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

fix: compare validator and withdrawal proof state roots #53

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 19, 2024

Conversation

wewecalibrate
Copy link
Contributor

@wewecalibrate wewecalibrate commented Jul 18, 2024

  • Compare validator & withdrawal proof state roots
  • Rename beacon chain proof function to isValidWCRootAgainstBlockRoot

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • New Features
    • Enhanced validation check in the ExoCapsule contract to ensure matching state roots for validator and withdrawal proofs.
  • Improvements
    • Improved error messaging for unmatched validator and withdrawal state roots.
  • Refactor
    • Renamed function for clarity in the BeaconChainProofs library.

Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Jul 18, 2024

Walkthrough

The recent updates to the ExoCapsule system introduce a new error definition, UnmatchedValidatorAndWithdrawal, to ensure that the state roots of validator and withdrawal proofs match. Additionally, a function in BeaconChainProofs has been renamed and its parameter formatting adjusted. These changes enhance error handling and code clarity.

Changes

File Change Summary
src/core/ExoCapsule.sol Added UnmatchedValidatorAndWithdrawal error definition and included validation for state roots
src/libraries/BeaconChainProofs.sol Renamed function isValidWCRootAgainstExecutionPayloadRoot to isValidWCRootAgainstBlockRoot, and adjusted parameter formatting.

Poem

In the realm of code so bright,
Errors now are clear as light. 🌟
Validators and withdrawals must align,
Else an error will confine.
Proofs refined, functions named anew,
ExoCapsule shines, for me and you. 🚀


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.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

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 an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Additionally, you can add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.

CodeRabbit Configuration 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.

@wewecalibrate wewecalibrate requested review from MaxMustermann2, adu-web3 and bwhour and removed request for MaxMustermann2 July 18, 2024 17:21
Copy link

Linting failed. Please check the logs.

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actionable comments posted: 0

Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between a6dfa2d and 75c9cc4.

Files selected for processing (2)
  • src/core/ExoCapsule.sol (2 hunks)
  • src/libraries/BeaconChainProofs.sol (2 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (3)
src/libraries/BeaconChainProofs.sol (1)

194-198: LGTM! Function name change is clear and descriptive.

The function isValidWCRootAgainstExecutionPayloadRoot has been renamed to isValidWCRootAgainstBlockRoot. The new name is more descriptive and aligns with the functionality.

src/core/ExoCapsule.sol (2)

49-49: LGTM! New error definition is clear and informative.

The new error UnmatchedValidatorAndWithdrawal with parameters validatorStateRoot and withdrawalStateRoot provides useful information for debugging.


155-159: LGTM! Validation check ensures consistency between validator and withdrawal proofs.

The validation check compares the state roots of the validator and withdrawal proofs. If they do not match, the new error UnmatchedValidatorAndWithdrawal is reverted, providing useful information for debugging.

Copy link

Linting failed. Please check the logs.

1 similar comment
Copy link

Linting failed. Please check the logs.

@wewecalibrate wewecalibrate force-pushed the refactor/native-withdraw branch from 75c9cc4 to defa4f6 Compare July 19, 2024 03:28
Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actionable comments posted: 0

Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 75c9cc4 and defa4f6.

Files selected for processing (2)
  • src/core/ExoCapsule.sol (2 hunks)
  • src/libraries/BeaconChainProofs.sol (2 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
  • src/core/ExoCapsule.sol
  • src/libraries/BeaconChainProofs.sol

@wewecalibrate wewecalibrate merged commit 8b5ee15 into main Jul 19, 2024
6 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants