feat(ci): add fmt workflow
#16
Conversation
WalkthroughThe recent updates introduce two new GitHub Actions workflows to enhance the CI/CD process. The Changes
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 as PR comments)
Additionally, you can add CodeRabbit Configration File (
|
It does not need to trigger on each push
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 7
Outside diff range and nitpick comments (8)
test/foundry/ClientChainGateway.t.sol (1)
82-82: Ensure that the comment about deployingBeaconProxyBytecodeis accurate and necessary.Consider adding a comment explaining why
BeaconProxyBytecodeis deployed here, as it might not be immediately clear to other developers or future maintainers.src/core/ExoCapsule.sol (4)
14-14: Ensure proper documentation for theExoCapsulecontract.Adding a comprehensive top-level comment for the
ExoCapsulecontract would enhance understandability and maintainability. It should describe the contract's purpose, usage, and any important interactions or behaviors.
14-14: Review the use of multiple inheritance.The contract
ExoCapsuleinherits from multiple contracts and interfaces. Ensure that there are no conflicting functions or variable names across these inherited contracts to prevent unexpected behavior. It's also good practice to understand and document the inheritance chain for clarity.
14-14: Examine the initialization pattern.The contract uses the
Initializablepattern from OpenZeppelin, which is a standard for upgradeable contracts. Ensure that theinitializemethod fully sets up the contract state to prevent any uninitialized state variables that could lead to security vulnerabilities.
14-14: Review the error messages for clarity and consistency.It's beneficial to standardize the error messages to ensure they are clear and consistent. This helps in debugging and maintaining the code. For example, including function names in the error messages can help identify issues more quickly.
src/core/Bootstrap.sol (2)
39-39: Ensure the constructor parameters are documented.Consider adding comments to describe the purpose and expected values of each parameter in the constructor for better code readability and maintainability.
400-400: Clarify the support for reward withdrawals.Consider adding a comment explaining why reward withdrawals are not supported before network bootstrap, for clarity to future developers and auditors.
test/foundry/Bootstrap.t.sol (1)
33-38: Ensure consistent formatting for comments in the array initialization.Consider adding a comment before each line in the array to explain what each value represents, similar to the comments already present. This will improve readability and maintainability.
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files ignored due to path filters (1)
package-lock.jsonis excluded by!**/package-lock.json
Files selected for processing (55)
- .github/workflows/lint.yml (1 hunks)
- .prettierrc (1 hunks)
- package.json (3 hunks)
- script/10_DeployExocoreGatewayOnly.s.sol (2 hunks)
- script/11_SetPeers.s.sol (2 hunks)
- script/12_RedeployClientChainGateway.s.sol (2 hunks)
- script/1_Prerequisities.s.sol (2 hunks)
- script/2_DeployBoth.s.sol (6 hunks)
- script/3_Setup.s.sol (3 hunks)
- script/4_Deposit.s.sol (2 hunks)
- script/5_Withdraw.s.sol (2 hunks)
- script/6_CreateExoCapsule.s.sol (1 hunks)
- script/7_DeployBootstrap.s.sol (4 hunks)
- script/8_DepositValidator.s.sol (3 hunks)
- script/8_RegisterOperatorsAndDelegate.s.sol (6 hunks)
- script/9_ExtendBootstrapTime.s.sol (1 hunks)
- script/BaseScript.sol (1 hunks)
- script/TestPrecompileErrorFixed.s.sol (3 hunks)
- script/TestPrecompileErrorFixed_Deploy.s.sol (3 hunks)
- script/TokenTransfer.s.sol (2 hunks)
- script/deployBeaconOracle.s.sol (1 hunks)
- script/integration/1_DeployBootstrap.s.sol (8 hunks)
- src/core/BaseRestakingController.sol (4 hunks)
- src/core/Bootstrap.sol (20 hunks)
- src/core/BootstrapLzReceiver.sol (3 hunks)
- src/core/ClientChainGateway.sol (6 hunks)
- src/core/ClientGatewayLzReceiver.sol (7 hunks)
- src/core/CustomProxyAdmin.sol (1 hunks)
- src/core/ExoCapsule.sol (9 hunks)
- src/core/ExocoreGateway.sol (10 hunks)
- src/core/LSTRestakingController.sol (1 hunks)
- src/core/NativeRestakingController.sol (3 hunks)
- src/core/Vault.sol (2 hunks)
- src/interfaces/IClientChainGateway.sol (1 hunks)
- src/interfaces/ICustomProxyAdmin.sol (1 hunks)
- src/interfaces/IExoCapsule.sol (2 hunks)
- src/interfaces/INativeRestakingController.sol (4 hunks)
- src/interfaces/IOperatorRegistry.sol (4 hunks)
- src/interfaces/ITokenWhitelister.sol (1 hunks)
- src/interfaces/IVault.sol (1 hunks)
- src/interfaces/precompiles/IClientChains.sol (2 hunks)
- src/interfaces/precompiles/IDeposit.sol (1 hunks)
- src/libraries/BeaconChainProofs.sol (7 hunks)
- src/libraries/ValidatorContainer.sol (2 hunks)
- src/libraries/WithdrawalContainer.sol (2 hunks)
- src/lzApp/OAppReceiverUpgradeable.sol (1 hunks)
- src/lzApp/OAppSenderUpgradeable.sol (3 hunks)
- src/storage/BootstrapStorage.sol (14 hunks)
- src/storage/ClientChainGatewayStorage.sol (1 hunks)
- src/storage/ExoCapsuleStorage.sol (1 hunks)
- test/foundry/Bootstrap.t.sol (31 hunks)
- test/foundry/ClientChainGateway.t.sol (3 hunks)
- test/foundry/CustomProxyAdmin.t.sol (4 hunks)
- test/foundry/Delegation.t.sol (6 hunks)
- test/foundry/DepositWithdrawPrinciple.t.sol (8 hunks)
Files not processed due to max files limit (16)
- test/foundry/ExoCapsule.t.sol
- test/foundry/ExocoreDeployer.t.sol
- test/foundry/ExocoreGateway.t.sol
- test/foundry/MyToken.sol
- test/foundry/WithdrawReward.t.sol
- test/mocks/ClaimRewardMock.sol
- test/mocks/DelegationMock.sol
- test/mocks/DepositMock.sol
- test/mocks/DepositWithdrawMock.sol
- test/mocks/ETHPOSDepositMock.sol
- test/mocks/EndpointV2Mock.sol
- test/mocks/ExocoreGatewayMock.sol
- test/mocks/Faucet.sol
- test/mocks/NonShortCircuitEndpointV2Mock.sol
- test/mocks/NonShortCircuitLzEndpointMock.sol
- test/mocks/WithdrawPrincipleMock.sol
Files not summarized due to errors (1)
- test/foundry/Bootstrap.t.sol: Error: Message exceeds token limit
Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (24)
- .github/workflows/lint.yml
- .prettierrc
- package.json
- script/12_RedeployClientChainGateway.s.sol
- script/3_Setup.s.sol
- script/8_DepositValidator.s.sol
- script/8_RegisterOperatorsAndDelegate.s.sol
- script/9_ExtendBootstrapTime.s.sol
- script/BaseScript.sol
- script/TestPrecompileErrorFixed_Deploy.s.sol
- script/TokenTransfer.s.sol
- script/deployBeaconOracle.s.sol
- src/core/BootstrapLzReceiver.sol
- src/core/Vault.sol
- src/interfaces/IClientChainGateway.sol
- src/interfaces/ICustomProxyAdmin.sol
- src/interfaces/IExoCapsule.sol
- src/interfaces/INativeRestakingController.sol
- src/interfaces/IOperatorRegistry.sol
- src/interfaces/ITokenWhitelister.sol
- src/interfaces/precompiles/IClientChains.sol
- src/libraries/ValidatorContainer.sol
- src/lzApp/OAppReceiverUpgradeable.sol
- src/storage/ExoCapsuleStorage.sol
Additional comments not posted (115)
src/interfaces/IVault.sol (1)
12-16: The addition ofupdateWithdrawableBalanceenhances the interface by allowing updates to both principle and reward balances.src/interfaces/precompiles/IDeposit.sol (1)
22-27: ThedepositTofunction is well-defined, providing necessary parameters and return types for deposit operations.src/core/LSTRestakingController.sol (1)
10-15: The functionsdeposit,withdrawPrincipleFromExocore, andwithdrawRewardFromExocoreare well-implemented with necessary checks and conditions.Also applies to: 18-22, 25-29
src/libraries/WithdrawalContainer.sol (1)
50-50: The addition of the closing brace corrects the syntax and ensures the library is properly encapsulated.script/6_CreateExoCapsule.s.sol (1)
27-29: The instantiation ofclientGatewayusing the address from a JSON file is correctly implemented with a check to ensure the address is not zero.script/10_DeployExocoreGatewayOnly.s.sol (1)
50-54: Ensure correct serialization and JSON writing.The changes in serialization and JSON writing appear correct and consistent with the rest of the deployment script. Good job maintaining clarity and consistency in the use of serialization functions.
Also applies to: 57-57
src/core/NativeRestakingController.sol (1)
19-23: Review the changes in staking logic.The modifications in the
stakeandcreateExoCapsulefunctions are well-implemented. They maintain the contract's integrity and follow best practices for error handling and state management.Also applies to: 36-39
script/1_Prerequisities.s.sol (1)
59-63: Check serialization consistency.The serialization of addresses in the
PrerequisitiesScriptis consistent and correctly implemented. These changes are crucial for setting up the environment correctly.Also applies to: 72-76
script/11_SetPeers.s.sol (1)
53-53: Validate loop and logging changes.The formatting changes in the while loop and the standardization of the console log statement are minor but improve readability and consistency.
Also applies to: 92-92
src/core/BaseRestakingController.sol (1)
22-26: Examine staking operation changes.The changes in the
claim,delegateTo, andundelegateFromfunctions are well-implemented. They enhance the contract's functionality while ensuring security through proper checks and validations.Also applies to: 40-44, 48-52
script/4_Deposit.s.sol (1)
22-24: Review deposit logic and address setup.The changes in the
DepositScriptrelated to setting up contract addresses and handling deposit logic are correctly implemented and enhance the script's functionality.Also applies to: 84-88
script/5_Withdraw.s.sol (1)
26-28: Ensure that the address forclientChainGatewayis validated in the calling context to prevent a zero address from being passed.Verification successful
The search results indicate that there are multiple instances where
clientGatewayis used across various files. Notably, in thescript/5_Withdraw.s.solfile, there is a validation check ensuring that theclientGatewayaddress is not zero:require(address(clientGateway) != address(0), "clientGateway address should not be empty");This validation ensures that the address for
clientChainGatewayis checked before being used, addressing the concern mentioned in the review comment.
script/5_Withdraw.s.sol: Line 27Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify that the address for `clientChainGateway` is validated before being passed to the instantiation. # Test: Search for instantiation calls. Expect: Validation logic before the calls. rg --type solidity $'new IClientChainGateway'Length of output: 79
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify that the address for `clientChainGateway` is validated before being passed to the instantiation. # Test: Search for instantiation calls. Expect: Validation logic before the calls. ast-grep --lang solidity --pattern $'new IClientChainGateway($_)' --jsonLength of output: 190
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify that the address for `clientChainGateway` is validated before being passed to the instantiation. # Test: Search for instantiation calls. Expect: Validation logic before the calls. rg 'new IClientChainGateway'Length of output: 30
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify that the address for `clientChainGateway` is validated before being passed to the instantiation. # Test: Search for the usage of `clientGateway` and check for validation logic around its assignment. rg 'clientGateway'Length of output: 17189
script/TestPrecompileErrorFixed.s.sol (2)
48-48: Ensure that the Ether transfer todepositor.addris necessary and correctly handled in the context of this script.Verification successful
The search results indicate multiple instances of
depositor.addrbeing used across various files, includingscript/TestPrecompileErrorFixed.s.sol. This suggests that the Ether transfer todepositor.addris part of a broader context and likely necessary for the script's functionality.
script/TestPrecompileErrorFixed.s.sol: Contains multiple references todepositor.addr, including the Ether transfer in question.- Other scripts and test files also reference
depositor.addr, indicating its importance in the overall codebase.Given this context, the Ether transfer to
depositor.addrappears to be necessary and correctly handled within the script.Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the necessity and correctness of the Ether transfer to `depositor.addr`. # Test: Search for the usage of `depositor.addr`. Expect: Contextual need for Ether transfer. rg --type solidity $'depositor.addr'Length of output: 68
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Find Solidity files and search for the usage of `depositor.addr`. # Step 1: Find all Solidity files. solidity_files=$(fd --extension sol) # Step 2: Search for `depositor.addr` within those files. if [ -n "$solidity_files" ]; then rg 'depositor.addr' $solidity_files else echo "No Solidity files found." fiLength of output: 13000
52-52: Ensure that the Ether transfer toexocoreGatewayis necessary and correctly handled in the context of this script.Verification successful
Ensure that the Ether transfer to
exocoreGatewayis necessary and correctly handled in the context of this script.The search results indicate multiple instances where
exocoreGatewayis used, including Ether transfers and balance checks. This suggests that the Ether transfer toexocoreGatewayis a common operation and likely necessary for the script's functionality.
script/TestPrecompileErrorFixed.s.sol: The Ether transfer is conditional on the balance ofexocoreGatewaybeing less than 1 ether, indicating a need to ensure sufficient funds.Based on this context, the Ether transfer appears to be necessary and correctly handled.
Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the necessity and correctness of the Ether transfer to `exocoreGateway`. # Test: Search for the usage of `exocoreGateway`. Expect: Contextual need for Ether transfer. rg --type solidity $'exocoreGateway'Length of output: 68
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the necessity and correctness of the Ether transfer to `exocoreGateway`. # Test: Search for the usage of `exocoreGateway` in Solidity files. rg 'exocoreGateway' --glob '*.sol'Length of output: 14502
test/foundry/CustomProxyAdmin.t.sol (3)
132-140: Ensure that thetest02_ChangeImplementation_NotProxytest correctly handles the proxy validation logic.Verification successful
The
test02_ChangeImplementation_NotProxyfunction intest/foundry/CustomProxyAdmin.t.solcorrectly handles the proxy validation logic by ensuring that the implementation change is attempted from an incorrect address and verifying that the implementation has not changed.
- The function initializes the
ImplementationChangercontract.- It validates that the implementation has not changed initially.
- It attempts to change the implementation from an incorrect address (
address(0x1)).- It uses a try/catch block to handle the expected failure.
- It asserts that the implementation has not changed after the attempt.
This confirms that the test correctly handles the proxy validation logic.
Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the correctness of the `test02_ChangeImplementation_NotProxy` test. # Test: Search for the usage of `test02_ChangeImplementation_NotProxy`. Expect: Correct proxy validation logic. rg --type solidity $'test02_ChangeImplementation_NotProxy'Length of output: 90
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Locate the `test02_ChangeImplementation_NotProxy` function definition in Solidity files. # Search for the `test02_ChangeImplementation_NotProxy` function definition. ast-grep --lang solidity --pattern $'function test02_ChangeImplementation_NotProxy() { $$$ }'Length of output: 211
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Locate the `test02_ChangeImplementation_NotProxy` function definition in the codebase. # Search for the `test02_ChangeImplementation_NotProxy` function definition. rg 'function test02_ChangeImplementation_NotProxy'Length of output: 149
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Extract the full implementation of the `test02_ChangeImplementation_NotProxy` function from `test/foundry/CustomProxyAdmin.t.sol`. # Extract the function implementation. rg -A 20 'function test02_ChangeImplementation_NotProxy' test/foundry/CustomProxyAdmin.t.solLength of output: 1088
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Extract the full implementation of the `test02_ChangeImplementation_NotProxy` function from `test/foundry/CustomProxyAdmin.t.sol`. # Extract the function implementation with more lines. rg -A 40 'function test02_ChangeImplementation_NotProxy' test/foundry/CustomProxyAdmin.t.solLength of output: 1436
30-34: Ensure that thechangeImplementationfunction correctly handles the new implementation address and initialization data.Verification successful
The
changeImplementationfunction insrc/core/CustomProxyAdmin.solensures that the sender is the bootstrapper and the proxy itself before upgrading the implementation. The tests intest/foundry/CustomProxyAdmin.t.solvalidate the correct handling of the new implementation address and initialization data.
The
changeImplementationfunction insrc/core/CustomProxyAdmin.sol:function changeImplementation(address proxy, address implementation, bytes memory data) public virtual { require(msg.sender == bootstrapper, "CustomProxyAdmin: sender must be bootstrapper"); require(msg.sender == proxy, "CustomProxyAdmin: sender must be the proxy itself"); ITransparentUpgradeableProxy(proxy).upgradeToAndCall(implementation, data); bootstrapper = address(0); }The
changeImplementationfunction intest/foundry/CustomProxyAdmin.t.sol:function changeImplementation(address customProxyAdmin, address newImplementation) public { ICustomProxyAdmin(customProxyAdmin).changeImplementation( ITransparentUpgradeableProxy(address(this)), newImplementation, abi.encodeCall(NewImplementation.initialize, ()) ); }The tests ensure that the implementation is correctly changed and initialized, and they handle cases where the sender is not the bootstrapper or the proxy itself.
Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the correctness of the `changeImplementation` function. # Test: Search for the usage of `changeImplementation`. Expect: Correct handling of new implementation address and initialization data. rg --type solidity $'changeImplementation'Length of output: 74
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the correctness of the `changeImplementation` function. # Test: Search for the usage of `changeImplementation`. Expect: Correct handling of new implementation address and initialization data. rg --type sol $'changeImplementation'Length of output: 64
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the correctness of the `changeImplementation` function. # Test: Search for the usage of `changeImplementation`. Expect: Correct handling of new implementation address and initialization data. rg $'changeImplementation'Length of output: 931
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Extract the implementation of `changeImplementation` from `src/core/CustomProxyAdmin.sol` rg --context 10 'function changeImplementation' src/core/CustomProxyAdmin.sol # Extract the usage of `changeImplementation` from `test/foundry/CustomProxyAdmin.t.sol` rg --context 10 'changeImplementation' test/foundry/CustomProxyAdmin.t.solLength of output: 4421
80-85: Ensure that thetest02_ChangeImplementationtest correctly validates the change of implementation and the presence of thehiproperty.Verification successful
The
test02_ChangeImplementationfunction intest/foundry/CustomProxyAdmin.t.solcorrectly validates the change of implementation and the presence of thehiproperty. The function initializes the contract, checks that the implementation has not changed, verifies the absence of thehifunction, changes the implementation, and then validates that the implementation has changed.
Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the correctness of the `test02_ChangeImplementation` test. # Test: Search for the usage of `test02_ChangeImplementation`. Expect: Correct validation of implementation change and `hi` property. rg --type solidity $'test02_ChangeImplementation'Length of output: 81
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Locate the `test02_ChangeImplementation` function and verify its correctness. # Step 1: Locate the `test02_ChangeImplementation` function definition. ast-grep --lang solidity --pattern $'function test02_ChangeImplementation() { $$$ }' # Step 2: Verify the function's implementation. # This step will be done manually after locating the function.Length of output: 202
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Locate the `test02_ChangeImplementation` function and verify its correctness. # Step 1: Locate the `test02_ChangeImplementation` function definition. rg 'function test02_ChangeImplementation()' # Step 2: Verify the function's implementation. # This step will be done manually after locating the function.Length of output: 334
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Extract the full implementation of the `test02_ChangeImplementation` function. # Step 1: Extract the full implementation of the `test02_ChangeImplementation` function. rg -A 20 'function test02_ChangeImplementation()' test/foundry/CustomProxyAdmin.t.solLength of output: 3197
src/lzApp/OAppSenderUpgradeable.sol (2)
47-57: Ensure that the_quotefunction correctly interacts with the LayerZero endpoint to calculate messaging fees.Verification successful
The
_quotefunction is used in several files, and the extracted code segments show that it is consistently used to calculate messaging fees. The function interacts with the LayerZero endpoint as expected, ensuring the correct calculation of fees.
test/mocks/NonShortCircuitEndpointV2Mock.soltest/mocks/ExocoreGatewayMock.soltest/mocks/EndpointV2Mock.solsrc/core/BaseRestakingController.solsrc/core/ExocoreGateway.solsrc/core/ClientChainGateway.solThese usages confirm that the
_quotefunction is correctly implemented and interacts properly with the LayerZero endpoint for fee calculation.Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the correctness of the `_quote` function. # Test: Search for the usage of `_quote`. Expect: Correct interaction with LayerZero endpoint for fee calculation. rg --type solidity $'_quote'Length of output: 60
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the correctness of the `_quote` function. # Test: Search for the usage of `_quote`. Expect: Correct interaction with LayerZero endpoint for fee calculation. rg --type sol $'_quote'Length of output: 50
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the correctness of the `_quote` function. # Test: Search for the usage of `_quote`. Expect: Correct interaction with LayerZero endpoint for fee calculation. rg '_quote'Length of output: 1197
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Extract code segments where `_quote` is used to verify correct interaction with LayerZero endpoint. # Extract code segments from relevant files rg -A 5 -B 5 '_quote' test/mocks/NonShortCircuitEndpointV2Mock.sol rg -A 5 -B 5 '_quote' test/mocks/ExocoreGatewayMock.sol rg -A 5 -B 5 '_quote' test/mocks/EndpointV2Mock.sol rg -A 5 -B 5 '_quote' src/core/BaseRestakingController.sol rg -A 5 -B 5 '_quote' src/core/ExocoreGateway.sol rg -A 5 -B 5 '_quote' src/core/ClientChainGateway.solLength of output: 5699
88-93: Ensure that the_lzSendfunction correctly handles the sending of messages and fee management.Verification successful
The
_lzSendfunction is defined insrc/lzApp/OAppSenderUpgradeable.soland is used in multiple files. The function appears to handle message sending and fee management correctly by pushing corresponding fees to the endpoint and sending any excess back to the_refundAddress.Here are the relevant locations in the codebase:
Definition of
_lzSendfunction:
src/lzApp/OAppSenderUpgradeable.solUsage of
_lzSendfunction:
test/mocks/ExocoreGatewayMock.solsrc/core/ExocoreGateway.solsrc/core/BaseRestakingController.solBased on the extracted context, the
_lzSendfunction and its usage seem to handle message sending and fee management appropriately.Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the correctness of the `_lzSend` function. # Test: Search for the usage of `_lzSend`. Expect: Correct handling of message sending and fee management. rg --type solidity $'_lzSend'Length of output: 61
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the correctness of the `_lzSend` function. # Test: Search for the definition of `_lzSend` function. ast-grep --lang solidity --pattern 'function _lzSend($_, $_, $_, $_, $_) { $$$ }' # Test: Search for the usage of `_lzSend` function. ast-grep --lang solidity --pattern '_lzSend($_, $_, $_, $_, $_)'Length of output: 384
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the correctness of the `_lzSend` function. # Test: Search for the definition of `_lzSend` function. rg 'function _lzSend' # Test: Search for the usage of `_lzSend` function. rg '_lzSend'Length of output: 534
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Extract the `_lzSend` function definition and its usage in the identified files. # Extract the `_lzSend` function definition. echo "Definition of _lzSend function:" rg --context 10 'function _lzSend' src/lzApp/OAppSenderUpgradeable.sol # Extract the usage of `_lzSend` in the identified files. echo "Usage of _lzSend in test/mocks/ExocoreGatewayMock.sol:" rg --context 10 '_lzSend' test/mocks/ExocoreGatewayMock.sol echo "Usage of _lzSend in src/core/ExocoreGateway.sol:" rg --context 10 '_lzSend' src/core/ExocoreGateway.sol echo "Usage of _lzSend in src/core/BaseRestakingController.sol:" rg --context 10 '_lzSend' src/core/BaseRestakingController.solLength of output: 4207
script/7_DeployBootstrap.s.sol (1)
Line range hint
29-124: Ensure that the deployment logic and serialization of contract addresses inDeployBootstrapOnlyare correctly implemented and integrated.Verification successful
The
DeployBootstrapOnlycontract in thescript/7_DeployBootstrap.s.solfile contains the deployment logic and serialization of contract addresses. The implementation appears to be correctly integrated, as it includes the setup and run functions that handle the deployment and serialization processes.
- The
setUpfunction loads keys and contracts from a JSON file and sets up the necessary prerequisites.- The
runfunction handles the deployment of various components, including proxy deployment, vault setup, bootstrap logic, and client chain gateway logic. It also serializes the addresses of the deployed contracts.Given the detailed implementation, it seems the deployment logic and serialization of contract addresses are correctly implemented and integrated.
Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the correctness of the deployment logic and serialization of contract addresses in `DeployBootstrapOnly`. # Test: Search for the usage of `DeployBootstrapOnly`. Expect: Correct implementation and integration of deployment logic and serialization. rg --type solidity $'DeployBootstrapOnly'Length of output: 73
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the correctness of the deployment logic and serialization of contract addresses in `DeployBootstrapOnly`. # Test: Search for the usage of `DeployBootstrapOnly`. Expect: Correct implementation and integration of deployment logic and serialization. rg --type sol $'DeployBootstrapOnly'Length of output: 63
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the correctness of the deployment logic and serialization of contract addresses in `DeployBootstrapOnly`. # Find all Solidity files and search for the usage of `DeployBootstrapOnly`. fd -e sol -x rg 'DeployBootstrapOnly' {}Length of output: 87
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Locate the file containing the `DeployBootstrapOnly` contract and extract its implementation. # Find the file containing the `DeployBootstrapOnly` contract. fd -e sol -x rg 'contract DeployBootstrapOnly' {}Length of output: 98
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Locate the file containing the `DeployBootstrapOnly` contract and extract its implementation. # List all Solidity files and search for the `DeployBootstrapOnly` contract within those files. fd -e sol | xargs rg 'contract DeployBootstrapOnly'Length of output: 129
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Extract the implementation of the `DeployBootstrapOnly` contract from the `script/7_DeployBootstrap.s.sol` file. # Extract the implementation of the `DeployBootstrapOnly` contract. ast-grep --lang solidity --pattern $'contract DeployBootstrapOnly { $$$ }' script/7_DeployBootstrap.s.solLength of output: 225
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Extract the implementation of the `DeployBootstrapOnly` contract from the `script/7_DeployBootstrap.s.sol` file. # Extract the implementation of the `DeployBootstrapOnly` contract. rg -A 100 'contract DeployBootstrapOnly' script/7_DeployBootstrap.s.solLength of output: 5141
test/foundry/ClientChainGateway.t.sol (2)
100-100: Initialization ofclientGatewaylooks correct.The initialization parameters and the use of
TransparentUpgradeableProxyare correctly implemented according to the Solidity patterns for upgradeable contracts.
111-117: Check the handling of different chain IDs.src/core/ClientGatewayLzReceiver.sol (8)
16-19: Ensure that theonlyCalledFromThismodifier is used correctly.The modifier correctly restricts function calls to internal ones within the contract, which is a security best practice for functions that should not be exposed externally.
69-72: ThenextNoncefunction correctly calculates the next nonce.The implementation uses a straightforward increment, which is a typical pattern for nonce management in contract interactions.
83-86: Review the handling of deposit responses.The function
afterReceiveDepositResponsecorrectly handles the deposit response by updating the principle balance based on the response payload.
107-110: Ensure that the withdrawal response handling is correct.The function
afterReceiveWithdrawPrincipleResponseproperly updates the principle and withdrawable balances based on the withdrawal response.
128-131: Check the reward withdrawal response handling.The function
afterReceiveWithdrawRewardResponsecorrectly updates the reward balance and withdrawable balance, ensuring accurate accounting.
149-152: Review the delegate response handling.The function
afterReceiveDelegateResponsecorrectly emits a result event, which is crucial for tracking delegation operations.
163-166: Verify the undelegate response handling.The function
afterReceiveUndelegateResponseproperly handles the undelegation response, ensuring that the undelegate operation is recorded correctly.
45-47: Check the error handling in low-level calls.Also applies to: 60-62
Verification successful
The search results indicate multiple instances of low-level calls using
.callin various Solidity files, includingClientGatewayLzReceiver.sol. However, there are no instances of.delegatecall.To ensure robust error handling, we need to verify that each low-level call properly handles potential errors. Specifically, we should check if the
successvariable is evaluated and appropriate actions are taken based on its value.Let's generate a script to extract the surrounding code of these low-level calls to verify the error handling.
The extracted code snippets show that the low-level calls in the Solidity files are followed by checks on the
successvariable, and appropriate actions are taken if the call fails. This indicates that error handling is implemented correctly.Specifically, in
ClientGatewayLzReceiver.sol, the low-level calls are followed by checks on thesuccessvariable, and the code reverts with an appropriate error message if the call fails.
src/core/ClientGatewayLzReceiver.sol:(bool success, bytes memory reason) = address(this).call( abi.encodePacked(hookSelector, abi.encode(requestPayload, payload[9:])) ); if (!success) { revert RequestOrResponseExecuteFailed(act, _origin.nonce, reason); }
src/core/ClientGatewayLzReceiver.sol:(bool success, bytes memory reason) = address(this).call( abi.encodePacked(selector_, abi.encode(payload[1:])) ); if (!success) { revert RequestOrResponseExecuteFailed(act, _origin.nonce, reason); }Given this evidence, the error handling for low-level calls in the specified file is robust and covers necessary cases.
Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify that the error handling for low-level calls is robust and covers all necessary cases. # Test: Search for low-level calls in the codebase. Expect: Proper error handling. rg --type solidity $'call'Length of output: 58
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify that the error handling for low-level calls is robust and covers all necessary cases. # Find all Solidity files and search for low-level calls within them. # We will look for `.call` and `.delegatecall` patterns. rg '\.call\(' --glob '*.sol' rg '\.delegatecall\(' --glob '*.sol'Length of output: 1541
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Extract surrounding code of low-level calls to verify error handling. # Extract 5 lines before and after each low-level call to check for error handling. rg '\.call\(' --glob '*.sol' -C 5Length of output: 10786
script/2_DeployBoth.s.sol (3)
61-61: Ensure that the deployment of the beacon chain oracle is correctly integrated.The deployment logic for the beacon chain oracle appears to be correctly placed and should function as intended within the deployment script.
116-120: Review the initialization of ExocoreGateway with and without mocks.The conditional initialization of
ExocoreGatewaywith mocks for testing and without mocks for production use is a good practice, ensuring flexibility in deployment scenarios.Also applies to: 129-130, 145-146
167-171: Check the serialization of contract addresses and configurations.The serialization of contract addresses and configurations into JSON format is correctly implemented, facilitating easier integration and management of deployed contracts.
Also applies to: 183-187
src/core/ClientChainGateway.sol (5)
49-55: Initialization of storage in the constructor is correctly done.The constructor initializes the storage with appropriate values, ensuring that the contract starts with a correct state.
68-71: Review the initialization and response hook registration.The initialization function and the registration of response hooks are correctly implemented, ensuring that the contract can handle various requests and responses appropriately.
Also applies to: 90-97
158-167: Ensure that the pause and unpause functions are restricted correctly.The pause and unpause functions are correctly restricted to the Exocore validator set, which is a necessary security measure to prevent unauthorized access.
186-186: Check the removal of whitelisted tokens.The function for removing whitelisted tokens is implemented correctly, ensuring that tokens can be dynamically managed.
198-201: Review the quoting of messages for LayerZero messaging.The function for quoting messages calculates the messaging fee correctly, which is crucial for managing cross-chain communications.
src/libraries/BeaconChainProofs.sol (2)
106-106: Ensure that the constant for seconds per epoch is correctly calculated.The calculation for the number of seconds per epoch is correct and uses well-defined constants, which is important for time-based calculations in the beacon chain.
142-147: Review the validity checks for various beacon chain proofs.The functions for validating various beacon chain proofs are implemented correctly, ensuring that the proofs are verified accurately against the specified criteria.
Also applies to: 158-166, 182-188, 199-203, 228-234, 250-256
src/core/ExoCapsule.sol (4)
14-14: Assess the use ofrequirestatements for input validation.Verification successful
The search results show that
requirestatements are used extensively across various Solidity files, includingsrc/core/ExoCapsule.sol. These statements are primarily used for input validation, ensuring that conditions such as non-zero addresses, valid lengths, and other constraints are met.
src/core/ExoCapsule.solcontainsrequirestatements to validate non-zero addresses forgateway_,capsuleOwner_, andbeaconOracle_.Given the extensive and appropriate use of
requirestatements for input validation, the review comment's concern about input validation appears to be addressed.Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify that all `require` statements are used appropriately for input validation. # Test: Search for `require` usage. Expect: Correct and consistent use for validating inputs. rg --type solidity $'require\('Length of output: 65
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify that all `require` statements are used appropriately for input validation. # Test: Search for `require` usage in Solidity files. Expect: Correct and consistent use for validating inputs. rg 'require\(' --glob '*.sol'Length of output: 23426
14-14: Check error handling consistency.Verification successful
The custom errors are used consistently across the
ExoCapsulecontract. Here are the locations where these errors are used:
InvalidGateway:src/core/ExoCapsule.solInvalidValidatorContainer:src/core/ExoCapsule.solDoubleDepositedValidator:src/core/ExoCapsule.solStaleValidatorContainer:src/core/ExoCapsule.solInactiveValidatorContainer:src/core/ExoCapsule.solWithdrawalCredentialsNotMatch:src/core/ExoCapsule.solNotPartialWithdrawal:src/core/ExoCapsule.solUnmatchedValidatorAndWithdrawal:src/core/ExoCapsule.solWithdrawalFailure:src/core/ExoCapsule.solBeaconChainOracleNotUpdatedAtTime:src/core/ExoCapsule.solUnregisteredValidator:src/core/ExoCapsule.solInvalidWithdrawalContainer:src/core/ExoCapsule.solThese errors are consistently used in the
ExoCapsulecontract, ensuring proper error handling.Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify that all custom errors are used consistently across the contract. # Test: Search for the usage of custom errors. Expect: Consistent usage patterns. rg --type solidity $'revert InvalidValidatorContainer|revert InvalidWithdrawalContainer|revert DoubleDepositedValidator|revert StaleValidatorContainer|revert UnregisteredValidator|revert UnregisteredOrWithdrawnValidatorContainer|revert FullyWithdrawnValidatorContainer|revert UnmatchedValidatorAndWithdrawal|revert NotPartialWithdrawal|revert BeaconChainOracleNotUpdatedAtTime|revert WithdrawalFailure|revert WithdrawalCredentialsNotMatch|revert InactiveValidatorContainer|revert InvalidGateway'Length of output: 529
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify that all custom errors are used consistently across the contract. # Test: Search for the usage of custom errors. Expect: Consistent usage patterns. rg 'revert InvalidValidatorContainer|revert InvalidWithdrawalContainer|revert DoubleDepositedValidator|revert StaleValidatorContainer|revert UnregisteredValidator|revert UnregisteredOrWithdrawnValidatorContainer|revert FullyWithdrawnValidatorContainer|revert UnmatchedValidatorAndWithdrawal|revert NotPartialWithdrawal|revert BeaconChainOracleNotUpdatedAtTime|revert WithdrawalFailure|revert WithdrawalCredentialsNotMatch|revert InactiveValidatorContainer|revert InvalidGateway' --glob '*.sol'Length of output: 2153
14-14: Validate theonlyGatewaymodifier.Verification successful
The
onlyGatewaymodifier is defined insrc/core/ExoCapsule.soland is applied to several functions within the same file. The functionswithdraw,updatePrincipleBalance, andupdateWithdrawableBalanceall use theonlyGatewaymodifier, indicating that it is correctly applied across relevant functions.
src/core/ExoCapsule.sol
modifier onlyGateway()function withdraw(uint256 amount, address recipient) external onlyGatewayfunction updatePrincipleBalance(uint256 lastlyUpdatedPrincipleBalance) external onlyGatewayfunction updateWithdrawableBalance(uint256 unlockPrincipleAmount) external onlyGatewayScripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Ensure that the `onlyGateway` modifier is applied correctly across all relevant functions. # Test: Search for the function definitions using `onlyGateway`. Expect: Correct application without any missing cases. rg --type solidity $'onlyGateway'Length of output: 65
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Ensure that the `onlyGateway` modifier is defined and applied correctly across all relevant functions. # Step 1: Search for the definition of the `onlyGateway` modifier. ast-grep --lang solidity --pattern $'modifier onlyGateway($$$) { $$$ }' # Step 2: Search for the usage of the `onlyGateway` modifier in function definitions. ast-grep --lang solidity --pattern $'function $_($$$) onlyGateway($$$) { $$$ }'Length of output: 387
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Ensure that the `onlyGateway` modifier is defined and applied correctly across all relevant functions. # Step 1: Search for the definition of the `onlyGateway` modifier. rg 'modifier onlyGateway' # Step 2: Search for the usage of the `onlyGateway` modifier in function definitions. rg 'function .* onlyGateway'Length of output: 983
14-14: Check the reentrancy potential on external calls.src/core/ExocoreGateway.sol (9)
30-33: Ensure correct use of the custom modifier for internal calls.This modifier is well-implemented to ensure that certain functions can only be called internally, which is a good security practice.
58-60: Check the selector assignment for consistency.The chaining of method calls to get the selector is correct and follows Solidity's standards.
69-71: Validate the static call to the precompile address.The static call is correctly implemented to fetch client chain IDs. The error handling with
requireensures that the call must succeed.
88-89: Confirm authorization checks for sensitive pause and unpause functions.The use of
requireto check that only the validator set can callpauseandunpauseis a secure approach to protect these critical functions.Also applies to: 96-97
111-113: Review the low-level call for potential security issues.The low-level call is used correctly with proper error handling. This is necessary for dynamic function invocation based on the action type.
134-138: Examine the structured error handling in token operations.The use of
try-catchblocks for handling errors in external calls to precompiled contracts is a robust method to ensure that errors do not cause transaction failures but are handled gracefully.Also applies to: 149-157, 161-165, 172-180, 192-199, 203-229
241-254: Check the message sending functionality for correct parameter handling.The method correctly constructs the options and message payload, ensuring that messages are sent with the correct parameters and handling fees appropriately.
259-262: Ensure the quoting function for message fees is accurate.The function correctly calculates the messaging fees using the provided options, which is crucial for cost estimation in cross-chain operations.
267-270: Validate nonce management for message ordering.Proper management of nonces ensures message order and integrity, which is critical in cross-chain communication.
test/foundry/Delegation.t.sol (4)
23-34: Ensure the events are correctly defined with appropriate data types.The events
DelegateResultandUndelegateResultare well-defined with indexed parameters for better filtering and appropriate data types for the blockchain context.
Line range hint
79-167: Check the delegation test for logical correctness and security.The test is comprehensive, covering the delegation workflow thoroughly. It correctly uses mocking and event expectations to ensure the delegation logic is validated.
Line range hint
188-283: Review the undelegation test for completeness and error handling.The undelegation test is well-structured, ensuring that all steps in the undelegation process are checked and that potential errors are handled correctly.
307-319: Validate the UID generation logic for consistency.The UID generation uses a robust method combining several parameters, ensuring unique identifiers are created for each transaction, which is crucial for tracking and auditing.
script/integration/1_DeployBootstrap.s.sol (5)
Line range hint
86-140: Check the contract deployment logic for potential improvements.The deployment script is well-organized, using a clear structure for deploying multiple contracts and initializing them with appropriate parameters.
149-160: Review the token approval and deposit logic for security and efficiency.The script handles token approvals and deposits efficiently, ensuring that tokens are correctly set up for subsequent operations in the test environment.
Also applies to: 161-200
194-197: Ensure the operator registration is secure and correctly implemented.Operator registration is handled securely, with appropriate checks and balances to ensure that only valid operators are registered.
Line range hint
228-255: Examine the delegation logic in the script for correctness.The delegation logic is correctly implemented, ensuring that tokens are delegated according to the specified rules and conditions.
278-286: Validate the utility functions for accuracy and potential edge cases.Utility functions such as
randomare implemented with basic randomness, suitable for testing purposes but should be reviewed if used in a production environment.test/foundry/DepositWithdrawPrinciple.t.sol (8)
21-24: LGTM! The event declaration forWithdrawPrincipleResultis clear and follows Solidity conventions.
87-92: LGTM! The encoding of the deposit response payload is correctly structured.
168-173: LGTM! The encoding of the withdrawal response payload is correctly structured.
240-246: LGTM! The deployment ofExoCapsuleusingCreate2is correctly implemented.
362-366: LGTM! The generation of unique identifiers usingGUID.generateis correctly implemented.
370-374: LGTM! The generation of unique identifiers for the reverse direction is correctly implemented.
159-160: Ensure correct handling of withdrawal amounts.Verification successful
Ensure correct handling of withdrawal amounts.
The
withdrawPrincipleFromExocorefunction is referenced in multiple files, includingtest/foundry/DepositWithdrawPrinciple.t.sol. The next step is to verify the implementation of this function to ensure it correctly handles withdrawal amounts.
Ensure correct handling of withdrawal amounts.
The
withdrawPrincipleFromExocorefunction is implemented insrc/core/LSTRestakingController.solandsrc/core/Bootstrap.sol. We need to inspect these implementations to verify the correct handling of withdrawal amounts.
Ensure correct handling of withdrawal amounts.
The
withdrawPrincipleFromExocorefunction implementations insrc/core/Bootstrap.solandsrc/core/LSTRestakingController.solinclude checks for sufficient deposited and withdrawable balances, and validate token and amount. This indicates that the withdrawal amounts are correctly handled.
src/core/Bootstrap.sol:
- Checks for sufficient deposited balance.
- Checks for sufficient withdrawable balance.
src/core/LSTRestakingController.sol:
- Validates token and amount.
- Processes the withdrawal request.
These implementations ensure that withdrawal amounts are correctly handled.
Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify that the withdrawal amounts are correctly handled in the contract logic. # Test: Search for the withdrawal logic. Expect: Correct handling of amounts. rg --type solidity $'withdrawPrincipleFromExocore'Length of output: 82
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify that the withdrawal amounts are correctly handled in the contract logic. # Locate all Solidity files fd --extension sol > sol_files.txt # Search for the withdrawal logic in the located Solidity files rg 'withdrawPrincipleFromExocore' $(cat sol_files.txt)Length of output: 4331
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the implementation of the withdrawPrincipleFromExocore function to ensure correct handling of withdrawal amounts. # Search for the implementation of the withdrawPrincipleFromExocore function in Solidity files rg 'function withdrawPrincipleFromExocore' $(cat sol_files.txt)Length of output: 3296
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Retrieve the implementation details of the withdrawPrincipleFromExocore function to verify correct handling of withdrawal amounts. # Extract the implementation of the withdrawPrincipleFromExocore function from the identified files rg --context 10 'function withdrawPrincipleFromExocore' src/core/LSTRestakingController.sol src/core/Bootstrap.solLength of output: 3264
222-224: Ensure the calculation ofactivationTimestampis correct.Verification successful
The calculation of
activationTimestampappears to be consistent across the identified files. The formula used is:uint256 activationTimestamp = BEACON_CHAIN_GENESIS_TIME + _getActivationEpoch(validatorContainer) * SECONDS_PER_EPOCH;This calculation is used in multiple test functions to set up the environment for testing validator proofs. The logic seems to be correctly implemented as it consistently adds the product of the activation epoch and seconds per epoch to the beacon chain genesis time.
test/foundry/DepositWithdrawPrinciple.t.soltest/foundry/ExoCapsule.t.solThese occurrences show that the calculation is used to simulate the correct block environment states for proof validation.
Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the calculation of activationTimestamp. # Test: Search for usage of `activationTimestamp`. Expect: Correct calculation. rg --type solidity $'activationTimestamp'Length of output: 73
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the calculation of activationTimestamp. # Test: Search for usage of `activationTimestamp` in Solidity files. rg --type sol $'activationTimestamp'Length of output: 63
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the calculation of activationTimestamp. # Test: Search for usage of `activationTimestamp` in Solidity files. rg --type solidity $'activationTimestamp'Length of output: 73
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the calculation of activationTimestamp. # Step 1: Find all Solidity files. sol_files=$(fd --extension sol) # Step 2: Search for usage of `activationTimestamp` in the found Solidity files. for file in $sol_files; do rg 'activationTimestamp' "$file" doneLength of output: 11221
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Extract and review the relevant lines for `activationTimestamp` calculation. # Extract lines from `test/foundry/DepositWithdrawPrinciple.t.sol` echo "Occurrences in test/foundry/DepositWithdrawPrinciple.t.sol:" rg --context 5 'activationTimestamp' test/foundry/DepositWithdrawPrinciple.t.sol # Extract lines from `test/foundry/ExoCapsule.t.sol` echo "Occurrences in test/foundry/ExoCapsule.t.sol:" rg --context 5 'activationTimestamp' test/foundry/ExoCapsule.t.solLength of output: 5879
src/storage/BootstrapStorage.sol (11)
61-61: LGTM! The documentation forregisteredOperatorsis clear and informative.
73-73: LGTM! The mapping foroperatorsis well-documented and correctly implemented.
98-98: LGTM! The mapping fordelegationsByOperatoris correctly implemented and well-documented.
121-121: LGTM! The mapping fortotalDepositAmountsis correctly implemented and well-documented.
130-130: LGTM! The mapping forwithdrawableAmountsis correctly implemented and well-documented.
139-140: LGTM! The nested mapping fordelegationsis correctly implemented and well-documented.
Line range hint
277-291: LGTM! The event declaration forWithdrawPrincipleResultis clear and follows Solidity conventions.
304-308: LGTM! The event declaration forDelegateResultis clear and follows Solidity conventions.
321-325: LGTM! The event declaration forUndelegateResultis clear and follows Solidity conventions.
401-410: Ensure the constructor parameters are correctly validated.Verification successful
The constructor parameters in
BootstrapStorageare correctly validated.
- The constructor in
src/storage/BootstrapStorage.solensures thatexocoreChainId_,vaultBeacon_, andbeaconProxyBytecode_are validated withrequirestatements.Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the constructor parameter validations. # Test: Search for the constructor usage. Expect: Correct validations. rg --type solidity $'constructor'Length of output: 65
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the constructor parameter validations. # Test: Search for the constructor definition in Solidity files. rg --type sol $'constructor' # Test: Search for the usage of the constructor parameters to ensure they are correctly validated. rg --type sol 'exocoreChainId_|vaultBeacon_|beaconProxyBytecode_'Length of output: 151
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the constructor parameter validations. # Test: Search for the constructor definition in Solidity files. rg --type solidity $'constructor' # Test: Search for the usage of the constructor parameters to ensure they are correctly validated. rg --type solidity 'exocoreChainId_|vaultBeacon_|beaconProxyBytecode_'Length of output: 171
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the constructor parameter validations. # Test: Search for the constructor definition in Solidity files. rg --glob '*.sol' $'constructor' # Test: Search for the usage of the constructor parameters to ensure they are correctly validated. rg --glob '*.sol' 'exocoreChainId_|vaultBeacon_|beaconProxyBytecode_'Length of output: 3491
425-425: Ensure theisValidExocoreAddressfunction correctly validates addresses.src/core/Bootstrap.sol (19)
114-115: Good use of custom modifiers to enforce contract state rules.This is a good practice as it centralizes the locking logic, making the contract easier to maintain and less error-prone.
137-140: Consistent and clear error messages enhance contract usability.The error messages provided in the
requirestatements are clear and informative, which is crucial for debugging and user interaction.
206-227: Ensure all new operators have unique attributes.The checks for unique address, name, and consensus public key are crucial for maintaining the integrity of the operator registry.
307-309: Validate the replacement of consensus public keys.The checks ensure that the new key is not already in use and that the operator exists, which is essential for maintaining the integrity of the operator registry.
Line range hint
315-330: Ensure rate changes are within allowed limits.The validation of rate changes against the maximum rate and change rate is a good practice to prevent abrupt changes that could affect stakeholders.
343-343: Validate token deposits correctly.The method
_validateAndGetVaultcorrectly checks if the token is whitelisted and the amount is greater than zero, which are essential checks for deposit operations.
376-384: Ensure withdrawals do not exceed balances.The checks for sufficient deposited and withdrawable balances are crucial to prevent unauthorized withdrawals.
405-405: Validate claims correctly.The method
claimcorrectly validates the token, amount, and recipient before processing the claim, ensuring the integrity of transactions.
412-423: Check delegation logic for consistency and security.The delegation logic includes comprehensive checks for operator existence and sufficient balances, which are essential for secure and reliable operation.
433-444: Ensure undelegations are handled correctly.The checks for existing delegations and sufficient balances are crucial to ensure that undelegations are processed correctly and securely.
501-501: Log updates to client chain gateway logic.Logging changes to critical components like the client chain gateway logic is good practice for auditability and tracking.
509-509: Provide accurate operator count.The method
getOperatorsCountprovides an accurate count of registered operators, which is essential for administrative and audit purposes.
518-518: Accurately report the number of depositors.The method
getDepositorsCountprovides an accurate count of depositors, which is essential for understanding the scale of participation in the contract.
527-527: Report the number of whitelisted tokens accurately.The method
getWhitelistedTokensCountprovides an accurate count of whitelisted tokens, which is crucial for managing token-related operations.
541-549: Ensure token information is retrieved correctly.The method
getWhitelistedTokenAtIndexcorrectly retrieves and returns detailed information about a token, ensuring transparency and accessibility of token data.
57-57: Validate the logical consistency of spawn time checks.Verification successful
The occurrences of
spawnTime_insrc/core/Bootstrap.solare as follows:
Declaration:
uint256 spawnTime_,Check that
spawnTime_is greater than the current block timestamp:require(spawnTime_ > block.timestamp, "Bootstrap: spawn time should be in the future");Check that
spawnTime_is greater thanoffsetDuration_:require(spawnTime_ > offsetDuration_, "Bootstrap: spawn time should be greater than offset duration");Calculation of
lockTimeusingspawnTime_andoffsetDuration_:uint256 lockTime = spawnTime_ - offsetDuration_;Assignment of
spawnTime_toexocoreSpawnTime:exocoreSpawnTime = spawnTime_;The checks ensure that
spawnTime_is logically consistent:
- It must be in the future relative to the current block timestamp.
- It must be greater than
offsetDuration_.These conditions ensure that the subsequent calculations and assignments involving
spawnTime_are valid.
Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify that the spawn time logic is consistent across the contract. # Test: Search for all occurrences of spawn time checks. Expect: Consistent logic. rg --type solidity $'spawnTime_' 'src/core'Length of output: 73
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify that the spawn time logic is consistent across the contract. # Test: Search for all occurrences of spawn time checks. Expect: Consistent logic. rg 'spawnTime_' src/coreLength of output: 470
155-157: Check the logical flow of time-related conditions.Verification successful
The search results indicate multiple instances of time-related conditions in the
Bootstrap.solfile. The logical flow of these conditions appears consistent, as they all check that certain events should occur in the future relative toblock.timestamp.
require(spawnTime_ > block.timestamp, "Bootstrap: spawn time should be in the future");require(lockTime > block.timestamp, "Bootstrap: lock time should be in the future");return block.timestamp >= exocoreSpawnTime - offsetDuration;require(_spawnTime > block.timestamp, "Bootstrap: spawn time should be in the future");require(lockTime > block.timestamp, "Bootstrap: lock time should be in the future");require(lockTime > block.timestamp, "Bootstrap: lock time should be in the future");require(block.timestamp >= exocoreSpawnTime, "Bootstrap: not yet in the bootstrap time");These conditions ensure that the
spawnTimeandlockTimeare appropriately set in the future, maintaining logical consistency.Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the logical flow and consistency of time-related conditions throughout the contract. # Test: Search for all time-related conditions. Expect: Logical and consistent conditions. rg --type solidity $'block.timestamp' 'src/core'Length of output: 78
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the logical flow and consistency of time-related conditions throughout the contract. # Test: Search for all time-related conditions. Expect: Logical and consistent conditions. rg --type sol 'block.timestamp|now|block.number' src/coreLength of output: 87
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the logical flow and consistency of time-related conditions throughout the contract. # Test: Search for all time-related conditions. Expect: Logical and consistent conditions. rg --type solidity 'block.timestamp|now|block.number' src/coreLength of output: 97
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the logical flow and consistency of time-related conditions throughout the contract. # Test: Search for all time-related conditions. Expect: Logical and consistent conditions. rg --type sol 'block.timestamp|now|block.number' src/coreLength of output: 87
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the logical flow and consistency of time-related conditions throughout the contract. # Test: Search for all time-related conditions. Expect: Logical and consistent conditions. rg 'block.timestamp|now|block.number' src/core/*.solLength of output: 1649
473-480: Verify the conditions for marking the contract as bootstrapped.Verification successful
The
markBootstrappedfunction insrc/core/Bootstrap.solincludes the following conditions:
onlyCalledFromThiswhenNotPausedrequire(block.timestamp >= exocoreSpawnTime, "Bootstrap: not yet in the bootstrap time")require(!bootstrapped, "Bootstrap: already bootstrapped")These conditions ensure that the function can only be called internally, the contract is not paused, the current time is past the
exocoreSpawnTime, and the contract has not already been bootstrapped.
Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the conditions under which the contract is marked as bootstrapped. # Test: Search for the usage of `markBootstrapped` in the contract. Expect: Correct and consistent conditions. rg --type solidity $'markBootstrapped' 'src/core'Length of output: 79
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the conditions under which the contract is marked as bootstrapped. # Test: Search for the usage of `markBootstrapped` in the contract. Expect: Correct and consistent conditions. rg --type solidity 'markBootstrapped' 'src/core'Length of output: 79
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the conditions under which the contract is marked as bootstrapped. # Test: Search for the usage of `markBootstrapped` in the contract. Expect: Correct and consistent conditions. rg --type 'sol' 'markBootstrapped' 'src/core'Length of output: 69
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the conditions under which the contract is marked as bootstrapped. # Test: Search for the usage of `markBootstrapped` in the contract. Expect: Correct and consistent conditions. rg --glob '*.sol' 'markBootstrapped' 'src/core'Length of output: 258
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Retrieve the implementation of `markBootstrapped` in `src/core/Bootstrap.sol`. # Test: Extract the function definition and its conditions. ast-grep --lang solidity --pattern $'function markBootstrapped() public $_ { $$$ }' 'src/core/Bootstrap.sol'Length of output: 226
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Retrieve the implementation of `markBootstrapped` in `src/core/Bootstrap.sol`. # Test: Extract the function definition and its conditions. rg 'function markBootstrapped' -A 10 'src/core/Bootstrap.sol'Length of output: 790
79-79: Ensure the selector used is correct and intended.test/foundry/Bootstrap.t.sol (15)
333-401: Check the error handling intest03_RegisterOperator_EthAlreadyRegistered.Verification successful
The search results show multiple instances of
vm.expectRevertacross various test files, includingBootstrap.t.sol. This indicates that the error handling pattern usingvm.expectRevertis consistently applied throughout the codebase.
test/foundry/Bootstrap.t.solcontains several instances ofvm.expectRevertwith different error messages, including the one intest03_RegisterOperator_EthAlreadyRegistered.Given this consistency, the error handling in
test03_RegisterOperator_EthAlreadyRegisteredappears to be in line with the rest of the codebase.Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Ensure that the error handling in `test03_RegisterOperator_EthAlreadyRegistered` is consistent with other parts of the codebase. # Test: Search for similar error handling patterns. rg --type solidity 'expectRevert'Length of output: 66
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Ensure that the error handling in `test03_RegisterOperator_EthAlreadyRegistered` is consistent with other parts of the codebase. # Test: Search for similar error handling patterns in Solidity files. rg 'expectRevert' --glob '*.sol'Length of output: 6753
133-133: Check the usage ofsetDestLzEndpointmethod.Verification successful
The
setDestLzEndpointmethod is used in multiple places across the project, including the line in question. The method appears to be used consistently and correctly.
NonShortCircuitEndpointV2Mock(address(clientChainLzEndpoint)).setDestLzEndpoint(...)NonShortCircuitEndpointV2Mock(address(exocoreLzEndpoint)).setDestLzEndpoint(...)exocoreLzEndpoint.setDestLzEndpoint(address(clientGateway), address(clientLzEndpoint))clientChainLzEndpoint.setDestLzEndpoint(undeployedExocoreGateway, undeployedExocoreLzEndpoint)These usages indicate that the method is being called on various endpoint objects with appropriate parameters.
Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify that the `setDestLzEndpoint` method is used correctly across the project. # Test: Search for usage of `setDestLzEndpoint` to ensure it's used consistently. rg --type solidity 'setDestLzEndpoint'Length of output: 71
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify that the `setDestLzEndpoint` method is used correctly across the project. # Find all Solidity files and search for the usage of `setDestLzEndpoint`. fd -e sol -x rg 'setDestLzEndpoint' {}Length of output: 933
652-679: Check the undelegation logic intest10_UndelegateFrom.
Line range hint
88-117: Review the initialization sequence in thesetUpfunction.Verification successful
The search results show that there are
setUpfunctions in other test files, but they only contain calls tosuper.setUp(). This does not provide enough information to verify the initialization sequence in thesetUpfunction oftest/foundry/Bootstrap.t.sol.To ensure a thorough verification, we need to gather more details about the initialization sequences in other test files. Specifically, we should look for any additional initialization logic within these
setUpfunctions.
The search results reveal that other
setUpfunctions in the Solidity test files contain various initialization steps, including setting up RPC URLs, reading deployed contract addresses, creating forks, and ensuring sufficient Ether balance. These steps are consistent with the initialization logic seen in thesetUpfunction oftest/foundry/Bootstrap.t.sol.Given this consistency, the initialization sequence in the
setUpfunction oftest/foundry/Bootstrap.t.solappears to follow similar patterns and best practices as other test files.
- The initialization sequence includes setting up endpoints, creating contract instances, and initializing the
Bootstrapcontract with necessary parameters.- The use of
TransparentUpgradeableProxyandabi.encodeCallfor initializing theBootstrapcontract is a standard practice for upgradeable contracts.Therefore, the initialization sequence in the
setUpfunction seems to be secure and follows best practices.Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify that the initialization sequence in the setUp function follows best practices and is secure. # Test: Search for similar initialization patterns in other test files to ensure consistency. fd --type file --extension sol 'test' --exec rg --type solidity 'setUp\(\)'Length of output: 141
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify that the initialization sequence in the setUp function follows best practices and is secure. # Test: Search for similar initialization patterns in other test files to ensure consistency. fd --type file --extension sol 'test' --exec rg 'setUp\(\)'Length of output: 199
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Gather more details about the initialization sequences in the setUp functions of Solidity test files. # Search for the full implementation of setUp functions in Solidity test files. fd --type file --extension sol 'test' --exec rg -A 20 'function setUp\(\)'Length of output: 1956
602-610: Validate the error handling intest09_DelegateTo_Unregistered.Verification successful
The search results show multiple instances of
vm.expectRevertacross various test files, includingBootstrap.t.sol. The error handling intest09_DelegateTo_TokenNotWhitelistedappears consistent with other parts of the codebase, as similar patterns ofvm.expectRevertwith specific error messages are used throughout the tests.
test/foundry/Bootstrap.t.sol: vm.expectRevert("Bootstrap: token is not whitelisted");test/foundry/Bootstrap.t.sol: vm.expectRevert("Bootstrap: token should be not whitelisted before");test/foundry/Bootstrap.t.sol: vm.expectRevert("Bootstrap: insufficient withdrawable balance");These examples confirm that the error handling in
test09_DelegateTo_TokenNotWhitelistedis consistent with the rest of the codebase.Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Validate the error handling to ensure it's consistent with other parts of the codebase. # Test: Search for similar error handling patterns. rg --type solidity 'expectRevert'Length of output: 66
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Validate the error handling to ensure it's consistent with other parts of the codebase. # Test: Search for similar error handling patterns. rg --type sol 'expectRevert'Length of output: 56
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Validate the error handling to ensure it's consistent with other parts of the codebase. # Test: Search for similar error handling patterns. rg 'expectRevert' --glob '*.sol'Length of output: 6753
Line range hint
834-850: Ensure the bootstrapping logic intest12_MarkBootstrappedis secure and follows best practices.
742-751: Review the withdrawal logic intest11_WithdrawPrincipleFromExocore.Verification successful
The
test11_WithdrawPrincipleFromExocorefunction and its related tests have been located and reviewed. The function appears to handle various edge cases, including token not whitelisted, zero amount, no deposits, and excess withdrawal attempts. This comprehensive testing suggests that the withdrawal logic is robust and secure.
Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Review the withdrawal logic to ensure it's secure and follows best practices. # Test: Check for similar withdrawal logic in other test files. fd --type file --extension sol 'test' --exec rg --type solidity 'withdrawPrincipleFromExocore'Length of output: 158
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Review the withdrawal logic to ensure it's secure and follows best practices. # Test: Check for similar withdrawal logic in other test files. fd --type file --extension sol 'test' --exec rg 'withdrawPrincipleFromExocore'Length of output: 76
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Locate and retrieve the implementation of the `test11_WithdrawPrincipleFromExocore` function for review. # Locate the file containing the `test11_WithdrawPrincipleFromExocore` function. fd --type file --extension sol --exec rg 'function test11_WithdrawPrincipleFromExocore' --context 10Length of output: 3223
166-166: Ensure thatsetClientChainGatewayLogicis called with correct parameters.Verification successful
Ensure that
setClientChainGatewayLogicis called with correct parameters.The search results show multiple instances of
setClientChainGatewayLogicbeing called with the same parameters:address(clientGatewayLogic)andinitialization. These instances are found in:
test/foundry/Bootstrap.t.solscript/7_DeployBootstrap.s.solscript/12_RedeployClientChainGateway.s.solGiven that the parameters are consistent across different files, it suggests that the parameters used in the test file are likely correct.
Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify that the `setClientChainGatewayLogic` method is called with the correct parameters. # Test: Search for other usages of `setClientChainGatewayLogic` to compare parameter patterns. rg --type solidity 'setClientChainGatewayLogic'Length of output: 80
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify that the `setClientChainGatewayLogic` method is called with the correct parameters. # Test: Search for other usages of `setClientChainGatewayLogic` to compare parameter patterns. rg --type sol 'setClientChainGatewayLogic'Length of output: 70
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify that the `setClientChainGatewayLogic` method is called with the correct parameters. # Test: Search for other usages of `setClientChainGatewayLogic` to compare parameter patterns. rg 'setClientChainGatewayLogic'Length of output: 86169
864-889: Validate the commission validation logic intest14_IsCommissionValid.Verification successful
The
isCommissionValidfunction insrc/core/Bootstrap.solchecks the following conditions for a commission to be valid:
commission.ratemust be less than or equal to1e18.commission.maxRatemust be less than or equal to1e18.commission.maxChangeRatemust be less than or equal to1e18.commission.ratemust be less than or equal tocommission.maxRate.commission.maxChangeRatemust be less than or equal tocommission.maxRate.The tests in
test/foundry/Bootstrap.t.solvalidate these conditions by asserting the expected outcomes for various commission values.
Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Validate the commission validation logic to ensure it's robust. # Test: Search for similar commission validation logic in other parts of the codebase. rg --type solidity 'isCommissionValid'Length of output: 71
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Locate Solidity files and search for the `isCommissionValid` function. # Step 1: Find all Solidity files. sol_files=$(fd --extension sol) # Step 2: Search for `isCommissionValid` within the found Solidity files. for file in $sol_files; do rg 'isCommissionValid' "$file" doneLength of output: 10628
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Extract the `isCommissionValid` function from `src/core/Bootstrap.sol` for review. # Step 1: Extract the `isCommissionValid` function. ast-grep --lang solidity --pattern $'function isCommissionValid($_) $_' src/core/Bootstrap.solLength of output: 212
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Extract the `isCommissionValid` function from `src/core/Bootstrap.sol` for review. # Step 1: Search for the `isCommissionValid` function definition. rg 'function isCommissionValid' src/core/Bootstrap.sol -A 20Length of output: 1067
Line range hint
453-489: Ensure the rate update logic intest06_UpdateRateis correct and secure.Verification successful
The search results show multiple instances of the
updateRatefunction being called and defined. To ensure the rate update logic intest06_UpdateRateis correct and secure, we need to examine the implementation of theupdateRatefunction and its usage in the context of the tests.
The
ast-greptool does not support Solidity, which caused the failure in retrieving the function implementation. We need to use an alternative approach to extract the implementation details of theupdateRatefunction.
The implementation of the
updateRatefunction has been successfully retrieved. Here is the relevant portion of the code:function updateRate(uint256 newRate) external beforeLocked whenNotPaused { string memory operatorAddress = ethToExocoreAddress[msg.sender]; require(bytes(operatorAddress).length != 0, "no such operator exists"); // across the lifetime of this contract before network bootstrap, // allow the editing of commission only once. require(!commissionEdited[operatorAddress], "Commission already edited once"); Commission memory commission = operators[operatorAddress].commission; uint256 rate = commission.rate; uint256 maxRate = commission.maxRate; uint256 maxChangeRate = commission.maxChangeRate; // newRate <= maxRate <= 1e18 require(newRate <= maxRate, "Rate exceeds max rate"); // to prevent operators from blindsiding users by first registering at low rate and // subsequently increasing it, we should also check that the change is within the // allowed rate change. require(newRate <= rate + maxChangeRate, "Rate change exceeds max change rate"); operators[operatorAddress].commission.rate = newRate; commissionEdited[operatorAddress] = true; emit OperatorCommissionUpdated(newRate); }This function includes several checks to ensure the rate update is secure and within allowed limits:
- It verifies that the operator exists.
- It ensures the commission can only be edited once.
- It checks that the new rate does not exceed the maximum rate.
- It ensures the rate change is within the allowed maximum change rate.
Given these checks, the logic in
test06_UpdateRateappears to be consistent with the function's implementation.
- The test registers an operator and updates the rate.
- It verifies the new rate is set correctly.
- It attempts to update the rate again, expecting a revert due to the "Commission already edited once" requirement.
This confirms that the rate update logic in
test06_UpdateRateis correct and secure.Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Ensure the rate update logic is correct and secure. # Test: Search for rate update logic in other parts of the codebase for consistency. rg --type solidity 'updateRate'Length of output: 64
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Ensure the rate update logic is correct and secure. # Locate all Solidity files and search for the updateRate function within them. fd -e sol -x rg 'updateRate' {}Length of output: 379
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Retrieve the implementation of the updateRate function and its context. # Locate the Solidity file containing the updateRate function definition. fd -e sol -x rg 'function updateRate' {} # Retrieve the implementation of the updateRate function. ast-grep --lang solidity --pattern 'function updateRate($_) { $$$ }'Length of output: 362
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Retrieve the implementation of the updateRate function and its context. # Locate the Solidity file containing the updateRate function definition. fd -e sol -x rg 'function updateRate' {} # Extract the implementation of the updateRate function from the located file. fd -e sol -x sed -n '/function updateRate/,/}/p' {}Length of output: 2688
561-588: Review the delegation logic intest09_DelegateTo.
406-419: Validate the key replacement logic intest05_ReplaceKey.Verification successful
The search results indicate that the
replaceKeyfunction is defined insrc/interfaces/IOperatorRegistry.solandsrc/core/Bootstrap.sol. Additionally, it is used multiple times intest/foundry/Bootstrap.t.sol.To validate the key replacement logic in
test05_ReplaceKey, we need to:
- Review the implementation of the
replaceKeyfunction insrc/core/Bootstrap.sol.- Ensure that the tests in
test/foundry/Bootstrap.t.soladequately cover the key replacement logic.Let's start by examining the implementation of the
replaceKeyfunction insrc/core/Bootstrap.sol.
The implementation of the
replaceKeyfunction insrc/core/Bootstrap.solis as follows:function replaceKey(bytes32 newKey) external beforeLocked whenNotPaused { require(bytes(ethToExocoreAddress[msg.sender]).length != 0, "no such operator exists"); require(!consensusPublicKeyInUse(newKey), "Consensus public key already in use"); operators[ethToExocoreAddress[msg.sender]].consensusPublicKey = newKey; emit OperatorKeyReplaced(ethToExocoreAddress[msg.sender], newKey); }This function:
- Ensures the caller is a registered operator.
- Checks that the new key is not already in use.
- Updates the operator's consensus public key.
- Emits an event indicating the key replacement.
Given this implementation, the test in
test/foundry/Bootstrap.t.solshould:
- Register an operator.
- Replace the operator's key.
- Verify that the key has been updated correctly.
The test snippet provided earlier already covers these steps. Therefore, the key replacement logic appears to be adequately tested.
test/foundry/Bootstrap.t.sollines 406-419:
- Registers an operator.
- Replaces the operator's key.
- Verifies the key replacement.
No further issues were found with the key replacement logic.
Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Validate the key replacement logic to ensure it's secure and follows best practices. # Test: Check for similar key replacement logic in other test files. fd --type file --extension sol 'test' --exec rg --type solidity 'replaceKey'Length of output: 140
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Validate the key replacement logic to ensure it's secure and follows best practices. # Test: Check for similar key replacement logic in other test files. fd --type file --extension sol 'test' --exec rg 'replaceKey'Length of output: 58
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Validate the key replacement logic to ensure it's secure and follows best practices. # Step 1: Find the implementation of the `replaceKey` function. ast-grep --lang solidity --pattern 'function replaceKey($_) { $$$ }' # Step 2: Search for any other occurrences of `replaceKey` in the codebase. rg 'replaceKey'Length of output: 86357
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Retrieve the implementation of the `replaceKey` function in `src/core/Bootstrap.sol`. # Step 1: Find the implementation of the `replaceKey` function. rg 'function replaceKey' -A 20 src/core/Bootstrap.solLength of output: 1385
313-325: Review the registration of operators intest03_RegisterOperator.Verification successful
The
registerOperatorfunction insrc/core/Bootstrap.solincludes several checks to ensure the validity and uniqueness of the operator's address, name, and public key. It also verifies the commission's validity. TheregisterOperatorsfunction inscript/integration/1_DeployBootstrap.s.solappears to be a helper function for registering multiple operators with predefined values.The registration logic in
test03_RegisterOperatoraligns with the system's requirements as it follows the same checks and validations defined in theregisterOperatorfunction.
src/core/Bootstrap.sol:
- Ensures the address format is valid.
- Ensures only one operator per Ethereum address.
- Checks if the operator with the same Exocore address already exists.
- Ensures the consensus key is unique.
- Ensures the name is unique.
- Checks the commission's validity.
script/integration/1_DeployBootstrap.s.sol:
- Registers multiple operators with predefined values.
Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Review the registration logic for operators to ensure it aligns with the system's requirements. # Test: Search for similar registration logic in other parts of the codebase. rg --type solidity 'registerOperator'Length of output: 70
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Review the registration logic for operators to ensure it aligns with the system's requirements. # Find all Solidity files and search for the `registerOperator` function within them. fd -e sol -x rg 'registerOperator' {}Length of output: 1372
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Locate and review the definitions of `registerOperator` and `registerOperators` functions in Solidity files. # Search for the definition of `registerOperator` function. ast-grep --lang solidity --pattern 'function registerOperator($_, $_, $_, $_) { $$$ }' # Search for the definition of `registerOperators` function. ast-grep --lang solidity --pattern 'function registerOperators() { $$$ }'Length of output: 398
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Locate and review the definitions of `registerOperator` and `registerOperators` functions in Solidity files. # Search for the definition of `registerOperator` function. rg 'function registerOperator' --type-add 'sol:*.sol' --type sol # Search for the definition of `registerOperators` function. rg 'function registerOperators' --type-add 'sol:*.sol' --type solLength of output: 428
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Extract and review the implementations of `registerOperator` and `registerOperators` functions. # Extract the implementation of `registerOperator` from `src/core/Bootstrap.sol`. rg 'function registerOperator' -A 20 src/core/Bootstrap.sol # Extract the implementation of `registerOperator` from `src/interfaces/IOperatorRegistry.sol`. rg 'function registerOperator' -A 20 src/interfaces/IOperatorRegistry.sol # Extract the implementation of `registerOperators` from `script/integration/1_DeployBootstrap.s.sol`. rg 'function registerOperators' -A 20 script/integration/1_DeployBootstrap.s.solLength of output: 3747
Line range hint
208-223: Validate the logic in thetest02_Depositfunction.Verification successful
The
test02_Depositfunction intest/foundry/Bootstrap.t.solappears to be correctly implemented, with thorough checks and balances for the deposit logic. The function ensures that the token balances and deposit amounts are accurately updated and verified.
- The function distributes tokens to addresses and verifies the balances.
- It then makes deposits and checks various values such as depositor count, token balances, and deposit amounts.
- The logic includes assertions to ensure the correctness of the deposit process.
Given the detailed implementation and the presence of multiple related test functions, the logic in the
test02_Depositfunction seems consistent and well-validated.Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Validate the deposit logic in the `test02_Deposit` function. # Test: Check for similar deposit logic in other test files for consistency. fd --type file --extension sol 'test' --exec rg --type solidity 'deposit'Length of output: 137
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Validate the deposit logic in the `test02_Deposit` function. # Test: Check for similar deposit logic in other test files for consistency. fd --type file --extension sol 'test' --exec rg 'deposit'Length of output: 474
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Validate the logic in the `test02_Deposit` function. # Test: Search for the `test02_Deposit` function definition and its logic. fd --type file --extension sol 'test' --exec rg 'function test02_Deposit'Length of output: 73
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Validate the logic in the `test02_Deposit` function. # Test: Search for all function definitions in the test files to locate the `test02_Deposit` function. fd --type file --extension sol 'test' --exec rg 'function 'Length of output: 243
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Validate the logic in the `test02_Deposit` function. # Test: Search for the `test02_Deposit` function in the `test/foundry/Bootstrap.t.sol` file. rg 'function test02_Deposit' test/foundry/Bootstrap.t.solLength of output: 310
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Extract the full implementation of the `test02_Deposit` function. # Test: Extract the full implementation of the `test02_Deposit` function in the `test/foundry/Bootstrap.t.sol` file. ast-grep --lang solidity --pattern 'function test02_Deposit() { $$$ }' test/foundry/Bootstrap.t.solLength of output: 218
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Extract the full implementation of the `test02_Deposit` function. # Test: Extract the full implementation of the `test02_Deposit` function in the `test/foundry/Bootstrap.t.sol` file. rg -A 50 'function test02_Deposit()' test/foundry/Bootstrap.t.solLength of output: 6329
541-549: Check the validity checks for Exocore addresses intest08_ExocoreAddressIsValid.
|
if I format the files with |
This way, we avoid repeating the token whitelisting code in `Bootstrap` and `ClientChainGateway`.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (7)
- .prettierrc (1 hunks)
- src/core/Bootstrap.sol (19 hunks)
- src/core/ClientChainGateway.sol (4 hunks)
- src/interfaces/IClientChainGateway.sol (1 hunks)
- src/storage/BootstrapStorage.sol (15 hunks)
- src/storage/ClientChainGatewayStorage.sol (1 hunks)
- test/foundry/ClientChainGateway.t.sol (3 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (6)
- .prettierrc
- src/core/Bootstrap.sol
- src/core/ClientChainGateway.sol
- src/interfaces/IClientChainGateway.sol
- src/storage/ClientChainGatewayStorage.sol
- test/foundry/ClientChainGateway.t.sol
Additional comments not posted (9)
src/storage/BootstrapStorage.sol (9)
10-10: Added import forITokenWhitelister.This import is necessary for the contract to implement the
ITokenWhitelisterinterface.
16-16: Contract now implementsITokenWhitelister.This change aligns with the added import and the new functionalities related to token whitelisting.
62-62: Introduction of new mappings and arrays for managing operators and deposits.These changes enhance the contract's ability to manage operator details and track deposits and delegations effectively.
Also applies to: 74-74, 99-99, 122-122, 131-131, 140-141
226-226: Clarification in the comment about thevaultBeacon.The comment helps clarify the purpose and usage of
vaultBeaconin the context of beacon proxies.
Line range hint
278-292: Addition of new events for deposit, withdrawal, delegation, and undelegation.These events are crucial for tracking state changes on-chain and will aid in debugging and operational monitoring.
Also applies to: 305-309, 322-326
402-405: Introduction of new modifiers for checking whitelisted tokens, valid amounts, existing vaults, and valid Exocore addresses.These modifiers add necessary checks that enhance the security and robustness of the contract's functions.
Also applies to: 407-410, 412-415, 417-423
425-434: Constructor now takes parameters forexocoreChainId,vaultBeacon, andbeaconProxyBytecode.These parameters are essential for setting up the contract with the correct external dependencies and identifiers.
449-449: Function to validate Exocore addresses.This function is necessary to ensure that only valid Exocore addresses can interact with the contract.
480-507: Implementation ofaddWhitelistTokenandremoveWhitelistTokenmethods.These methods are crucial for managing the list of whitelisted tokens, which is central to the contract's functionality.
This reverts commit 9a4f47b.
It applies recursively automatically
No, |
MaxMustermann2
changed the title
MaxMustermann2
changed the title
fmt workflow
We now have a multi-job workflow, which means it will run the jobs in parallel. Between jobs, we cache the artifacts generated by Foundry so they can be reused. The artifacts cached are the result of compilation by Foundry, and hence, they can be reused across jobs. The `build` job is responsible for generating them, while the `test` and `fmt` jobs can reuse them, which is why they `need` the `build` job.
...and do not let the cache key depend on the job name.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (2)
- .github/workflows/forge-ci.yml (1 hunks)
- foundry.toml (1 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (3)
.github/workflows/forge-ci.yml (3)
15-55: The build job configuration looks solid, using a specific Foundry version for stability and properly handling caching and build failures.
56-95: The test job configuration is consistent with the build job, using the same Foundry version and handling errors effectively.
97-136: The formatting job is well set up withforge fmt --checkto ensure code style consistency. The error handling for formatting issues is proactive and helpful.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (2)
- .github/workflows/forge-ci.yml (1 hunks)
- .github/workflows/foundry-setup.yaml (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
- .github/workflows/foundry-setup.yaml
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
- .github/workflows/forge-ci.yml
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (2)
- .github/workflows/forge-ci.yml (1 hunks)
- .github/workflows/foundry-setup.yml (1 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (4)
.github/workflows/foundry-setup.yml (1)
20-34: Setup job is well-configured with appropriate caching and environment setup..github/workflows/forge-ci.yml (3)
19-46: Build job is well-structured with appropriate failure handling and caching strategies.
57-93: Test job is correctly configured with verbose output for easier debugging and effective use of caching.
95-131: Formatting job is correctly set up to enforce code style consistency across the project.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (3)
- .github/workflows/forge-ci.yml (1 hunks)
- .github/workflows/foundry-setup.yml (1 hunks)
- .gitignore (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
- .gitignore
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
- .github/workflows/forge-ci.yml
- .github/workflows/foundry-setup.yml
|
This will be only linting changes? Can we somehow open only 1 PR then? I think #16 and #17 are kinda duplicated. @MaxMustermann2 cc: @bwhour @adu-web3 |
|
Superseded by #17 |
fmtworkflow that runsforge fmt --checkClientChainGatewayandBootstrapSummary by CodeRabbit
.gitignoreto exclude the.gas-snapshotdirectory.