validate that vault deposit does not exceed max uint64 #1576
Conversation
|
Warning Rate Limit Exceeded@tqin7 has exceeded the limit for the number of commits or files that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 15 minutes and 22 seconds before requesting another review. How to resolve this issue?After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit. How do rate limits work?CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization. WalkthroughThe recent updates focus on enhancing the validation logic for Changes
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 as PR comments)
Additionally, you can add CodeRabbit Configration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
protocol/x/vault/keeper/msg_server_deposit_to_vault_test.go (1)
Line range hint
202-251: The new test case scenario is comprehensive and effectively tests for various invalid deposit amounts. Consider adding comments to each sub-case to explain the expected behavior and why these specific values are tested.+ // Test case for zero deposit amount, which should fail. "Three failed deposits due to invalid deposit amount": { vaultId: constants.Vault_Clob_1, depositorSetups: []DepositorSetup{ { depositor: constants.Alice_Num0, depositorBalance: big.NewInt(1_000), }, { depositor: constants.Bob_Num0, depositorBalance: big.NewInt(1_000), }, }, depositInstances: []DepositInstance{ { depositor: constants.Alice_Num0, depositAmount: big.NewInt(0), msgSigner: constants.Alice_Num0.Owner, checkTxFails: true, checkTxResponseContains: "Deposit amount is invalid", expectedOwnerShares: nil, }, { depositor: constants.Bob_Num0, depositAmount: big.NewInt(-1), msgSigner: constants.Bob_Num0.Owner, checkTxFails: true, checkTxResponseContains: "Deposit amount is invalid", expectedOwnerShares: nil, }, { depositor: constants.Bob_Num0, depositAmount: new(big.Int).Add( new(big.Int).SetUint64(math.MaxUint64), big.NewInt(1), ), msgSigner: constants.Bob_Num0.Owner, checkTxFails: true, checkTxResponseContains: "Deposit amount is invalid", expectedOwnerShares: nil, }, }, totalSharesHistory: []*big.Int{ big.NewInt(0), big.NewInt(0), big.NewInt(0), }, vaultEquityHistory: []*big.Int{ big.NewInt(0), big.NewInt(0), big.NewInt(0), }, },
Review Details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (3)
- protocol/x/vault/keeper/msg_server_deposit_to_vault_test.go (3 hunks)
- protocol/x/vault/types/msg_deposit_to_vault.go (1 hunks)
- protocol/x/vault/types/msg_deposit_to_vault_test.go (2 hunks)
Additional Context Used
Path-based Instructions (3)
protocol/x/vault/types/msg_deposit_to_vault.go (1)
Pattern
**/**: Do not include a walkthrough. For all comments on line changes that are longer than 15 lines, add a prefix to the comment of what lines you are commenting on (for example: "The changes from lines 100 to 200...". Add your comment to be on the last 15 lines of the chunk rather than adding your comment to the entire chunk.protocol/x/vault/types/msg_deposit_to_vault_test.go (1)
Pattern
**/**: Do not include a walkthrough. For all comments on line changes that are longer than 15 lines, add a prefix to the comment of what lines you are commenting on (for example: "The changes from lines 100 to 200...". Add your comment to be on the last 15 lines of the chunk rather than adding your comment to the entire chunk.protocol/x/vault/keeper/msg_server_deposit_to_vault_test.go (1)
Pattern
**/**: Do not include a walkthrough. For all comments on line changes that are longer than 15 lines, add a prefix to the comment of what lines you are commenting on (for example: "The changes from lines 100 to 200...". Add your comment to be on the last 15 lines of the chunk rather than adding your comment to the entire chunk.
Additional comments not posted (2)
protocol/x/vault/types/msg_deposit_to_vault_test.go (1)
4-5: The imports ofmathandmath/bigare appropriate for the operations performed in the test cases.protocol/x/vault/keeper/msg_server_deposit_to_vault_test.go (1)
5-5: The imports ofmathandmath/bigare appropriate for the operations performed in the test cases.
tqin7
force-pushed
the
tq/fix-vault-deposit
branch
from
7fbc368 to
148e786
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
Review Details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (3)
- protocol/x/vault/keeper/msg_server_deposit_to_vault.go (3 hunks)
- protocol/x/vault/keeper/msg_server_deposit_to_vault_test.go (3 hunks)
- protocol/x/vault/types/msg_deposit_to_vault.go (2 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
- protocol/x/vault/keeper/msg_server_deposit_to_vault_test.go
- protocol/x/vault/types/msg_deposit_to_vault.go
Additional Context Used
Path-based Instructions (1)
protocol/x/vault/keeper/msg_server_deposit_to_vault.go (1)
Pattern
**/**: Do not include a walkthrough. For all comments on line changes that are longer than 15 lines, add a prefix to the comment of what lines you are commenting on (for example: "The changes from lines 100 to 200...". Add your comment to be on the last 15 lines of the chunk rather than adding your comment to the entire chunk.
Additional comments not posted (2)
protocol/x/vault/keeper/msg_server_deposit_to_vault.go (2)
28-28: Confirm thatMintSharescorrectly handlesBigIntvalues.
46-46: Ensure thatUint64conversion is safe and does not lead to data loss.
| @@ -32,13 +34,16 @@ func (k msgServer) DepositToVault( | |||
| // Transfer from sender subaccount to vault. | |||
| // Note: Transfer should take place after minting shares for | |||
| // shares calculation to be correct. | |||
| if !quoteQuantums.IsUint64() { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why is this check not in ValidateBasic and instead done during the processing of the message? We would want to reject such messages as early as possible rather than accepting in CheckTx, processing in DeliverTx then failing to process the message.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I first added it to ValidateBasic but moved it here to be clearer on why we require it to be Uint64. Let me move it back
| @@ -32,13 +34,16 @@ func (k msgServer) DepositToVault( | |||
| // Transfer from sender subaccount to vault. | |||
| // Note: Transfer should take place after minting shares for | |||
| // shares calculation to be correct. | |||
| if !quoteQuantums.IsUint64() { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does this cause the transaction to fail? Can you do this up-front instead? Is there some validateBasic function this can go in?
| if msg.QuoteQuantums.Cmp(dtypes.NewInt(0)) <= 0 { | ||
| return ErrInvalidDepositAmount | ||
| // Validate that quote quantums is positive and an uint64. | ||
| if msg.QuoteQuantums.Cmp(dtypes.NewInt(0)) <= 0 || !msg.QuoteQuantums.BigInt().IsUint64() { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: .Cmp(dtypes.NewInt(0)) <= 0 -> .Sign() < 0
|
@Mergifyio backport release/protocol/v5.x |
✅ Backports have been created
|
(cherry picked from commit 76c548c) # Conflicts: # protocol/x/vault/keeper/msg_server_deposit_to_vault.go
… (#1580) Co-authored-by: Tian <[email protected]>
… (#1580) Co-authored-by: Tian <[email protected]>
… (#1580) Co-authored-by: Tian <[email protected]>
… (#1580) Co-authored-by: Tian <[email protected]>
… (#1580) Co-authored-by: Tian <[email protected]>
Changelist
A deposit to vault should not exceed
MaxUint64as transfer expects a uint64Test Plan
added unit tests
Author/Reviewer Checklist
state-breakinglabel.indexer-postgres-breakinglabel.PrepareProposalorProcessProposal, manually add the labelproposal-breaking.feature:[feature-name].backport/[branch-name].refactor,chore,bug.Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Bug Fixes
Tests