feat: CCIPConfig, adding exhaustive checks for p2pIds and bootstrapP2PIds #1178
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
0xsuryansh
requested review from
makramkd,
elatoskinas,
RayXpub and
a team
as code owners
Signed-off-by: 0xsuryansh <[email protected]>
LCOV of commit
|
Signed-off-by: 0xsuryansh <[email protected]>
makramkd
reviewed
Jul 10, 2024
| @@ -146,6 +147,16 @@ func P2pIDsFromInts(ints []int64) [][32]byte { | |||
| p2pID := p2pkey.MustNewV2XXXTestingOnly(big.NewInt(i)).PeerID() | |||
| p2pIDs = append(p2pIDs, p2pID) | |||
| } | |||
| sort.Slice(p2pIDs, func(i, j int) bool { | |||
| for k := 0; k < 32; k++ { | |||
| if p2pIDs[i][k] < p2pIDs[j][k] { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Wow does this work as expected?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah nvm I thought you were comparing arrays.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this basically the same as converting to a uint256 and comparing? I think it is but not 100% sure. If it is, it might be easier to grok this sort that way instead of this.
elatoskinas
approved these changes
Jul 11, 2024
| @@ -0,0 +1,5 @@ | |||
| --- | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We can remove the changeset, we do not use them in ccip
| @@ -536,6 +557,130 @@ contract CCIPConfig_validateConfig is CCIPConfigSetup { | |||
| vm.expectRevert(abi.encodeWithSelector(CCIPConfig.NodeNotInRegistry.selector, nonExistentP2PId)); | |||
| s_ccipCC.validateConfig(config); | |||
| } | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
q: are we still planning the fuzz test for validateConfig?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Added a ticket for this, will pick this up ref : https://smartcontract-it.atlassian.net/browse/CCIP-2004
makramkd
approved these changes
Jul 11, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Motivation
In
CCIPConfig._validateConfigwe try to do an exhaustive amount of validations,the following validations remained
Ticket CCIP-2595
Solution
Created a library
SortedSetValidationUtilin chainlink main-repo smartcontractkit/chainlink#13774 to support these sort, duplicate and subset check inCCIPConfig.These changes are cherry-picked
This library can also be used in the optimisation of
CCIPConfigArraysValidation._ensureInRegistryRegarding 1 : Since each p2pId at index i corresponds to the signer at index i both arrays can't be sorted at the same time.
Hence, we are going the enforce that p2pIds and bootstrapP2PIds are sent sorted on function calls to in
CCIPConfigcontract. This means that these exhaustive checks forbytes[] signersandbytes[] transmittersneeds to be done in off-chain tooling.