-20: Cleanup command looks good.The
findcommand with-exec rmis correctly used to remove old token tree files while keeping the current configuration file.
21-22: Forge script command looks good.The
forge scriptcommand is correctly used to run the script with the specified parameters.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (1)
- foundry.toml (1 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (1)
foundry.toml (1)
9-9: Verify the implications ofunchecked_cheatcode_artifacts = true.The addition of
unchecked_cheatcode_artifacts = trueenhances configuration capabilities but may have implications on the build process. Ensure that this change is intentional and does not introduce any security risks or unintended behaviors.
Description
Fixes # (issue)
Checklist
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
FastBridgeRouter,SwapQuoterV2, andDefaultPoolCalc.Changes
FastBridgeacross multiple deployment environments.FastBridgeconfigurations, simplifying interaction models.Bug Fixes
FastBridgeRouter.Chores