Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

feat(x/staking): update validators min commission rate after MsgUpdateParams #19537

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Feb 23, 2024

Conversation

julienrbrt
Copy link
Member

@julienrbrt julienrbrt commented Feb 23, 2024

Description

Closes: #10540


Author Checklist

All items are required. Please add a note to the item if the item is not applicable and
please add links to any relevant follow up issues.

I have...

  • included the correct type prefix in the PR title
  • confirmed ! in the type prefix if API or client breaking change
  • targeted the correct branch (see PR Targeting)
  • provided a link to the relevant issue or specification
  • reviewed "Files changed" and left comments if necessary
  • included the necessary unit and integration tests
  • added a changelog entry to CHANGELOG.md
  • updated the relevant documentation or specification, including comments for documenting Go code
  • confirmed all CI checks have passed

Reviewers Checklist

All items are required. Please add a note if the item is not applicable and please add
your handle next to the items reviewed if you only reviewed selected items.

I have...

  • confirmed the correct type prefix in the PR title
  • confirmed all author checklist items have been addressed
  • reviewed state machine logic, API design and naming, documentation is accurate, tests and test coverage

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • New Features
    • Enhanced staking functionality to automatically align validator commission rates with the minimum commission rate setting, promoting fairness and consistency among validators.

@julienrbrt julienrbrt changed the title feat(x/staking): update validators min commission rater after MsgUpdateParams feat(x/staking): update validators min commission rate after MsgUpdateParams Feb 23, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Feb 23, 2024

Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The recent update introduces a significant enhancement to the staking module by enabling dynamic updates to the MinCommissionRate through MsgUpdateParams. This change ensures that when the minimum commission rate parameter is adjusted, the commission rates of all validators are automatically updated to reflect this change, maintaining consistency and fairness in validator commission rates.

Changes

File(s) Change Summary
x/staking/README.md Introduces an update where setting MinCommissionRate affects validators with a lower commission rate, aligning them to MinCommissionRate.
x/staking/keeper/msg_server.go Adds functionality to update validator commission rates based on changes to the minimum commission rate parameter. If the minimum commission rate is updated, the commission rates of all validators are adjusted accordingly.

Assessment against linked issues

Objective Addressed Explanation
staking: bump all commission rate below param (10540) The code changes align with the objective of updating all validators' commission rates to the minimum set via governance.

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

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-tests for this file.
  • 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 tests 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 from git and render them as a table.
    • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit tests.
    • @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.
  • The JSON schema for the configuration file is available here.
  • 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/coderabbit-overrides.v2.json

CodeRabbit Discord Community

Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.

@julienrbrt julienrbrt marked this pull request as ready for review February 23, 2024 13:51
@julienrbrt julienrbrt requested a review from a team as a code owner February 23, 2024 13:51
Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Review Status

Actionable comments generated: 2

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yml

Commits Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 6d96e1d and ea1c457.
Files selected for processing (3)
  • x/staking/CHANGELOG.md (1 hunks)
  • x/staking/keeper/msg_server.go (2 hunks)
  • x/staking/keeper/msg_server_test.go (9 hunks)
Additional comments: 4
x/staking/CHANGELOG.md (1)
  • 30-30: The changelog entry is clear and follows the established format, correctly categorizing the change as a new feature and providing a direct link to the PR for more context.
x/staking/keeper/msg_server_test.go (3)
  • 1030-1041: The creation of a validator for commission rate testing is well-implemented. However, it's crucial to ensure that the commission rates set during validator creation align with the updated MinCommissionRate in the MsgUpdateParams test cases. This ensures that the tests accurately reflect the intended functionality of updating minimum commission rates for validators.
  • 1064-1075: The test case for updating parameters with an updated minimum commission rate is well-structured. It correctly verifies that after updating the MinCommissionRate, the commission rate of existing validators is adjusted accordingly. This aligns with the PR's objective to dynamically adjust validators' commission rates based on governance decisions. It's important to ensure that this behavior is consistent across all validators in the network.
  • 1181-1189: The error handling and post-check logic in the MsgUpdateParams test cases are correctly implemented. However, it's essential to ensure comprehensive coverage for all possible error scenarios and parameter updates. This includes testing for edge cases and validating that all network policies regarding commission rates are enforced correctly.

Comment on lines 602 to 638
// get previous params params
previousParams, err := k.Params.Get(ctx)
if err != nil {
return nil, err
}

// store params
if err := k.Params.Set(ctx, msg.Params); err != nil {
return nil, err
}

// when min comission rate is updated, we need to update the commission rate of all validators
if !previousParams.MinCommissionRate.Equal(msg.Params.MinCommissionRate) {
minRate := msg.Params.MinCommissionRate

vals, err := k.GetAllValidators(ctx)
if err != nil {
return nil, err
}

for _, val := range vals {
// set the commission rate to min rate
if val.Commission.CommissionRates.Rate.LT(minRate) {
val.Commission.CommissionRates.Rate = minRate
// set the max rate to minRate if it is less than min rate
if val.Commission.CommissionRates.MaxRate.LT(minRate) {
val.Commission.CommissionRates.MaxRate = minRate
}

val.Commission.UpdateTime = k.environment.HeaderService.GetHeaderInfo(ctx).Time
if err := k.SetValidator(ctx, val); err != nil {
return nil, fmt.Errorf("failed to set validator after MinCommissionRate param change: %w", err)
}
}
}
}

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The logic to update all validators' commission rates when the MinCommissionRate parameter changes is correctly implemented. However, there are a few considerations:

  • Performance: Iterating over all validators and updating them one by one could be inefficient for a large number of validators. Consider batching updates or optimizing the database access pattern if possible.
  • Error Handling: The loop continues even if setting a validator fails. This could lead to partial updates without clear visibility. Consider adding logging or a mechanism to track failed updates.
  • Commission Rate Adjustment Logic: The logic correctly checks if the current rate is less than the new minimum rate and updates it accordingly. However, it also adjusts the MaxRate to the MinRate if it's lower, which might not be intended. Confirm this behavior aligns with the business logic.
  • Best Practices: The use of k.environment.HeaderService.GetHeaderInfo(ctx).Time for setting the UpdateTime is appropriate, ensuring that the update timestamp reflects the transaction time.

Overall, the implementation meets the objectives, but consider the above points for potential refinement.

Comment on lines 1051 to 1085
Authority: keeper.GetAuthority(),
Params: types.DefaultParams(),
},
expErr: false,
postCheck: func() {
// verify that the commission isn't changed
vals, err := keeper.GetAllValidators(ctx)
require.NoError(err)
require.Len(vals, 1)
require.True(vals[0].Commission.Rate.Equal(comm.Rate))
require.True(vals[0].Commission.MaxRate.GTE(comm.MaxRate))
},
},
{
name: "valid params with updated min commission rate",
input: &types.MsgUpdateParams{
Authority: keeper.GetAuthority(),
Params: paramsWithUpdatedMinCommissionRate,
},
postCheck: func() {
vals, err := keeper.GetAllValidators(ctx)
require.NoError(err)
require.Len(vals, 1)
require.True(vals[0].Commission.Rate.GTE(paramsWithUpdatedMinCommissionRate.MinCommissionRate))
require.True(vals[0].Commission.MaxRate.GTE(paramsWithUpdatedMinCommissionRate.MinCommissionRate))
},
},
{
name: "invalid authority",
input: &types.MsgUpdateParams{
Authority: "invalid",
Params: types.DefaultParams(),
},
expErr: true,
expErrMsg: "invalid authority",
},
{
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

📝 NOTE
This review was outside the diff hunks and was mapped to the diff hunk with the greatest overlap. Original lines [1030-1189]

While the test cases for MsgUpdateParams effectively cover scenarios with valid and invalid parameters, including the updated minimum commission rate, it would be beneficial to add more test cases that specifically target the automatic adjustment of validators' commission rates. This could include scenarios where multiple validators have commission rates below the new minimum and ensuring that their rates are updated correctly. Additionally, testing the persistence of these changes across blocks would further validate the robustness of the implementation.

// Suggested test case addition:
// Test automatic adjustment of validators' commission rates when the MinCommissionRate is updated.
func (s *KeeperTestSuite) TestAutomaticCommissionRateAdjustment() {
    // Setup: Create multiple validators with varying commission rates.
    // Action: Update the MinCommissionRate through MsgUpdateParams.
    // Assert: All validators have their commission rates adjusted to at least the new MinCommissionRate.
}

Copy link
Member

@tac0turtle tac0turtle left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

beast

@julienrbrt julienrbrt force-pushed the julien/staking-msgparamsupgrade branch from 5e2ac0a to 9a27340 Compare February 23, 2024 13:57
Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Review Status

Actionable comments generated: 0

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yml

Commits Files that changed from the base of the PR and between ea1c457 and 3ee996f.
Files selected for processing (1)
  • x/staking/README.md (2 hunks)

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Review Status

Actionable comments generated: 0

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yml

Commits Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 3ee996f and cfe73c7.
Files selected for processing (2)
  • x/staking/README.md (2 hunks)
  • x/staking/keeper/msg_server.go (2 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
  • x/staking/README.md
  • x/staking/keeper/msg_server.go

@@ -598,11 +599,43 @@ func (k msgServer) UpdateParams(ctx context.Context, msg *types.MsgUpdateParams)
return nil, err
}

// get previous staking params
previousParams, err := k.Params.Get(ctx)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

nit:

Suggested change
previousParams, err := k.Params.Get(ctx)
currParams, err := k.Params.Get(ctx)

@julienrbrt julienrbrt added this pull request to the merge queue Feb 23, 2024
Merged via the queue into main with commit 4b73e31 Feb 23, 2024
61 of 62 checks passed
@julienrbrt julienrbrt deleted the julien/staking-msgparamsupgrade branch February 23, 2024 17:18
@GrayFieth
Copy link

Your awesome thank you so much

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

staking: bump all commission rate below param
5 participants