Add missing consensus types

[maxim-inj]

fix: add consensus types to interface registry

The chain client was unable to resolve type URL /cosmos.consensus.v1.MsgUpdateParams

Not an urgent fix, can go into dev and be part of 1.56 once released.

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Chores
  • Updated client context and transaction configuration to include consensus type interfaces from the Cosmos SDK.

[aarmoa]

Changes look good to me

[coderabbitai]

Warning

There were issues while running some tools. Please review the errors and either fix the tool’s configuration or disable the tool if it’s a critical failure.

🔧 golangci-lint (1.62.2)

level=warning msg="[lintersdb] The name "gas" is deprecated. The linter has been renamed to: gosec."
level=warning msg="[lintersdb] The linter named "megacheck" is deprecated. It has been split into: gosimple, staticcheck, unused."

Walkthrough

The changes involve integrating the Cosmos SDK's consensustypes package into the client chain context. Specifically, the code now imports the consensus types package and registers its interfaces during the initialization of transaction configuration and client context. This modification suggests an enhancement in handling consensus-related functionality within the blockchain client implementation.

Changes

File	Change Summary
client/chain/context.go	- Added import for consensustypes from Cosmos SDK - Added consensustypes.RegisterInterfaces() in NewTxConfig() - Added consensustypes.RegisterInterfaces() in NewClientContext()

Poem

🐰 Consensus types hop into view,
Interfaces dancing, registry true
SDK magic weaves its spell
Blockchain context rings its bell
A rabbit's code leap, crisp and bright! 🌈

✨ Finishing Touches

• 📝 Generate Docstrings (Beta)

---

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>, 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.

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: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)

client/chain/context.go (1)

157-157: LGTM! Interface registration added correctly in NewClientContext.

The consensus types registration is properly placed and maintains consistency with the NewTxConfig registration pattern.

Consider extracting the common interface registration sequence into a separate function to reduce code duplication between NewTxConfig and NewClientContext. Example:

+// registerCommonInterfaces registers all common interfaces used by both TxConfig and ClientContext
+func registerCommonInterfaces(interfaceRegistry types.InterfaceRegistry) {
+    keyscodec.RegisterInterfaces(interfaceRegistry)
+    std.RegisterInterfaces(interfaceRegistry)
+    exchange.RegisterInterfaces(interfaceRegistry)
+    // ... all other common registrations ...
+    consensustypes.RegisterInterfaces(interfaceRegistry)
+    feegranttypes.RegisterInterfaces(interfaceRegistry)
+    wasmtypes.RegisterInterfaces(interfaceRegistry)
+    icatypes.RegisterInterfaces(interfaceRegistry)
+}

This would simplify maintenance and ensure consistency between both registration points.

📜 Review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between a75fc67 and 612c7e5.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• client/chain/context.go (3 hunks)

⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (1)

• GitHub Check: pre-commit

🔇 Additional comments (3)

client/chain/context.go (3)

41-41: LGTM! Import added correctly.

The consensus types import is properly placed with other Cosmos SDK imports and follows the codebase conventions.

---

109-109: LGTM! Interface registration added correctly in NewTxConfig.

The consensus types registration is properly placed and maintains the logical grouping with other Cosmos SDK type registrations.

---

41-41: Verify the changes resolve the type URL issue.

The changes appropriately add consensus types registration to both NewTxConfig and NewClientContext, which should resolve the inability to handle /cosmos.consensus.v1.MsgUpdateParams.

Run this script to verify the type URL resolution:

Also applies to: 109-109, 157-157

✅ Verification successful

✅ Consensus message type URL resolution is properly implemented

The verification confirms that:

• The consensus types are properly registered in the interface registry
• The registration is implemented in both required locations
• The implementation follows the standard pattern used for other Cosmos SDK modules

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify that the consensus message type URL is properly registered

# Search for any existing usage of the consensus message type
rg -l "MsgUpdateParams" || echo "No direct usage found"

# Verify the interface registration by searching for consensus type registration patterns
rg "consensustypes\.RegisterInterfaces" || echo "No registration found"

Length of output: 1223

---

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Check the context of consensustypes.RegisterInterfaces calls
rg -B 5 -A 5 "consensustypes\.RegisterInterfaces" client/chain/context.go

Length of output: 1140