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

refactor(consensus messages): add consensus messages to various modules #19602

Closed
wants to merge 36 commits into from

Conversation

tac0turtle
Copy link
Member

@tac0turtle tac0turtle commented Feb 29, 2024

Description

Closes: #19599

this pr adds consensus messages to consensus module and makes other modules query it for comet info data


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

Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Feb 29, 2024

Important

Auto Review Skipped

Draft detected.

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.


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 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.

@tac0turtle tac0turtle added the S:blocked Status: Blocked label Feb 29, 2024
x/slashing/keeper/abci.go Dismissed Show dismissed Hide dismissed
@tac0turtle tac0turtle removed the S:blocked Status: Blocked label Mar 20, 2024
@kocubinski kocubinski self-assigned this Apr 15, 2024
x/slashing/module.go Dismissed Show dismissed Hide dismissed
@kocubinski kocubinski mentioned this pull request Apr 17, 2024
12 tasks
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the C:x/auth label Apr 25, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the C:Store label Apr 30, 2024
types/context.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@@ -2,9 +2,8 @@ package keeper

import (
"context"

consensusv1 "cosmossdk.io/api/cosmos/consensus/v1"
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

since the hybrid router and proto v2 is deprecated in server v2 these should be gogo type imports right?

if evidence == nil {
continue // skip if no evidence
}
e := types.FromABCIEvidence(*evidence, k.stakingKeeper.ConsensusAddressCodec())

Check warning

Code scanning / CodeQL

Panic in BeginBock or EndBlock consensus methods Warning

path flow from Begin/EndBlock to a panic call
continue // skip if no evidence
}
e := types.FromABCIEvidence(*evidence, k.stakingKeeper.ConsensusAddressCodec())
err := k.handleEquivocationEvidence(ctx, e)

Check warning

Code scanning / CodeQL

Panic in BeginBock or EndBlock consensus methods Warning

path flow from Begin/EndBlock to a panic call
path flow from Begin/EndBlock to a panic call
path flow from Begin/EndBlock to a panic call
path flow from Begin/EndBlock to a panic call
path flow from Begin/EndBlock to a panic call
@github-actions github-actions bot removed C:x/distribution distribution module related C:x/upgrade labels May 1, 2024
"cosmossdk.io/x/evidence/types"

"github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk/telemetry"
sdk "github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk/types"
consensusv1 "github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk/x/consensus/types"
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

this usage of types seems correct, the gogo types in x/consensus, but slashing and staking are using the API module?

@kocubinski
Copy link
Member

kocubinski commented May 1, 2024

after working to get these tests passing it occurred to me that there is a simpler way to resolve this via IoC instead of conditionally deciding where to fetch cometInfo from in the keeper call and adding more boilerplate to every place in the code we need to fetch it.

#20238 demonstrates a Service which fetches cometInfo from context for server v1. a different implementation would be used for server v2, probably a (caching) keeper call. I don't think we need to expose this on the grpc router either and wouldn't have to in the design in #20238

@tac0turtle
Copy link
Member Author

replaced

@tac0turtle tac0turtle closed this May 2, 2024
@tac0turtle tac0turtle deleted the marko/19599 branch May 2, 2024 16:01
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.

[Feature]: add consensus message to slashing & evidence
2 participants