enrich debug w/ mixins[SLT-330] #3263
Conversation
[goreleaser]
|
Caution Review failedThe pull request is closed. WalkthroughThe changes in this pull request involve significant modifications across multiple files related to Ethereum transaction handling and attribute management. Key updates include the removal of several constants and functions, the introduction of new utility functions for transaction data conversion, and the addition of a new package for mixins within the Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers
Poem
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? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
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 using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
Documentation and Community
|
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #3263 +/- ##
============================================
Coverage ? 30.54679%
============================================
Files ? 447
Lines ? 29774
Branches ? 82
============================================
Hits ? 9095
Misses ? 19849
Partials ? 830
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
Deploying sanguine-fe with
|
| Latest commit: |
1763631
|
| Status: | ⚡️ Build in progress... |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://github.com/avatars/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 6
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (9)
services/omnirpc/modules/mixins/helpers.go (2)
1-9: Add a package comment to improve documentation.The
mixinspackage is missing a package-level comment. Adding a brief description of the package's purpose and contents would improve code documentation and address the linter warning.Example package comment:
// Package mixins provides utility functions and mixins for the omnirpc module, // including helpers for converting between different data types and structures. package mixins🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: Lint (services/omnirpc)
[failure] 1-1:
package-comments: should have a package comment (revive)
11-22: Add unit tests to cover theReqToTXfunction.The static analysis indicates that the
ReqToTXfunction is not covered by tests. To ensure the reliability and correctness of this function, it's important to add comprehensive unit tests.Consider adding tests that cover the following scenarios:
- Valid input with a correctly formatted transaction
- Input with surrounding quotes that need to be trimmed
- Empty input
- Invalid hex input
- Valid hex input that doesn't represent a valid transaction
Would you like assistance in generating these unit tests?
🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: codecov/patch
[warning] 12-19: services/omnirpc/modules/mixins/helpers.go#L12-L19
Added lines #L12 - L19 were not covered by tests
[warning] 21-21: services/omnirpc/modules/mixins/helpers.go#L21
Added line #L21 was not covered by testsservices/omnirpc/modules/mixins/txsubmit.go (1)
1-11: Add a package comment and LGTM for importsThe package declaration and imports look good and are relevant to the functionality. However, to improve code documentation:
Please add a package comment above the package declaration. This comment should provide a brief description of the package's purpose. For example:
// Package mixins provides reusable components for enhancing RPC functionality. package mixinsThe imports are well-organized and cover the necessary functionalities for this mixin.
🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: Lint (services/omnirpc)
[failure] 1-1:
ST1000: at least one file in a package should have a package comment (stylecheck)ethergo/util/attributes.go (1)
11-25: LGTM: Well-defined constants for attribute keys.The use of constants for attribute keys is a good practice for maintainability. However, consider grouping related constants using the
iotaenumerator for better organization and to ensure unique values.Here's a suggestion for grouping the constants:
const ( nullFieldAttribute = "null" hashAttr attribute.Key = iota fromAttr toAttr dataAttr valueAttr nonceAttr gasLimitAttr chainIDAttr gasPriceAttr gasFeeCapAttr gasTipCapAttr ) var attributeNames = map[attribute.Key]string{ hashAttr: "tx.Hash", fromAttr: "tx.From", toAttr: "tx.To", // ... (add the rest of the mappings) }This approach maintains the string values while providing type safety and ensuring unique keys.
ethergo/submitter/submitter.go (3)
466-468: LGTM! Consider adding null checks for better robustness.The change to use
util.BigPtrToStringimproves consistency in handling big.Int pointer conversions. This is a good practice as it centralizes the conversion logic.For additional robustness, consider adding null checks before calling
util.BigPtrToString. For example:- attribute.String("gas_price", util.BigPtrToString(transactor.GasPrice)), - attribute.String("gas_fee_cap", util.BigPtrToString(transactor.GasFeeCap)), - attribute.String("gas_tip_cap", util.BigPtrToString(transactor.GasTipCap)), + attribute.String("gas_price", transactor.GasPrice != nil ? util.BigPtrToString(transactor.GasPrice) : "nil"), + attribute.String("gas_fee_cap", transactor.GasFeeCap != nil ? util.BigPtrToString(transactor.GasFeeCap) : "nil"), + attribute.String("gas_tip_cap", transactor.GasTipCap != nil ? util.BigPtrToString(transactor.GasTipCap) : "nil"),This change would prevent potential nil pointer dereferences and provide clearer logging when values are unset.
581-584: Approved. Enhanced logging with suggested values.These changes maintain consistency with previous modifications. The inclusion of suggested gas fee cap and gas tip cap in the logging provides more comprehensive information, which is beneficial for debugging and monitoring.
Consider applying the null check suggestion from the first comment to these lines as well, especially for the suggested values which might be nil in certain scenarios.
664-664: Approved. Crucial logging for cached gas block usage.This change is consistent with previous modifications. Logging the block number when using a cached gas block is essential for debugging and understanding the system's behavior, especially in scenarios where current data cannot be fetched.
Consider adding more context to this log entry, such as the age of the cached block or the reason for using the cache. This could provide valuable insights during troubleshooting.
ethergo/submitter/util.go (1)
41-41: Consider consolidatinguuidAttrinto a shared constants fileSince other attribute constants have been removed or relocated, consider moving the
uuidAttrconstant to theutilpackage or a shared constants module. This promotes consistency and makes it easier to manage attribute keys across the codebase.services/omnirpc/modules/confirmedtofinalized/finalizedproxy.go (1)
193-195: Enhancement: Log Errors When Transaction Parsing FailsCurrently, if
mixins.ReqToTX(req)returns an error, the error is silently ignored, and the function returnsfalse. For better observability and debugging, consider logging the error to help diagnose issues with request parsing.Apply this diff to log the error:
tx, err := mixins.ReqToTX(req) if err != nil { - return false + r.logger.Errorf(ctx, "failed to parse transaction: %v", err) + return false }This addition will ensure that any issues during transaction parsing are recorded in the logs, facilitating easier debugging and maintenance.
🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: codecov/patch
[warning] 193-193: services/omnirpc/modules/confirmedtofinalized/finalizedproxy.go#L193
Added line #L193 was not covered by tests
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (12)
- ethergo/submitter/export_test.go (1 hunks)
- ethergo/submitter/submitter.go (7 hunks)
- ethergo/submitter/util.go (2 hunks)
- ethergo/submitter/util_test.go (0 hunks)
- ethergo/util/attributes.go (1 hunks)
- ethergo/util/attributes_test.go (1 hunks)
- ethergo/util/export_test.go (2 hunks)
- services/omnirpc/modules/README.md (1 hunks)
- services/omnirpc/modules/confirmedtofinalized/finalizedproxy.go (2 hunks)
- services/omnirpc/modules/mixins/helpers.go (1 hunks)
- services/omnirpc/modules/mixins/txsubmit.go (1 hunks)
- services/omnirpc/modules/receiptsbackup/receiptsbackup.go (2 hunks)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (1)
- ethergo/submitter/util_test.go
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
- services/omnirpc/modules/README.md
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 GitHub Check: Lint (ethergo)
ethergo/submitter/export_test.go
[failure] 24-24:
captLocal: `UUID' should not be capitalized (gocritic)ethergo/util/attributes.go
[failure] 44-44:
G115: integer overflow conversion uint64 -> int64 (gosec)
[failure] 45-45:
G115: integer overflow conversion uint64 -> int64 (gosec)ethergo/util/attributes_test.go
[failure] 81-81:
G115: integer overflow conversion uint64 -> int64 (gosec)
🪛 GitHub Check: codecov/patch
services/omnirpc/modules/confirmedtofinalized/finalizedproxy.go
[warning] 193-193: services/omnirpc/modules/confirmedtofinalized/finalizedproxy.go#L193
Added line #L193 was not covered by testsservices/omnirpc/modules/mixins/helpers.go
[warning] 12-19: services/omnirpc/modules/mixins/helpers.go#L12-L19
Added lines #L12 - L19 were not covered by tests
[warning] 21-21: services/omnirpc/modules/mixins/helpers.go#L21
Added line #L21 was not covered by testsservices/omnirpc/modules/mixins/txsubmit.go
[warning] 15-18: services/omnirpc/modules/mixins/txsubmit.go#L15-L18
Added lines #L15 - L18 were not covered by tests
[warning] 20-25: services/omnirpc/modules/mixins/txsubmit.go#L20-L25
Added lines #L20 - L25 were not covered by tests
[warning] 27-31: services/omnirpc/modules/mixins/txsubmit.go#L27-L31
Added lines #L27 - L31 were not covered by tests
[warning] 33-33: services/omnirpc/modules/mixins/txsubmit.go#L33
Added line #L33 was not covered by testsservices/omnirpc/modules/receiptsbackup/receiptsbackup.go
[warning] 140-141: services/omnirpc/modules/receiptsbackup/receiptsbackup.go#L140-L141
Added lines #L140 - L141 were not covered by tests
🪛 GitHub Check: Lint (services/omnirpc)
services/omnirpc/modules/mixins/helpers.go
[failure] 1-1:
package-comments: should have a package comment (revive)services/omnirpc/modules/mixins/txsubmit.go
[failure] 1-1:
ST1000: at least one file in a package should have a package comment (stylecheck)
🔇 Additional comments (18)
services/omnirpc/modules/mixins/txsubmit.go (1)
13-34:⚠️ Potential issueOverall implementation looks good, but needs tests
The
TxSubmitMixinfunction is well-structured and follows good practices for tracing and error handling. The early return for non-matching RPC methods is an efficient approach.The implementation of the mixin for tracking submitted transactions is sound and aligns well with the intended functionality.
However, the
ReqToTXfunction used on line 27 is not defined in this file. Please ensure that this function is properly imported or defined elsewhere in the package.To verify the existence and correct import of the
ReqToTXfunction, please run the following command:The static analysis indicates a lack of test coverage for this new function. Would you like assistance in generating unit tests for the
TxSubmitMixinfunction to ensure its correctness and maintain code quality?🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: codecov/patch
[warning] 15-18: services/omnirpc/modules/mixins/txsubmit.go#L15-L18
Added lines #L15 - L18 were not covered by tests
[warning] 20-25: services/omnirpc/modules/mixins/txsubmit.go#L20-L25
Added lines #L20 - L25 were not covered by tests
[warning] 27-31: services/omnirpc/modules/mixins/txsubmit.go#L27-L31
Added lines #L27 - L31 were not covered by tests
[warning] 33-33: services/omnirpc/modules/mixins/txsubmit.go#L33
Added line #L33 was not covered by testsethergo/util/export_test.go (5)
3-6: LGTM: Import statements are correct.The addition of the
github.com/ethereum/go-ethereum/commonimport is appropriate for the new functionality introduced in this file.
44-46: LGTM: Constant exported for testing purposes.The
NullFieldAttributeconstant is properly documented and exported for testing purposes. This is a good practice for making internal constants available in test scenarios.
48-50: LGTM: Function exported for testing purposes.The
AddressPtrToStringfunction is a well-named wrapper that exports the functionality of the internaladdressPtrToStringfunction for testing. This is a good practice for making internal functions available in test scenarios.
52-75: LGTM: Constants exported for testing purposes.The block of constants is well-documented and follows a consistent naming convention. Each constant is properly exported for testing purposes, which is a good practice for making internal constants available in test scenarios.
Line range hint
1-75: Summary: Enhancements for testing and debuggingThe changes in this file significantly improve the testability of the
ethergo/utilpackage by exporting several internal constants and a function. This aligns well with the PR objective of enriching debugging capabilities. The additions are well-documented and follow consistent naming conventions, which will facilitate easier and more comprehensive testing of the package.These changes will likely lead to more robust test coverage and easier debugging of Ethereum transaction-related functionality in the future.
ethergo/util/attributes.go (3)
1-9: LGTM: Package declaration and imports are appropriate.The package name 'util' is suitable for utility functions, and all imported packages are relevant to the functionality provided in this file.
64-78: 🛠️ Refactor suggestionAddress TODO and consider improving null handling.
The TODO comment suggests moving
BigPtrToStringto the core package. This should be addressed to improve code organization.Consider using a custom type for null values instead of a string constant for better type safety.
To address these points:
Create a task to move
BigPtrToStringto the core package. This will likely involve updating import statements in other files.Consider introducing a custom type for null values:
type NullableString string const NullValue NullableString = "null" func addressPtrToString(address *common.Address) NullableString { if address == nil { return NullValue } return NullableString(address.Hex()) } func BigPtrToString(num *big.Int) NullableString { if num == nil { return NullValue } return NullableString(num.String()) }This approach provides better type safety and makes it clear when a value might be null.
To ensure these changes don't introduce inconsistencies, run the following script:
This will help identify any other locations where null values are handled, ensuring consistency across the codebase.
✅ Verification successful
Verification Successful: Proceed with Recommendations.
nullFieldAttributeis exclusively used inethergo/util/attributes.goandethergo/util/export_test.go.- No other parts of the codebase are affected by changes to
nullFieldAttribute.You can safely address the TODO and implement the suggested improvements without impacting other modules.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check for other usages of nullFieldAttribute in the codebase rg --type go 'nullFieldAttribute'Length of output: 278
27-62:⚠️ Potential issueAddress TODO and potential integer overflow issues.
The TODO comment suggests downcasting to int64 for nonce and gas limit. This should be addressed to ensure proper handling of large values.
Static analysis tools have flagged potential integer overflow issues when converting uint64 to int64 for nonce and gas limit.
Consider using a more descriptive error message when the sender's address cannot be detected.
To address these points:
- For the nonce and gas limit, consider using
uint64instead ofint64to avoid potential overflow:attribute.Int64(nonceAttr, int64(transaction.Nonce())), attribute.Int64(gasLimitAttr, int64(transaction.Gas())),Change to:
attribute.Uint64(nonceAttr, transaction.Nonce()), attribute.Uint64(gasLimitAttr, transaction.Gas()),
- For error handling, provide more context:
from = fmt.Sprintf("could not be detected: %v", err)Change to:
from = fmt.Sprintf("sender address could not be detected: %v", err)
- Consider adding a comment explaining why we're ignoring the potential overflow for now, if it's determined to be acceptable for tracing purposes.
To ensure these changes don't introduce inconsistencies, run the following script:
This will help identify any other locations where these values are used and ensure consistency across the codebase.
✅ Verification successful
Verified: Recommended changes are safe and improve code consistency.
Update
nonceandgasLimitattributes to useuint64:attribute.Uint64(nonceAttr, transaction.Nonce()), attribute.Uint64(gasLimitAttr, transaction.Gas()),Enhance the error message for sender address detection:
from = fmt.Sprintf("sender address could not be detected: %v", err)Add a comment explaining the decision around potential overflow handling for clarity.
These changes align
attributes.gowith the rest of the codebase and prevent possible integer overflow issues.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Verify usage of uint64 for nonce and gas limit in other parts of the codebase rg --type go 'transaction\.Nonce\(\)|transaction\.Gas\(\)'Length of output: 507
🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: Lint (ethergo)
[failure] 44-44:
G115: integer overflow conversion uint64 -> int64 (gosec)
[failure] 45-45:
G115: integer overflow conversion uint64 -> int64 (gosec)ethergo/submitter/export_test.go (1)
Line range hint
1-93: Verify the impact of removed constants and functionsThe AI summary indicates that several constants (e.g.,
NullFieldAttribute,HashAttr,FromAttr, etc.) and theAddressPtrToStringfunction have been removed from this file. While these changes are not visible in the provided code snippet, they may have significant implications:
The removal of attribute constants suggests a change in how transaction attributes are handled. Ensure that all code depending on these constants has been updated accordingly.
The
AddressPtrToStringfunction has been removed, butBigPtrToStringremains. This inconsistency might indicate a change in how address pointers are handled throughout the codebase.To ensure these changes don't introduce regressions, please run the following verification:
Review the results to ensure that all affected code has been properly updated and that there are no remaining references to the removed elements.
🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: Lint (ethergo)
[failure] 24-24:
captLocal: `UUID' should not be capitalized (gocritic)services/omnirpc/modules/receiptsbackup/receiptsbackup.go (2)
8-8: LGTM: New import added correctly.The new import for the
mixinspackage is added correctly and doesn't cause any conflicts.
140-141: Please provide more information about the TxSubmitMixin function.The addition of
mixins.TxSubmitMixin(ctx, r.handler, rpcRequest)aligns with the PR objective of enriching debug capabilities with mixins. However, it would be helpful to have more information about what this function does and how it enhances transaction tracking and debugging.Could you please provide a brief description of the
TxSubmitMixinfunction and its expected impact on the system?To better understand the usage of this mixin, let's check for other occurrences in the codebase:
Also, there's no test coverage for these new lines. Consider adding tests to ensure the mixin is called correctly:
Would you like assistance in generating test cases for this new functionality?
✅ Verification successful
Clarification on TxSubmitMixin Function
The
TxSubmitMixinfunction serves as a mixin for tracking submitted transactions. It enhances transaction tracking and debugging by:
- Creating a Tracing Span: Initiates a tracing span named "txsubmit" using OpenTelemetry, which helps in monitoring the lifecycle of a transaction.
- Attribute Assignment: Assigns attributes such as the transaction ID and other relevant transaction details to the span, providing deeper insights into each transaction.
- RPC Method Verification: Ensures that only transactions using the
SendRawTransactionMethodare tracked, preventing unnecessary tracing of other RPC methods.- Error Handling: Logs warnings if the RPC request cannot be converted to a transaction, aiding in debugging issues related to transaction submissions.
This integration allows for enhanced visibility into transaction submissions, facilitating better monitoring, debugging, and performance analysis within the system.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for other usages of TxSubmitMixin rg --type go 'TxSubmitMixin\(' -A 3Length of output: 736
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Display the contents of TxSubmitMixin function cat services/omnirpc/modules/mixins/txsubmit.goLength of output: 1060
🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: codecov/patch
[warning] 140-141: services/omnirpc/modules/receiptsbackup/receiptsbackup.go#L140-L141
Added lines #L140 - L141 were not covered by testsethergo/submitter/submitter.go (4)
504-506: Consistent change, refer to previous comment for improvement.These changes are consistent with the modifications in the previous segment. They improve the handling of big.Int pointer conversions.
Please refer to the previous comment regarding the addition of null checks for improved robustness.
540-542: Consistent change approved.These modifications align with the previous changes in the file, maintaining consistency in the use of
util.BigPtrToString.
593-594: Approved. Informative logging of gas prices.These changes align with previous modifications and provide valuable logging information by including both the suggested and actual gas prices.
608-608: Approved. Important logging of max gas price.This change maintains consistency with previous modifications. Logging the maximum gas price is crucial for understanding and debugging gas price limits in the system.
ethergo/submitter/util.go (2)
4-5: Imports are appropriately addedThe addition of
"github.com/ethereum/go-ethereum/core/types"and"github.com/synapsecns/sanguine/ethergo/util"is necessary for handling transaction types and utilizing utility functions, respectively.
34-36: RefactoredtxToAttributesfunction improves clarityThe function
txToAttributesis neatly refactored to utilizeutil.TxToAttributes(transaction), reducing code duplication and enhancing readability. Appending theuuidattribute ensures that the transaction UUID is included in the attributes.
| // ReqToTX converts a request to a transaction. | ||
| func ReqToTX(req rpc.Request) (tx *types.Transaction, err error) { | ||
| tx = new(types.Transaction) | ||
|
|
||
| hex := common.FromHex(string(bytes.ReplaceAll(req.Params[0], []byte{'"'}, []byte{}))) | ||
| err = tx.UnmarshalBinary(hex) | ||
| if err != nil { | ||
| return nil, fmt.Errorf("could not unmarshal transaction: %w", err) | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| return tx, nil | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Improve input validation and string handling in ReqToTX.
While the function's core logic is sound, there are a few areas for improvement:
- Add input validation for
req.Paramsto ensure it's not empty and has at least one element. - Consider using
strings.Triminstead ofbytes.ReplaceAllfor more robust quote removal. - Add a check for empty input after quote removal.
Here's a suggested implementation with these improvements:
func ReqToTX(req rpc.Request) (*types.Transaction, error) {
if len(req.Params) == 0 {
return nil, fmt.Errorf("empty params in request")
}
hexStr := strings.Trim(string(req.Params[0]), "\"")
if hexStr == "" {
return nil, fmt.Errorf("empty transaction data after trimming quotes")
}
hex := common.FromHex(hexStr)
if len(hex) == 0 {
return nil, fmt.Errorf("invalid hex data in request")
}
tx := new(types.Transaction)
if err := tx.UnmarshalBinary(hex); err != nil {
return nil, fmt.Errorf("could not unmarshal transaction: %w", err)
}
return tx, nil
}This implementation adds more robust error checking and improves the handling of the input string.
🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: codecov/patch
[warning] 12-19: services/omnirpc/modules/mixins/helpers.go#L12-L19
Added lines #L12 - L19 were not covered by tests
[warning] 21-21: services/omnirpc/modules/mixins/helpers.go#L21
Added line #L21 was not covered by tests
ethergo/submitter/export_test.go
Outdated
| // txToAttributes exports txToAttributes for testing. | ||
| func TxToAttributesUUID(transaction *types.Transaction, UUID string) []attribute.KeyValue { | ||
| return txToAttributes(transaction, UUID) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Consider adjusting the function name and parameter case
The function has been renamed from TxToAttributes to TxToAttributesUUID, which better reflects its purpose by including the UUID. This change improves clarity and suggests enhanced transaction tracking capabilities.
However, there are two points to consider:
-
The function name could be more consistent with Go naming conventions. Consider using
TxToAttributesWithUUIDinstead ofTxToAttributesUUIDfor better readability. -
The linter suggests that
UUIDshould not be capitalized. While it's common to capitalize UUID as an abbreviation, adhering to the linter's suggestion would improve consistency with Go's style guidelines.
Consider applying the following changes:
-func TxToAttributesUUID(transaction *types.Transaction, UUID string) []attribute.KeyValue {
+func TxToAttributesWithUUID(transaction *types.Transaction, uuid string) []attribute.KeyValue {
return txToAttributes(transaction, UUID)
}This change would address both the function naming and the linter's suggestion about the UUID parameter.
Committable suggestion was skipped due to low confidence.
🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: Lint (ethergo)
[failure] 24-24:
captLocal: `UUID' should not be capitalized (gocritic)
| metrics.EndSpanWithErr(span, err) | ||
| }() | ||
|
|
||
| tx := new(types.Transaction) | ||
|
|
||
| hex := common.FromHex(string(bytes.ReplaceAll(req.Params[0], []byte{'"'}, []byte{}))) | ||
| err = tx.UnmarshalBinary(hex) | ||
| tx, err := mixins.ReqToTX(req) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Logical Error: Correct the Condition in checkShouldRequest Function
The condition in the checkShouldRequest function may not align with the intended logic described in the comments. The current code is:
// only apply to sendRawTransaction
// ignore if maxSubmitAhead is 0
if client.RPCMethod(req.Method) != client.SendRawTransactionMethod && r.maxSubmitAhead > 0 {
return true
}According to the comments, we should skip the check (i.e., return true) if the method is not SendRawTransactionMethod or if maxSubmitAhead is zero. The current use of the logical AND operator (&&) does not reflect this logic. It should be the logical OR operator (||).
Apply this diff to correct the condition:
-if client.RPCMethod(req.Method) != client.SendRawTransactionMethod && r.maxSubmitAhead > 0 {
+if client.RPCMethod(req.Method) != client.SendRawTransactionMethod || r.maxSubmitAhead == 0 {
return true
}This change ensures that the function returns true when the method is not SendRawTransactionMethod or when maxSubmitAhead is zero, aligning the code with the intended logic.
🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: codecov/patch
[warning] 193-193: services/omnirpc/modules/confirmedtofinalized/finalizedproxy.go#L193
Added line #L193 was not covered by tests
| tx, err := mixins.ReqToTX(req) | ||
| if err != nil { | ||
| return false |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add Unit Tests for the New Transaction Parsing Logic
The introduction of mixins.ReqToTX(req) replaces the manual transaction unmarshalling. However, this new code is not covered by existing tests, as indicated by the static analysis tools.
Adding unit tests for this function will help ensure that transaction parsing works correctly, including handling of edge cases and error conditions. Would you like assistance in drafting these unit tests or opening a GitHub issue to track this task?
🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: codecov/patch
[warning] 193-193: services/omnirpc/modules/confirmedtofinalized/finalizedproxy.go#L193
Added line #L193 was not covered by tests
ethergo/util/attributes_test.go
Outdated
| u.Require().Equal(mapAttr[util.NonceAttr].AsInt64(), int64(mockTX.Nonce())) | ||
| u.Require().Equal(mapAttr[util.GasLimitAttr].AsInt64(), int64(mockTX.Gas())) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Prevent potential integer overflow in uint64 to int64 conversion
Converting uint64 values to int64 can lead to integer overflows if the values exceed the maximum value of int64 (2^63 - 1). The Nonce() and Gas() methods return uint64, and directly casting them to int64 may result in incorrect behavior for large values. To avoid this issue, consider the following options:
- Option 1: Ensure that the test values for
NonceandGasare within theint64range. - Option 2: Modify the attribute storage to use
uint64instead ofint64, if feasible. - Option 3: Compare the values as
uint64by retrieving them appropriately fromattribute.Value.
Apply this diff if adjusting the test values:
- u.Require().Equal(mapAttr[util.NonceAttr].AsInt64(), int64(mockTX.Nonce()))
- u.Require().Equal(mapAttr[util.GasLimitAttr].AsInt64(), int64(mockTX.Gas()))
+ u.Require().Equal(mapAttr[util.NonceAttr].AsInt64(), int64(int64(mockTX.Nonce())))
+ u.Require().Equal(mapAttr[util.GasLimitAttr].AsInt64(), int64(int64(mockTX.Gas())))Alternatively, if AsUint64() is available:
- u.Require().Equal(mapAttr[util.NonceAttr].AsInt64(), int64(mockTX.Nonce()))
- u.Require().Equal(mapAttr[util.GasLimitAttr].AsInt64(), int64(mockTX.Gas()))
+ u.Require().Equal(mapAttr[util.NonceAttr].AsUint64(), mockTX.Nonce())
+ u.Require().Equal(mapAttr[util.GasLimitAttr].AsUint64(), mockTX.Gas())Also applies to: 100-101
🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: Lint (ethergo)
[failure] 81-81:
G115: integer overflow conversion uint64 -> int64 (gosec)
| t.Errorf("BigPtrToString(nil) = %q; want %q", result, expected) | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // Test case: num is an integer | ||
| num = big.NewInt(123) | ||
| expected = "123" | ||
| result = util.BigPtrToString(num) | ||
| if result != expected { | ||
| t.Errorf("BigPtrToString(123) = %q; want %q", result, expected) | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Use consistent assertion methods in tests
In the TestBigPtrToString function, t.Errorf is used for assertions, whereas other tests utilize the assert package (e.g., assert.Equal). For consistency and improved readability, it's recommended to use the assert package throughout the tests.
Apply this diff to refactor the assertions:
- if result != expected {
- t.Errorf("BigPtrToString(nil) = %q; want %q", result, expected)
- }
+ assert.Equal(t, expected, result, "BigPtrToString(nil) should return expected value")And:
- if result != expected {
- t.Errorf("BigPtrToString(123) = %q; want %q", result, expected)
- }
+ assert.Equal(t, expected, result, "BigPtrToString(123) should return expected value")📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| t.Errorf("BigPtrToString(nil) = %q; want %q", result, expected) | |
| } | |
| // Test case: num is an integer | |
| num = big.NewInt(123) | |
| expected = "123" | |
| result = util.BigPtrToString(num) | |
| if result != expected { | |
| t.Errorf("BigPtrToString(123) = %q; want %q", result, expected) | |
| } | |
| assert.Equal(t, expected, result, "BigPtrToString(nil) should return expected value") | |
| } | |
| // Test case: num is an integer | |
| num = big.NewInt(123) | |
| expected = "123" | |
| result = util.BigPtrToString(num) | |
| assert.Equal(t, expected, result, "BigPtrToString(123) should return expected value") |
[goreleaser]
|
accidentally merged this a tad prematurely |
[goreleaser]
Description
Summary by CodeRabbit