feat: return error codes in binary merkle tree #279
Conversation
|
Warning Rate Limit Exceeded@sweexordious has exceeded the limit for the number of commits or files that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 7 minutes and 37 seconds before requesting another review. How to resolve this issue?After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit. How do rate limits work?CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization. WalkthroughThe recent updates across several Solidity files involve enhancing error handling in Merkle tree verification. The Changes
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (invoked as PR comments)
Additionally, you can add CodeRabbit Configration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Review Status
Actionable comments generated: 2
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Files selected for processing (5)
- src/Blobstream.sol (1 hunks)
- src/lib/tree/binary/BinaryMerkleTree.sol (3 hunks)
- src/lib/tree/binary/test/BinaryMerkleTree.t.sol (17 hunks)
- src/lib/verifier/DAVerifier.sol (2 hunks)
- src/lib/verifier/test/DAVerifier.t.sol (1 hunks)
Additional comments: 9
src/lib/tree/binary/BinaryMerkleTree.sol (4)
15-27: The addition of the
ErrorCodesenum provides a clear and descriptive way to handle errors within theBinaryMerkleTreelibrary. This is a good practice as it improves the readability and maintainability of the code by providing meaningful error messages instead of generic failures.8-57: > Note: This review was outside the patches, so it was mapped to the patch with the greatest overlap. Original lines [39-76]
The
verifyfunction has been refactored to return a tuple containing a boolean and anErrorCodesvalue. This change allows the function to communicate specific error conditions back to the caller, which is a significant improvement over the previous implementation that only returned a boolean. It's important to ensure that all callers of this function are updated to handle the new return type.
85-115: The
computeRootHashfunction has been updated to return a tuple(bytes32, ErrorCodes), which is consistent with the changes made to theverifyfunction. This ensures that error handling is uniform across the library. It's crucial that all internal calls tocomputeRootHashproperly handle the new return type.82-118: > Note: This review was outside the patches, so it was mapped to the patch with the greatest overlap. Original lines [117-130]
The
slicefunction usesrevertwith a specific error message for handling invalid ranges, which is appropriate for an internal utility function. This approach is consistent with Solidity's error handling patterns.src/lib/verifier/DAVerifier.sol (1)
- 155-156: The code destructures the tuple returned by
BinaryMerkleTree.verifyto use the boolean value for validation. It's important to ensure that the error code is not ignored and is handled appropriately, especially if it can provide additional context for a failed verification.Verification successful
The output from the
rgcommand provides context around the usage of theBinaryMerkleTree.ErrorCodes errorin theBinaryMerkleTree.t.soltest file. It shows that the error code is being checked against theNoErrorvalue usingassertEq, and the booleanisValidis being checked withassertTrueorassertTrue(!isValid)depending on the expected outcome of the verification.This indicates that the error codes are indeed being handled and tested for correctness in various scenarios within the test cases. The tests are designed to ensure that the correct error code is returned for different verification scenarios, which aligns with the PR's objective to enhance error handling.
Based on the provided context, it can be concluded that the error codes are being properly handled in the test cases where they are captured.
Scripts Executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Verify that the error code from BinaryMerkleTree.verify is handled properly in all calls within the codebase. ast-grep --lang solidity --pattern $'BinaryMerkleTree.verify($_, $_, $_) { (bool valid, $_) = $$$; $$$ }'Length of output: 227
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for the usage of BinaryMerkleTree.verify in the codebase using ripgrep rg "BinaryMerkleTree.verify"Length of output: 2966
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check the handling of the error code in the test files where it is captured rg "BinaryMerkleTree.ErrorCodes error" src/lib/tree/binary/test/Length of output: 2042
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Extract the relevant test cases from BinaryMerkleTree.t.sol to see how the error code is being used rg -C 5 "BinaryMerkleTree.ErrorCodes error" src/lib/tree/binary/test/BinaryMerkleTree.t.solLength of output: 6174
src/Blobstream.sol (1)
- 362-362: The
isProofValidvariable is now assigned using tuple assignment to ignore the second return value of theBinaryMerkleTree.verifyfunction. This change is consistent with the new return type ofverify. However, it's important to ensure that the ignored error code is not needed for additional context in case of a failed verification.Verification successful
The review comment is consistent with the codebase. The
Blobstream.solandDAVerifier.solcontracts have been updated to ignore the second value of the tuple returned byBinaryMerkleTree.verify, which aligns with the new error handling strategy. The test files capture the error codes for assertions, indicating that the error codes are used where necessary, such as in testing, but are ignored in the main contract logic where only the boolean validity check is required.Scripts Executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Verify that the ignored error code from BinaryMerkleTree.verify is not needed for additional context. ast-grep --lang solidity --pattern $'BinaryMerkleTree.verify($_, $_, $_) { (bool isProofValid,) = $$$; $$$ }'Length of output: 231
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for the usage of `BinaryMerkleTree.verify` and how its return values are handled. rg "BinaryMerkleTree.verify" --multiline-dotallLength of output: 2985
src/lib/tree/binary/test/BinaryMerkleTree.t.sol (2)
54-54: The test
testVerifyNonehas been updated to handle the new tuple return type fromBinaryMerkleTree.verify. It's good to see that the tests are being updated to reflect the changes in the library's interface.65-66: The test
testVerifyOneLeafEmptynow includes an assertion to check the error code, which is a good practice to ensure that the correct error code is returned for the given scenario.src/lib/verifier/test/DAVerifier.t.sol (1)
- 170-172: The updated
testComputeSquareSizeFromRowProoffunction now captures the error code from theBinaryMerkleTree.verifyfunction and asserts that it equalsNoError. This change aligns with the PR's objective to enhance error handling by using specific error codes instead of reverting. The test ensures that theverifyfunction is returning the expectedNoErrorcode, which is a good practice for confirming the correct behavior of the updated error handling mechanism.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Review Status
Actionable comments generated: 0
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Files selected for processing (1)
- src/lib/tree/binary/BinaryMerkleTree.sol (3 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
- src/lib/tree/binary/BinaryMerkleTree.sol
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Review Status
Actionable comments generated: 0
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Files selected for processing (2)
- src/lib/tree/binary/BinaryMerkleTree.sol (3 hunks)
- wrappers/Blobstream.sol/wrapper.go (1 hunks)
Files not summarized due to errors (1)
- wrappers/Blobstream.sol/wrapper.go: Error: Message exceeds token limit
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
- src/lib/tree/binary/BinaryMerkleTree.sol
Additional comments: 7
wrappers/Blobstream.sol/wrapper.go (7)
61-61: The
WrappersMetaDatavariable has been updated with a new ABI and binary. Ensure that the ABI changes are consistent with the intended contract functionality changes and that the binary corresponds to the compiled result of the updated contract.61-61: The
WrappersMetaDataABI string is quite long. It's important to ensure that the ABI matches the Solidity contract's functions, events, and errors. This can be done by comparing the ABI string with the contract's Solidity source code.61-61: The
DeployWrappersfunction should be checked to ensure that it correctly deploys the contract with the updated ABI and binary. This includes verifying that theparsedABI is not nil and that the deployment transaction is created without errors.Verification successful
The provided output from the shell script execution shows the
DeployWrappersfunction withinwrappers/ERC1967Proxy.sol/wrapper.go. The function takes four parameters and returns four values. It first retrieves the ABI usingWrappersMetaData.GetAbi()and checks for errors. If the ABI is nil, it returns an error. Then, it proceeds to deploy the contract usingbind.DeployContractwith the provided parameters and the binary data fromWrappersBin. If there are no errors during deployment, it returns the address of the deployed contract, the transaction object, aWrappersinstance, and a nil error.Based on this information, the
DeployWrappersfunction appears to be correctly set up to deploy the contract with the updated ABI and binary, as it checks for a non-nil ABI and handles errors appropriately during the deployment process.* 61-61: Ensure that the types `WrappersCaller`, `WrappersTransactor`, and `WrappersFilterer` are correctly set up for contract interaction, including the correct contract address and backend interfaces.Scripts Executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Verify that the DeployWrappers function correctly deploys the contract. ast-grep --lang go --pattern $'func DeployWrappers($_, $_, $_, $_) $_ { $$$ }'Length of output: 1464
Verification successful
The types
WrappersCaller,WrappersTransactor, andWrappersFiltererinwrappers/Blobstream.sol/wrapper.goare set up with a*bind.BoundContractfield, which is a generic contract wrapper for low-level calls. This setup is typical for Go Ethereum contract interaction, where aBoundContractis used to interact with smart contracts on the Ethereum blockchain.* 61-61: Check that the session types `WrappersSession`, `WrappersCallerSession`, and `WrappersTransactorSession` are correctly set up with pre-set options for contract interaction.Scripts Executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Verify that the types are set up correctly for contract interaction. ast-grep --lang go --pattern $'type WrappersCaller struct { $$$ }' ast-grep --lang go --pattern $'type WrappersTransactor struct { $$$ }' ast-grep --lang go --pattern $'type WrappersFilterer struct { $$$ }'Length of output: 1649
Verification successful
The session types
WrappersSession,WrappersCallerSession, andWrappersTransactorSessioninwrappers/Blobstream.sol/wrapper.goare set up as follows:
WrappersSessionincludes aContractfield for the generic contract binding,CallOptsfor call options, andTransactOptsfor transaction authorization options.WrappersCallerSessionincludes aContractfield for the generic contract caller binding andCallOptsfor call options.WrappersTransactorSessionincludes aContractfield for the generic contract transactor binding andTransactOptsfor transaction authorization options.These session types are correctly set up to pre-set call and transact options for contract interaction.
* 61-61: Verify that the raw types `WrappersRaw`, `WrappersCallerRaw`, and `WrappersTransactorRaw` provide the correct low-level access to the contract's methods.Scripts Executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Verify that the session types are correctly set up. ast-grep --lang go --pattern $'type WrappersSession struct { $$$ }' ast-grep --lang go --pattern $'type WrappersCallerSession struct { $$$ }' ast-grep --lang go --pattern $'type WrappersTransactorSession struct { $$$ }'Length of output: 2733
Verification successful
The provided script output confirms the existence of the
WrappersRaw,WrappersCallerRaw, andWrappersTransactorRawstructs within thewrapper.gofiles for bothERC1967Proxy.solandBlobstream.sol. Each of these structs contains a field namedContractwhich is a pointer to another struct (Wrappers,WrappersCaller, andWrappersTransactorrespectively). These fields are intended to provide access to the raw methods of the contract.Based on this information, it can be concluded that the raw types are indeed present and are structured to provide low-level access to the contract's methods as intended.
* 61-61: Ensure that the methods for deploying and interacting with the contract, such as `DeployWrappers`, `Call`, `Transfer`, `Transact`, and event filters like `FilterDataRootTupleRootEvent`, are correctly implemented and bound to the contract's functions and events.Scripts Executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Verify that the raw types provide correct low-level access. ast-grep --lang go --pattern $'type WrappersRaw struct { $$$ }' ast-grep --lang go --pattern $'type WrappersCallerRaw struct { $$$ }' ast-grep --lang go --pattern $'type WrappersTransactorRaw struct { $$$ }'Length of output: 1708
Verification successful
The verification scripts have successfully identified the implementations of the
DeployWrappers,Call,Transfer,Transact, andFilterDataRootTupleRootEventfunctions in the Go wrapper files for the smart contracts. The presence of these functions in thewrapper.gofiles for bothERC1967Proxy.solandBlobstream.solindicates that the methods for deploying and interacting with the contracts, as well as the event filters, are indeed implemented as expected.Based on the output, we can conclude that the methods and event filters are correctly implemented and bound to the contract's functions and events in the Go wrapper files.
Scripts Executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Verify that the methods are correctly implemented. ast-grep --lang go --pattern $'func DeployWrappers($_, $_, $_, $_) $_ { $$$ }' ast-grep --lang go --pattern $'func ($_ *WrappersRaw) Call($_, $_, $_, $_) $_ { $$$ }' ast-grep --lang go --pattern $'func ($_ *WrappersRaw) Transfer($_) $_ { $$$ }' ast-grep --lang go --pattern $'func ($_ *WrappersRaw) Transact($_, $_, $_) $_ { $$$ }' # Verify that the event filters are correctly implemented. ast-grep --lang go --pattern $'func ($_ *WrappersFilterer) FilterDataRootTupleRootEvent($_, $_) $_ { $$$ }'Length of output: 4874
Overview
Binary merkle tree library not reverting and returning error codes instead.
Checklist
Summary by CodeRabbit