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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Problem: tx inclusion logic when block gas limit exceeded is not tested #380

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 11, 2022
Merged

Problem: tx inclusion logic when block gas limit exceeded is not tested #380

merged 1 commit into from
Mar 11, 2022

Conversation

yihuang
Copy link
Collaborator

@yihuang yihuang commented Mar 7, 2022

Closes: #379
Solution:

  • add integration test to test tx inclusion logic when block gas limit exceeded.

👮🏻👮🏻👮🏻 !!!! REFERENCE THE PROBLEM YOUR ARE SOLVING IN THE PR TITLE AND DESCRIBE YOUR SOLUTION HERE !!!! DO NOT FORGET !!!! 👮🏻👮🏻👮🏻

PR Checklist:

  • Have you read the CONTRIBUTING.md?
  • Does your PR follow the C4 patch requirements?
  • Have you rebased your work on top of the latest master?
  • Have you checked your code compiles? (make)
  • Have you included tests for any non-trivial functionality?
  • Have you checked your code passes the unit tests? (make test)
  • Have you checked your code formatting is correct? (go fmt)
  • Have you checked your basic code style is fine? (golangci-lint run)
  • If you added any dependencies, have you checked they do not contain any known vulnerabilities? (go list -json -m all | nancy sleuth)
  • If your changes affect the client infrastructure, have you run the integration test?
  • If your changes affect public APIs, does your PR follow the C4 evolution of public contracts?
  • If your code changes public APIs, have you incremented the crate version numbers and documented your changes in the CHANGELOG.md?
  • If you are contributing for the first time, please read the agreement in CONTRIBUTING.md now and add a comment to this pull request stating that your PR is in accordance with the Developer's Certificate of Origin.

Thank you for your code, it's appreciated! :)

@yihuang yihuang requested a review from a team as a code owner March 7, 2022 08:03
@yihuang yihuang requested review from leejw51crypto and thomas-nguy and removed request for a team March 7, 2022 08:03
@yihuang yihuang marked this pull request as draft March 7, 2022 08:03
@yihuang
Copy link
Collaborator Author

yihuang commented Mar 7, 2022

expect to fail right now, but should success after #378.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 7, 2022 •
edited
Loading

Codecov Report

Merging #380 (aa1b35a) into main (3ea70c5) will increase coverage by 19.54%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

❗ Current head aa1b35a differs from pull request most recent head a29f498. Consider uploading reports for the commit a29f498 to get more accurate results

Impacted file tree graph

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #380       +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage   21.51%   41.06%   +19.54%     
===========================================
  Files          27       30        +3     
  Lines        1729     1505      -224     
===========================================
+ Hits          372      618      +246     
+ Misses       1324      841      -483     
- Partials       33       46       +13
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
x/cronos/genesis.go 61.53% <ø> (-38.47%) ⬇️
x/cronos/handler.go 100.00% <ø> (ø)
x/cronos/keeper/evm.go 58.00% <ø> (+6.27%) ⬆️
x/cronos/keeper/evm_hooks.go 80.00% <ø> (ø)
x/cronos/keeper/evm_log_handlers.go 83.50% <ø> (ø)
x/cronos/keeper/gravity_hooks.go 0.00% <ø> (ø)
x/cronos/keeper/grpc_query.go 0.00% <ø> (ø)
x/cronos/keeper/ibc.go 83.20% <ø> (+5.01%) ⬆️
x/cronos/keeper/ibc_hooks.go 50.00% <ø> (-8.83%) ⬇️
x/cronos/keeper/keeper.go 64.89% <ø> (-29.45%) ⬇️
... and 28 more

@yihuang yihuang requested a review from macong-cdc March 7, 2022 08:08
@yihuang yihuang mentioned this pull request Mar 7, 2022
Merged
13 tasks
@yihuang yihuang marked this pull request as ready for review March 9, 2022 01:57
@yihuang
Problem: tx inclusion logic when block gas limit exceeded is not tested
a29f498 
Closes: crypto-org-chain#379
Solution:
- add integration test to test tx inclusion logic when block gas limit exceeded.
thomas-nguy
thomas-nguy reviewed Mar 10, 2022
View reviewed changes
integration_tests/test_basic.py
sign_transaction(
w3,
{
"to": ADDRS["validator"],
Copy link
Collaborator

@thomas-nguy thomas-nguy Mar 10, 2022 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

the actual gas to send one transaction is 21,000

From your test I understand that the anteHandler will count the gas_limit, not the actual gas used. Isnt it a problem? It means that one can potentially block other transactions by setting very high gas limit

thomas-nguy
thomas-nguy reviewed Mar 10, 2022
View reviewed changes
integration_tests/test_basic.py
sign_transaction(
w3,
{
"to": ADDRS["validator"],
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

the actual gas to send one transaction is 21,000

From your test I understand that the anteHandler will count the gas_limit, not the actual gas used. Isnt it a problem?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

@yihuang yihuang Mar 10, 2022 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

yeah, but that's how tendermint/cosmos-sdk works right now, in check tx mode it doesn't actually run the transaction, so it can only rely on the gas limit specified by the user. it's to make the validator run more efficiently.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I see, I wonder if its possible to rely on the api estimate_gas to have a more accurate result... but it might bring performance degradation

thomas-nguy
thomas-nguy approved these changes Mar 10, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Collaborator

@thomas-nguy thomas-nguy left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

test looks good otherwise

@yihuang yihuang merged commit 58085b5 into crypto-org-chain:main Mar 11, 2022
@yihuang yihuang deleted the test-tx-inclusion branch March 11, 2022 01:55
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@thomas-nguy thomas-nguy thomas-nguy approved these changes

@leejw51crypto leejw51crypto Awaiting requested review from leejw51crypto leejw51crypto is a code owner automatically assigned from crypto-org-chain/cronos-dev

@macong-cdc macong-cdc Awaiting requested review from macong-cdc

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Problem: tx inclusion logic when block gas limit exceeded is not tested
2 participants
@yihuang @thomas-nguy