-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 597
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
ADR 008: IBC Actor Callbacks #1976
Changes from 12 commits
cbc024e
b59dc7a
3f71f59
edc1776
c877600
9bf4416
5a5a2d1
10d0449
cfa6c18
b321e6a
93069e4
e1d9de0
d61c160
4b2c538
25cf11b
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,374 @@ | ||
# ADR 008: Callback to IBC Actors | ||
|
||
## Changelog | ||
* 2022-08-10: Initial Draft | ||
|
||
## Status | ||
|
||
Proposed | ||
|
||
## Context | ||
|
||
IBC was designed with callbacks between core IBC and IBC applications. IBC apps would send a packet to core IBC. When the result of the packet lifecycle eventually resolved into either an acknowledgement or a timeout, core IBC called a callback on the IBC application so that the IBC application could take action on the basis of the result (e.g. unescrow tokens for ICS-20). | ||
|
||
This setup worked well for off-chain users interacting with IBC applications. | ||
|
||
We are now seeing the desire for secondary applications (e.g. smart contracts, modules) to call into IBC apps as part of their state machine logic and then do some actions on the basis of the packet result. Or to receive a packet from IBC and do some logic upon receipt. | ||
|
||
Example Usecases: | ||
- Send an ICS-20 packet, and if it is successful, then send an ICA-packet to swap tokens on LP and return funds to sender | ||
- Execute some logic upon receipt of token transfer to a smart contract address | ||
|
||
This requires a second layer of callbacks. The IBC application already gets the result of the packet from core IBC, but currently there is no standardized way to pass this information on to an actor module/smart contract. | ||
|
||
## Definitions | ||
|
||
- Actor: an actor is an on-chain module (this may be a hardcoded module in the chain binary or a smart contract) that wishes to execute custom logic whenever IBC receives a packet flow that it has either sent or received. It **must** be addressable by a string value. | ||
|
||
## Decision | ||
|
||
Create a standardized callback interface that actors can implement. IBC applications (or middleware that wraps IBC applications) can now call this callback to route the result of the packet/channel handshake from core IBC to the IBC application to the original actor on the sending chain. IBC applications can route the packet receipt to the destination actor on the receiving chain. | ||
|
||
IBC actors may implement the following interface: | ||
|
||
```go | ||
type IBCActor interface { | ||
// OnChannelOpen will be called on the IBCActor when the channel opens | ||
// this will happen either on ChanOpenAck or ChanOpenConfirm | ||
OnChannelOpen(ctx sdk.Context, portID, channelID, version string) | ||
|
||
// OnChannelClose will be called on the IBCActor if the channel closes | ||
// this will be called on either ChanCloseInit or ChanCloseConfirm and if the channel handshake fails on our end | ||
// NOTE: currently the channel does not automatically close if the counterparty fails the handhshake so actors must be prepared for an OpenInit to never return a callback for the time being | ||
OnChannelClose(ctx sdk.Context, portID, channelID string) | ||
|
||
// IBCActor must also implement PacketActor interface | ||
PacketActor | ||
} | ||
|
||
// PacketActor is split out into its own separate interface since implementors may choose | ||
// to only support callbacks for packet methods rather than supporting the full IBCActor interface | ||
type PacketActor interface { | ||
// OnRecvPacket will be called on the IBCActor after the IBC Application | ||
// handles the RecvPacket callback if the packet has an IBC Actor as a receiver. | ||
OnRecvPacket(ctx sdk.Context, packet channeltypes.Packet, relayer string) error | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. this should be |
||
|
||
// OnAcknowledgementPacket will be called on the IBC Actor | ||
// after the IBC Application handles its own OnAcknowledgementPacket callback | ||
OnAcknowledgmentPacket( | ||
ctx sdk.Context, | ||
packet channeltypes.Packet, | ||
ack exported.Acknowledgement, | ||
relayer string | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. same |
||
) error | ||
|
||
// OnTimeoutPacket will be called on the IBC Actor | ||
// after the IBC Application handles its own OnTimeoutPacket callback | ||
OnTimeoutPacket( | ||
ctx sdk.Context, | ||
packet channeltypes.Packet, | ||
relayer string | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. same as above |
||
) error | ||
} | ||
Comment on lines
+52
to
+72
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. If these are identical to the existing callbacks, wouldn't it make sense to split those out rather than duplicating them? So maybe: type PacketCallbacks interface {
// OnRecvPacket must return an acknowledgement that implements the Acknowledgement interface.
// In the case of an asynchronous acknowledgement, nil should be returned.
// If the acknowledgement returned is successful, the state changes on callback are written,
// otherwise the application state changes are discarded. In either case the packet is received
// and the acknowledgement is written (in synchronous cases).
OnRecvPacket(
ctx sdk.Context,
packet channeltypes.Packet,
relayer sdk.AccAddress,
) exported.Acknowledgement
OnAcknowledgementPacket(
ctx sdk.Context,
packet channeltypes.Packet,
acknowledgement []byte,
relayer sdk.AccAddress,
) error
OnTimeoutPacket(
ctx sdk.Context,
packet channeltypes.Packet,
relayer sdk.AccAddress,
) error
}
type PacketActor interface {
PacketCallbacks
} Just thinking in the future if these interfaces change, it'd be nice to ensure compile wise that they don't go out of sync There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Yea, these are written down so that implementors understand what it is they're doing. But how exactly it gets implemented will depend on the execution environment in question. For example with wasm, all these callbacks will be reduced to the single interface by which you call into a smart contract There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. These interfaces don't actually exist in #3287 There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I am all for reducing the IBCModule interface down into smaller composable interfaces! 👍 There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Big fan of splitting up larger interfaces into smaller ones and accepting narrower scoped interfaces in method signatures where possible! There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Opened #3317 to track this suggestion |
||
``` | ||
|
||
The CallbackPacketData interface will get extended to add `GetSrcCallbackAddress` and `GetDestCallbackAddress` methods. These may return an address | ||
or they may return the empty string. The address may reference an IBCActor or it may be a regular user address. If the address is not an IBCActor, the actor callback must continue processing (no-op). Any IBC application or middleware that uses these methods must handle these cases. In most cases, the `GetSrcCallbackAddress` will be the sender address and the `GetDestCallbackAddress` will be the receiver address. However, these are named generically so that implementors may choose a different contract address for the callback if they choose. | ||
colin-axner marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
|
||
```go | ||
// Implemented by any packet data type that wants to support | ||
colin-axner marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
// PacketActor callbacks | ||
colin-axner marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
type CallbackPacketData interface { | ||
// may return the empty string | ||
GetSrcCallbackAddress() string | ||
|
||
// may return the empty string | ||
GetDestCallbackAddress() string | ||
Comment on lines
+84
to
+88
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I think these might need more explanation? It seems like it might be valuable for an IBC application to allow a receiver address of the callback to be different than the receiver address for the packet data action
Comment on lines
+85
to
+88
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. mega nit on naming consistency here - the packet interface uses naming of should we keep them consistent? I don't feel particularly strongly tbh, just something I noticed There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I think this is worth doing |
||
|
||
// UserDefinedGasLimit allows the sender of the packet to define inside the packet data | ||
// a gas limit for how much the ADR-8 callbacks can consume. If defined, this will be passed | ||
// in as the gas limit so that the callback is guaranteed to complete within a specific limit. | ||
// On recvPacket, a gas-overflow will just fail the transaction allowing it to timeout on the sender side. | ||
// On ackPacket and timeoutPacket, a gas-overflow will reject state changes made during callback but still | ||
// commit the transaction. This ensures the packet lifecycle can always complete. | ||
// If the packet data returns 0, the remaining gas limit will be passed in (modulo any chain-defined limit) | ||
// Otherwise, we will set the gas limit passed into the callback to the `min(ctx.GasLimit, UserDefinedGasLimit())` | ||
colin-axner marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
UserDefinedGasLimit() uint64 | ||
} | ||
``` | ||
|
||
IBC Apps or middleware can then call the IBCActor callbacks like so in their own callbacks: | ||
|
||
### Handshake Callbacks | ||
|
||
The handshake init callbacks (`OnChanOpenInit` and `OnChanCloseInit`) will need to include an additional field so that the initiating actor can be tracked and called upon during handshake completion. | ||
colin-axner marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
|
||
```go | ||
func OnChanOpenInit( | ||
colin-axner marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
ctx sdk.Context, | ||
order channeltypes.Order, | ||
connectionHops []string, | ||
portID string, | ||
channelID string, | ||
channelCap *capabilitytypes.Capability, | ||
counterparty channeltypes.Counterparty, | ||
version string, | ||
actor string, | ||
) (string, error) { | ||
acc := k.getAccount(ctx, actor) | ||
ibcActor, ok := acc.(IBCActor) | ||
if ok { | ||
k.setActor(ctx, portID, channelID, actor) | ||
} | ||
|
||
// continued logic | ||
} | ||
|
||
func OnChanOpenAck( | ||
ctx sdk.Context, | ||
portID, | ||
channelID string, | ||
counterpartyChannelID string, | ||
counterpartyVersion string, | ||
) error { | ||
// run any necessary logic first | ||
// negotiate final version | ||
|
||
actor := k.getActor(ctx, portID, channelID) | ||
if actor != "" { | ||
ibcActor, _ := acc.(IBCActor) | ||
ibcActor.OnChanOpen(ctx, portID, channelID, version) | ||
} | ||
// cleanup state | ||
k.deleteActor(ctx, portID, channelID) | ||
colin-axner marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
} | ||
|
||
func OnChanOpenConfirm( | ||
ctx sdk.Context, | ||
portID, | ||
channelID string, | ||
) error { | ||
// run any necesssary logic first | ||
// retrieve final version | ||
|
||
actor := k.getActor(ctx, portID, channelID) | ||
if actor != "" { | ||
ibcActor, _ := acc.(IBCActor) | ||
ibcActor.OnChanOpen(ctx, portID, channelID, version) | ||
} | ||
// cleanup state | ||
k.deleteActor(ctx, portID, channelID) | ||
} | ||
|
||
func OnChanCloseInit( | ||
ctx sdk.Context, | ||
portID, | ||
channelID, | ||
actor string, | ||
) error { | ||
acc := k.getAccount(ctx, actor) | ||
ibcActor, ok := acc.(IBCActor) | ||
if ok { | ||
k.setActor(ctx, portID, channelID, actor) | ||
} | ||
Comment on lines
+171
to
+175
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. seems odd to set a different actor for the closing handshake steps rather than just reusing what's already there. i.e. not deleting the state entry in ACK/CONFIRM. |
||
|
||
// continued logic | ||
} | ||
|
||
func OnChanCloseConfirm( | ||
ctx sdk.Context, | ||
portID, | ||
channelID string, | ||
) error { | ||
// run any necesssary logic first | ||
|
||
actor := k.getActor(ctx, portID, channelID) | ||
if actor != "" { | ||
ibcActor, _ := acc.(IBCActor) | ||
ibcActor.OnChanClose(ctx, portID, channelID) | ||
} | ||
// cleanup state | ||
k.deleteActor(ctx, portID, channelID) | ||
} | ||
``` | ||
|
||
### PacketCallbacks | ||
|
||
No packet callback API will need to change. | ||
|
||
```go | ||
// Call the IBCActor recvPacket callback after processing the packet | ||
// if the recvPacket callback exists and returns an error | ||
// then return an error ack to revert all packet data processing | ||
func OnRecvPacket( | ||
ctx sdk.Context, | ||
packet channeltypes.Packet, | ||
colin-axner marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
relayer sdk.AccAddress, | ||
) (ack exported.Acknowledgement) { | ||
// run any necesssary logic first | ||
// IBCActor logic will postprocess | ||
colin-axner marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
|
||
// unmarshal packet data into expected interface | ||
var cbPacketData callbackPacketData | ||
unmarshalInterface(packet.GetData(), cbPacketData) | ||
if cbPacketData == nil { | ||
return | ||
} | ||
colin-axner marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Comment on lines
+214
to
+218
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. shouldn't this |
||
|
||
acc := k.getAccount(ctx, cbPacketData.GetDstCallbackAddress()) | ||
ibcActor, ok := acc.(IBCActor) | ||
if ok { | ||
// set gas limit for callback | ||
gasLimit := getGasLimit(ctx, cbPacketData) | ||
cbCtx = ctx.WithGasLimit(gasLimit) | ||
|
||
err := ibcActor.OnRecvPacket(cbCtx, packet, relayer) | ||
colin-axner marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
|
||
// deduct consumed gas from original context | ||
ctx = ctx.WithGasLimit(ctx.GasMeter().RemainingGas() - cbCtx.GasMeter().GasConsumed()) | ||
if err != nil { | ||
return AcknowledgementError(err) | ||
} | ||
} | ||
return | ||
} | ||
|
||
// Call the IBCActor acknowledgementPacket callback after processing the packet | ||
// if the ackPacket callback exists and returns an error | ||
colin-axner marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
// DO NOT return the error upstream. The acknowledgement must complete for the packet | ||
// lifecycle to end, so the custom callback cannot block completion. | ||
// Instead we emit error events and set the error in state | ||
// so that users and on-chain logic can handle this appropriately | ||
func (im IBCModule) OnAcknowledgementPacket( | ||
ctx sdk.Context, | ||
packet channeltypes.Packet, | ||
acknowledgement []byte, | ||
relayer string, | ||
) error { | ||
// application-specific onAcknowledgmentPacket logic | ||
|
||
// unmarshal packet data into expected interface | ||
var cbPacketData callbackPacketData | ||
unmarshalInterface(packet.GetData(), cbPacketData) | ||
if cbPacketData == nil { | ||
return | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. ditto on implicit/explicit about passing through to app rather than silently returning There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I believe that is what: |
||
} | ||
|
||
// unmarshal ack bytes into the acknowledgment interface | ||
var ack exported.Acknowledgement | ||
unmarshal(acknowledgement, ack) | ||
|
||
// send acknowledgement to original actor | ||
acc := k.getAccount(ctx, cbPacketData.GetSrcCallbackAddress()) | ||
ibcActor, ok := acc.(IBCActor) | ||
if ok { | ||
gasLimit := getGasLimit(ctx, cbPacketData) | ||
|
||
// create cached context with gas limit | ||
cacheCtx, writeFn := ctx.CacheContext() | ||
cacheCtx = cacheCtx.WithGasLimit(gasLimit) | ||
|
||
defer func() { | ||
if e := recover(); e != nil { | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. does this need to be a recover from panic? is it not possible to just do error checking? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. will panicking revert state in a way that returning an error won't? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I guess the idea is that there is a possibility the |
||
log("ran out of gas in callback. reverting callback state") | ||
} else { | ||
// only write callback state if we did not panic during execution | ||
writeFn() | ||
colin-axner marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
} | ||
} | ||
|
||
err := ibcActor.OnAcknowledgementPacket(cacheCtx, packet, ack, relayer) | ||
|
||
// deduct consumed gas from original context | ||
ctx = ctx.WithGasLimit(ctx.GasMeter().RemainingGas() - cbCtx.GasMeter().GasConsumed()) | ||
|
||
setAckCallbackError(ctx, packet, err) | ||
colin-axner marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
emitAckCallbackErrorEvents(err) | ||
} | ||
} | ||
|
||
// Call the IBCActor timeoutPacket callback after processing the packet | ||
// if the timeoutPacket callback exists and returns an error | ||
// DO NOT return the error upstream. The timeout must complete for the packet | ||
// lifecycle to end, so the custom callback cannot block completion. | ||
// Instead we emit error events and set the error in state | ||
// so that users and on-chain logic can handle this appropriately | ||
func (im IBCModule) OnTimeoutPacket( | ||
ctx sdk.Context, | ||
packet channeltypes.Packet, | ||
relayer string, | ||
) error { | ||
// application-specific onTimeoutPacket logic | ||
|
||
// unmarshal packet data into expected interface | ||
var cbPacketData callbackPacketData | ||
unmarshalInterface(packet.GetData(), cbPacketData) | ||
if cbPacketData == nil { | ||
return | ||
} | ||
|
||
// call timeout callback on original actor | ||
acc := k.getAccount(ctx, cbPacketData.GetSrcCallbackAddress()) | ||
ibcActor, ok := acc.(IBCActor) | ||
if ok { | ||
gasLimit := getGasLimit(ctx, cbPacketData) | ||
|
||
// create cached context with gas limit | ||
cacheCtx, writeFn := ctx.CacheContext() | ||
cacheCtx = cacheCtx.WithGasLimit(gasLimit) | ||
|
||
defer func() { | ||
if e := recover(); e != nil { | ||
log("ran out of gas in callback. reverting callback state") | ||
} else { | ||
// only write callback state if we did not panic during execution | ||
writeFn() | ||
} | ||
} | ||
|
||
err := ibcActor.OnTimeoutPacket(ctx, packet, relayer) | ||
|
||
// deduct consumed gas from original context | ||
ctx = ctx.WithGasLimit(ctx.GasMeter().RemainingGas() - cbCtx.GasMeter().GasConsumed()) | ||
|
||
setTimeoutCallbackError(ctx, packet, err) | ||
emitTimeoutCallbackErrorEvents(err) | ||
} | ||
} | ||
|
||
func getGasLimit(ctx sdk.Context, cbPacketData CallbackPacketData) uint64 { | ||
// getGasLimit returns the gas limit to pass into the actor callback | ||
// this will be the minimum of the remaining gas limit in the tx | ||
// and the config defined gas limit. The config limit is itself | ||
// the minimum of a user defined gas limit and the chain-defined gas limit | ||
// for actor callbacks | ||
var configLimit uint64 | ||
if cbPacketData == 0 { | ||
configLimit = chainDefinedActorCallbackLimit | ||
} else { | ||
configLimit = min(chainDefinedActorCallbackLimit, cbPacketData.UserDefinedGasLimit()) | ||
} | ||
return min(ctx.GasMeter().GasRemaining(), configLimit) | ||
} | ||
``` | ||
|
||
Chains are expected to specify a `chainDefinedActorCallbackLimit` to ensure that callbacks do not consume an arbitrary amount of gas. Thus, it should always be possible for a relayer to complete the packet lifecycle even if the actor callbacks cannot run successfully. | ||
|
||
## Consequences | ||
|
||
### Positive | ||
|
||
- IBC Actors can now programatically execute logic that involves sending a packet and then performing some additional logic once the packet lifecycle is complete | ||
- Middleware implementing ADR-8 can be generally used for any application | ||
- Leverages the same callback architecture used between core IBC and IBC applications | ||
|
||
### Negative | ||
|
||
- Callbacks may now have unbounded gas consumption since the actor may execute arbitrary logic. Chains implementing this feature should take care to place limitations on how much gas an actor callback can consume. | ||
- Application packets that want to support ADR-8 must additionally have their packet data implement the `CallbackPacketData` interface and register their implementation on the chain codec | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Personally, I'd move this to the |
||
|
||
### Neutral | ||
|
||
## References | ||
|
||
- https://github.com/cosmos/ibc-go/issues/1660 | ||
colin-axner marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Do we need
OnChannelUpgrade
?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes eventually. The channel handshake callbacks are not going to be implemented in the short term
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
#3318