feat: ADR-004 (Nakamoto Bonus) #10

Pantani · 2025-08-26T19:49:42Z

implementation of https://github.com/atomone-hub/atomone/blob/main/docs/architecture/adr-004-nakamoto-bonus.md

api/cosmos/distribution/v1beta1/distribution.pulsar.go

api/cosmos/distribution/v1beta1/query.pulsar.go

x/distribution/types/query.pb.go

x/distribution/keeper/abci.go

+	c := sdk.UnwrapSDKContext(ctx)
+
+	// dynamically adjust the nakamoto bonus coefficient first.
+	if err := k.AdjustEta(c); err != nil {


x/distribution/keeper/abci.go

-	if ctx.BlockHeight() > 1 {
-		if err := k.AllocateTokens(ctx, previousTotalPower, ctx.VoteInfos()); err != nil {
+	if c.BlockHeight() > 1 {
+		if err := k.AllocateTokens(ctx, previousTotalPower, c.VoteInfos()); err != nil {


x/distribution/module.go

 func (am AppModule) BeginBlock(ctx context.Context) error {
 	c := sdk.UnwrapSDKContext(ctx)
-	return BeginBlocker(c, am.keeper)
+	return am.keeper.BeginBlocker(c)


…at/nakamoto-bonus

github-actions · 2025-09-04T02:57:41Z

@Pantani your pull request is missing a changelog!

tests/integration/api/cosmos/distribution/module/v1/module.pulsar.go

tbruyelle · 2025-09-10T09:36:17Z

Does this PR replace atomone-hub/atomone#182?

julienrbrt

nice work! first walk-trough, i'll check the tests more carefully later today/tomorrow

julienrbrt · 2025-09-10T10:55:30Z

x/distribution/keeper/eta.go

+		return err
+	}
+
+	if !params.NakamotoBonusEnabled {


why do we need to set it to zero if disabled?

because the parameter is being used inside the allocate tokens. We set it to zero so that we can share the reward among the validades without the Nakamoto bonus

cosmos-sdk/x/distribution/keeper/allocation.go

Line 52 in 152eeac

nakamotoCoefficient := params.NakamotoBonusCoefficient // the nakamoto bonus coefficient (e.g., 0.05 means 5% NB, 95% PR)

Shouldn't we do that at InitGenesis and/or in a migration instead of here?

What do you mean? the AdjustEta?

No the enabled check to set the default value

Yes, but this is the idea, but we can change the value through governance tx

Yes, it should stay in params, but mean the default value L25

x/distribution/keeper/nakamoto_bonus.go

x/distribution/keeper/eta.go

julienrbrt · 2025-09-10T10:59:43Z

x/distribution/keeper/eta.go

+
+// AdjustEta is called to adjust η dynamically for each block.
+func (k Keeper) AdjustEta(ctx sdk.Context) error {
+	if ctx.BlockHeight()%types.EtaUpdateInterval != 0 {


This almost sounds like we could use the x/epochs module for the calculation instead.

Is it available in this version? I didn't find it here

It should be compatible yeah.

Do you know how I can use it? I couldn't find any reference to this in the SDK. I don't see it in this version

@julienrbrt could you give an example to see if the usage of x/epoch is worthwhile ?

x/distribution/keeper/grpc_query.go

x/distribution/types/params.go

Makefile

…at/nakamoto-bonus # Conflicts: # Makefile # api/cosmos/distribution/v1beta1/distribution.pulsar.go # x/distribution/types/query.pb.go

tbruyelle · 2025-09-18T08:42:26Z

Does this PR replace atomone-hub/atomone#182?

And also atomone-hub/atomone#181 ?

If yes please close them @Pantani

…at/nakamoto-bonus

crypto/keys/multisig/amino.go

proto/cosmos/distribution/v1beta1/query.proto

tbruyelle · 2025-09-23T15:55:25Z

x/distribution/keeper/nakamoto_bonus.go

+	}
+	sort.Slice(validators, func(i, j int) bool {
+		return validators[i].GetBondedTokens().GT(validators[j].GetBondedTokens())
+	})


validators is already sorted by power, is it different than bonded tokens ?

tbruyelle · 2025-09-24T12:29:11Z

x/distribution/keeper/allocation.go

+	numValidators := int64(len(bondedVotes))
+	nbPerValidator := sdk.NewDecCoinFromDec(bondDenom, math.LegacyZeroDec())
+	if numValidators > 0 && len(nakamotoBonus) > 0 {
+		amount := nakamotoBonus.AmountOf(bondDenom).Quo(math.LegacyNewDec(numValidators))


Why limiting to atone bond denom ?

Currently the inflation rewards contain both atone and photon. The Nakamoto bonus should reflect that as well in my opinion.

x/distribution/keeper/allocation.go

tbruyelle · 2025-09-24T12:34:11Z

x/distribution/keeper/eta.go

+
+// AdjustEta is called to adjust η dynamically for each block.
+func (k Keeper) AdjustEta(ctx sdk.Context) error {
+	if ctx.BlockHeight()%types.EtaUpdateInterval != 0 {


@julienrbrt could you give an example to see if the usage of x/epoch is worthwhile ?

x/distribution/keeper/eta.go

tbruyelle · 2025-09-24T13:00:49Z

x/distribution/types/params.go

 	return nil
 }
+
+func validateNakamotoBonusCoefficient(i interface{}) error {


No need to use an interface{} here.

We need it here because we still use the legacy params table here. And wee need to pass to

cosmos-sdk/x/distribution/types/params_legacy.go

Line 17 in 6b80729

func (p *Params) ParamSetPairs() paramtypes.ParamSetPairs {

Why do we still need the legacy params? It looks like everything lives in the keeper.Params now.

tbruyelle

I kinda overlook the update of the Nakamoto Coefficient in the initial specs. I wonder if it isn't a bit dangerous to let this coef moving freely between 0 and 1.

Is it really a required feature ? (@giuliostramondo @giunatale)

giuliostramondo · 2025-09-24T15:34:31Z

@tbruyelle we discussed about this in the past and the decision was to let the coefficient move between 0 and 1. What we could do is to allow a max to be set through governance (initially max would be 1 as discussed), what do you think @giunatale ?

giunatale · 2025-09-24T15:35:48Z

@tbruyelle we discussed about this in the past and the decision was to let the coefficient move between 0 and 1. What we could do is to allow a max to be set through governance (initially max would be 1 as discussed), what do you think @giunatale ?

makes sense to me!

tbruyelle · 2025-09-24T15:42:29Z

@tbruyelle we discussed about this in the past and the decision was to let the coefficient move between 0 and 1. What we could do is to allow a max to be set through governance (initially max would be 1 as discussed), what do you think @giunatale ?

makes sense to me!

I agree about having a max somewhere in the parameter. As mentionned in my review as well, the coefficient itself shouldn't be a parameter, as it is a moving value.

Pantani · 2025-09-26T02:30:16Z

I agree about having a max somewhere in the parameter. As mentionned in my review as well, the coefficient itself shouldn't be a parameter, as it is a moving value.

IMHO, we could move the coefficient to the store and keep the flag to disable and enable inside the parameters, along with the Nakamoto step

tbruyelle · 2025-09-26T09:13:38Z

I agree about having a max somewhere in the parameter. As mentionned in my review as well, the coefficient itself shouldn't be a parameter, as it is a moving value.

IMHO, we could move the coefficient to the store and keep the flag to disable and enable inside the parameters, along with the Nakamoto step

Yes exactly. You can potentially replace the disable/enable flag with the max parameter. If max=0 then that means the Nakamoto Bonus is disabled. wdyt?

Pantani · 2025-09-30T03:16:08Z

Yes exactly. You can potentially replace the disable/enable flag with the max parameter. If max=0 then that means the Nakamoto Bonus is disabled. wdyt?

IMHO I think it is confusing because we already have some rules, such as if the maximum and minimum are equal, the commission is fixed, and if both are zero, the Nakamoto is disabled. I think it works if it's well documented

tbruyelle · 2025-10-01T10:21:04Z

IMHO I think it is confusing because we already have some rules, such as if the maximum and minimum are equal, the commission is fixed, and if both are zero, the Nakamoto is disabled. I think it works if it's well documented

OK as you prefer.

tbruyelle · 2025-10-01T10:22:05Z

x/distribution/keeper/nakamoto_bonus.go

+	}
+
+	if !params.NakamotoBonus.Enabled {
+		// Always set eta to zero and skip dynamic update


Suggested change

// Always set eta to zero and skip dynamic update

// Always set Nakamoto Bonus to zero and skip dynamic update

tbruyelle · 2025-10-01T10:22:42Z

x/distribution/keeper/nakamoto_bonus.go

+	lowAvg := avg(low)
+	coefficient := nakamotoCoefficient
+
+	// Adjust coefficient: if avgHigh >= 3x avgLow, increase eta, else decrease


Suggested change

// Adjust coefficient: if avgHigh >= 3x avgLow, increase eta, else decrease

// Adjust coefficient: if avgHigh >= 3x avgLow, increase Nakamoto Bonus, else decrease

feat: ADR-004 (Nakamoto Bonus)

29fbf8e

Pantani self-assigned this Aug 26, 2025

fix import lint

c66a3a5

github-advanced-security bot found potential problems Aug 26, 2025

View reviewed changes

Pantani added 5 commits September 1, 2025 17:18

remove LINT_DIFF env var

d962c42

Merge branch 'release/v0.50.x' into Pantani/feat/nakamoto-bonus

54af7d9

run lint-fix

5d1b901

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/release/v0.50.x' into Pantani/fe…

e71a50b

…at/nakamoto-bonus

fix grpc go generation to version 7

633a653

Pantani marked this pull request as ready for review September 4, 2025 02:57

Pantani requested review from julienrbrt, giunatale, tbruyelle and giuliostramondo as code owners September 4, 2025 02:57

Pantani added 5 commits September 4, 2025 01:52

fix json tests

815fb89

remove unused lint scape

ffd5b9c

add zero value to deprecated params

042bdd7

add copy of distr pulsar files

ec01197

fix tests for distr query

6c79558

github-advanced-security bot found potential problems Sep 10, 2025

View reviewed changes

run lint-fix

152eeac

julienrbrt reviewed Sep 10, 2025

View reviewed changes

Pantani added 3 commits September 11, 2025 15:49

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/release/v0.50.x' into Pantani/fe…

7b6a004

…at/nakamoto-bonus # Conflicts: # Makefile # api/cosmos/distribution/v1beta1/distribution.pulsar.go # x/distribution/types/query.pb.go

remove revive from animo lint

97a5d62

set local api module repo

f64aa85

Pantani force-pushed the Pantani/feat/nakamoto-bonus branch from 13d1ae5 to f64aa85 Compare September 13, 2025 00:39

fix go.mod

1921e98

Pantani added 3 commits September 15, 2025 02:42

fix missing api

a4fe166

fix adjust eta

a5e548e

remove unused var

aa0c907

Pantani requested a review from julienrbrt September 15, 2025 06:01

Pantani added 2 commits September 15, 2025 03:08

fix nakamoto bonus params test

bca9b25

fix animo json import

b4fbfd4

This was referenced Sep 18, 2025

feat: add distribution module atomone-hub/atomone#181

Closed

feat: ADR-004 (Nakamoto Bonus) atomone-hub/atomone#182

Closed

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/release/v0.50.x' into Pantani/fe…

6b80729

…at/nakamoto-bonus

tbruyelle reviewed Sep 24, 2025

View reviewed changes

tbruyelle requested changes Sep 24, 2025

View reviewed changes

apply some code review

f5e1e83

Pantani added 3 commits September 30, 2025 01:02

move coefficient from params to store

7b14b70

fix distribution API

68f4418

fix queries name

6884574

tbruyelle reviewed Oct 1, 2025

View reviewed changes

	// Always set eta to zero and skip dynamic update
	// Always set Nakamoto Bonus to zero and skip dynamic update

	// Adjust coefficient: if avgHigh >= 3x avgLow, increase eta, else decrease
	// Adjust coefficient: if avgHigh >= 3x avgLow, increase Nakamoto Bonus, else decrease

feat: ADR-004 (Nakamoto Bonus) #10

Are you sure you want to change the base?

feat: ADR-004 (Nakamoto Bonus) #10

Uh oh!

Conversation

Pantani commented Aug 26, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Check warning

Check warning

Check warning

github-actions bot commented Sep 4, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

tbruyelle commented Sep 10, 2025

Uh oh!

julienrbrt left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

tbruyelle commented Sep 18, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

tbruyelle left a comment

Pantani commented Sep 26, 2025 •

edited

Loading

tbruyelle Oct 1, 2025 •

edited

Loading