Refactor L1 user deposit processing in x/rollup module

[AnkushinDaniil]

Partially fixes #205

Summary by CodeRabbit

• New Features

  • Enhanced configuration capabilities for blockchain applications with the introduction of a new chain configuration function.
  • Improved handling of Ethereum user deposit transactions for enhanced accuracy and compliance with Ethereum standards.
  • Updated minting logic for better representation of mint amounts.
  • Simplified deposit transactions by removing specific deposit amounts, aligning with future changes in transaction handling.

• Bug Fixes

  • Enhanced error handling with detailed logging for failures in determining the sender's address, improving clarity in transaction processing issues.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

The changes introduce a new function, NewChainConfig, in the monomer.go file to construct a params.ChainConfig struct. The processL1UserDepositTxs function in deposits.go has been updated to improve sender address retrieval and error handling, shifting from tx.Value() to tx.Mint(). Tests in builder_test.go and rollup_test.go have been adjusted to reflect these changes. Additionally, the GenerateEthTxs function in utils.go now explicitly sets the Mint value, and the rollupFlow function in stack_test.go has modified deposit transaction handling.

Changes

File Path	Change Summary
monomer.go	Added NewChainConfig function to create params.ChainConfig struct.
x/rollup/keeper/deposits.go	Updated sender address retrieval to use NewCancunSigner, improved error handling, and revised minting logic to use tx.Mint().
builder/builder_test.go	Adjusted tests to reflect changes in sender address retrieval and minting logic.
x/rollup/tests/integration/rollup_test.go	Modified test to derive user address using NewCancunSigner and updated deposit amount retrieval to use Mint().
testutils/utils.go	Changed GenerateEthTxs to set Mint value explicitly to 100 for consistency.
e2e/stack_test.go	Altered rollupFlow to set depositAmount to zero, indicating a shift in deposit transaction handling.

Assessment against linked issues

Objective	Addressed	Explanation
Verify correct data processing in processL1UserDeposits() (#205)	❌	The changes do not address the issue of retrieving values from the encoded calldata of the transaction.

Possibly related PRs

• Fix op-proposer behavior in e2e tests #196: The changes in this PR involve modifications to the MonomerClient and its methods, which enhance the functionality related to Ethereum client interactions, relevant to the new NewChainConfig function.
• Remove ToWithdrawalTx helper #218: This PR removes the ToWithdrawalTx helper function and refactors transaction creation to use MsgInitiateWithdrawal, connecting to the changes in transaction handling introduced in the main PR.

Suggested reviewers

• Nate Beauregard
• joshklop

Poem

In the land of code where rabbits play,
Changes hop in a bright new way.
With clearer paths and errors tamed,
Minting magic is now proclaimed!
So let us cheer, with joyful glee,
For robust deposits, as fine as can be! 🐇✨

---

Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between a4d7db3 and 6c8d190.

Files selected for processing (2)

• x/rollup/keeper/deposits.go (3 hunks)
• x/rollup/keeper/msg_server.go (1 hunks)

Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)

• x/rollup/keeper/deposits.go

Additional comments not posted (1)

x/rollup/keeper/msg_server.go (1)

37-37: Verify the impact of the l1blockInfo parameter on the processL1UserDepositTxs function.

The addition of the l1blockInfo parameter aligns with the PR objective of addressing issues related to the processing of L1 user deposits. It potentially enhances the transaction handling logic by providing more accurate data processing for user deposits, as highlighted in the linked issue #205.

To ensure that the change has the desired impact, please verify the following in the processL1UserDepositTxs function:

1. The l1blockInfo parameter is being used to retrieve the correct values from the encoded calldata of the transaction, instead of relying on the To and Value fields.
2. The retrieved values are being correctly interpreted and used in the processing of user deposits.
3. The change addresses the concerns raised in the linked issue regarding the accuracy of data processing.

Run the following script to retrieve the implementation of the processL1UserDepositTxs function:

Verification successful

---

Verification of l1blockInfo parameter impact on processL1UserDepositTxs function completed

The l1blockInfo parameter has been successfully integrated into the processL1UserDepositTxs function in x/rollup/keeper/deposits.go. This change addresses the concerns raised in issue #205 and enhances the accuracy of L1 user deposit transaction processing:

1. The l1blockInfo is used to create a signer with the correct block number and timestamp, ensuring accurate extraction of sender addresses from transactions.
2. The function now correctly processes each L1 user deposit transaction, minting ETH to the corresponding cosmos address.
3. The implementation includes proper error handling and logging for various scenarios, improving overall robustness.

These changes align with the PR objective of addressing issues related to the processing of L1 user deposits and enhance the transaction handling logic by providing more accurate data processing.

Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Retrieve the implementation of the `processL1UserDepositTxs` function.

# Test: Search for the function definition.
# Expect: The function definition with the new `l1blockInfo` parameter.
ast-grep --lang go --pattern $'func (k *Keeper) processL1UserDepositTxs(ctx context.Context, txBytes []byte, l1blockInfo *L1BlockInfo) (mintEvents []MintEvent, err error) {
  $$$
}'

Length of output: 182

---

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Search for the processL1UserDepositTxs function with a more flexible pattern

# Test 1: Search for any function containing "processL1UserDepositTxs" in its name
echo "Searching for processL1UserDepositTxs function:"
ast-grep --lang go --pattern 'func $_($_) $_processL1UserDepositTxs($_) $_ {
  $$$
}'

# Test 2: If Test 1 doesn't yield results, search for any function related to L1 user deposits
echo "Searching for functions related to L1 user deposits:"
ast-grep --lang go --pattern 'func $_($_) $_L1UserDeposit$_($_) $_ {
  $$$
}'

# Test 3: Search for references to L1 user deposit processing
echo "Searching for references to L1 user deposit processing:"
rg "L1.*user.*deposit" -n --type go

Length of output: 3204

---

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Retrieve the implementation of the processL1UserDepositTxs function

# Test 1: Search for the processL1UserDepositTxs function in deposits.go
echo "Searching for processL1UserDepositTxs function in deposits.go:"
ast-grep --lang go --pattern 'func (k Keeper) processL1UserDepositTxs($_) $_ {
  $$$
}' x/rollup/keeper/deposits.go

# Test 2: If Test 1 doesn't yield results, use a more flexible pattern
echo "Searching with a more flexible pattern:"
ast-grep --lang go --pattern 'func $_processL1UserDepositTxs($_) $_ {
  $$$
}' x/rollup/keeper/deposits.go

# Test 3: If both above tests fail, print the entire content of deposits.go
echo "Printing the content of deposits.go:"
cat x/rollup/keeper/deposits.go

Length of output: 6423

---

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  -- I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
  -- Generate unit testing code for this file.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  -- @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
  -- @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  -- @coderabbitai generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.
  -- @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
  -- @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
  -- @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

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

Other keywords and placeholders

• Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
• Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
• Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

• You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
• Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
• If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

[AnkushinDaniil]

@natebeauregard

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 0

Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)

testutils/utils.go (1)

79-81: The change partially addresses the past review comment, but consider covering more test cases.

The explicit setting of the Mint field to big.NewInt(100) addresses the suggestion from the past review comment to set the Mint field directly in the test helper. However, the case where Mint is nil is not covered, which was also mentioned in the past review comment.

Consider the alternative approach suggested in the past review comment of using a random seed for every test. This could help test a wider range of deposit transaction variations and ensure the robustness of the code.

Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 7f1a529 and 127bc4e.

Files selected for processing (4)

• builder/builder_test.go (2 hunks)
• testutils/utils.go (1 hunks)
• x/rollup/keeper/deposits.go (1 hunks)
• x/rollup/tests/integration/rollup_test.go (2 hunks)

Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)

• x/rollup/keeper/deposits.go

Additional comments not posted (3)

x/rollup/tests/integration/rollup_test.go (1)

44-47: LGTM!

The changes to derive userAddr from the sender of depositTx and obtain depositAmount from depositTx.Mint() are correct and more appropriate for handling Ethereum transactions.

builder/builder_test.go (2)

314-324: LGTM!

The code changes look good:

• The Mint() method is correctly used to retrieve the deposit amount.
• The sender's address is correctly retrieved using the Sender() method of the signer.
• The deposit and withdrawal transactions are correctly included in the block payload.

---

351-351: LGTM!

The deposit transaction result is correctly verified by checking the MintEth event attributes.

[natebeauregard]

Looking good, left a few small nits. I'll wait for @joshklop's chain config question to be addressed before approving

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 0

Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)

e2e/stack_test.go (1)

262-262: Simplification of deposit transaction amount. Consider future test cases.

The change simplifies the deposit transaction by setting the deposit amount to zero. This may impact how deposits are processed downstream.

In light of the removed comment hinting at a future pivot from the Value field to a Mint field, consider proactively adding test cases that cover scenarios with and without a Value field. This will help ensure a smooth transition when the pivot occurs.

Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 127bc4e and 1c5ad12.

Files selected for processing (1)

• e2e/stack_test.go (1 hunks)