Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

op-node: fix ecotone upgrade test #10092

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Apr 10, 2024
Merged

op-node: fix ecotone upgrade test #10092

merged 2 commits into from
Apr 10, 2024

Conversation

tynes
Copy link
Contributor

@tynes tynes commented Apr 10, 2024

Description

Previously the upgrade transactions test made an assertion against
the bytecode that is in the bindings. This needs to be modified
because the upgrade txs cannot ever change as they are part of
consensus. Any modification to the bindings means that the assertion
will fail. We should test against the expected value directly
instead of going through the binding that has no guarantee
to be on a particular version and will change over time.

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Refactor
    • Enhanced transaction tests by using custom variables for bytecode comparison, improving the reliability and clarity of test outcomes.

Previously the upgrade transactions test made an assertion against
the bytecode that is in the bindings. This needs to be modified
because the upgrade txs cannot ever change as they are part of
consensus. Any modification to the bindings means that the assertion
will fail. We should test against the expected value directly
instead of going through the binding that has no guarantee
to be on a particular version and will change over time.
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Apr 10, 2024

Walkthrough

The recent update in the codebase enhances transaction tests by replacing hardcoded binding references with customizable variables. This change offers a more dynamic approach to bytecode comparison, improving the testing framework's flexibility and maintainability.

Changes

File Path Change Summary
op-node/rollup/derive/.../ecotone_upgrade_transactions_test.go Updated to use custom variables for bytecode comparison in transaction tests.

Recent Review Details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Commits Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 4279a1f and c412094.
Files selected for processing (1)
  • op-node/rollup/derive/ecotone_upgrade_transactions_test.go (2 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
  • op-node/rollup/derive/ecotone_upgrade_transactions_test.go

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

Share
Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

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

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

CodeRabbit Commands (invoked as PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger a review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

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

CodeRabbit Configration 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.

@tynes tynes added this pull request to the merge queue Apr 10, 2024
@github-merge-queue github-merge-queue bot removed this pull request from the merge queue due to failed status checks Apr 10, 2024
@tynes tynes added this pull request to the merge queue Apr 10, 2024
Merged via the queue into develop with commit 097ca87 Apr 10, 2024
69 checks passed
@tynes tynes deleted the fix-op-node-ecotone-test branch April 10, 2024 18:26
pcw109550 pushed a commit to testinprod-io/optimism that referenced this pull request Apr 15, 2024
* op-node: fix ecotone upgrade test

Previously the upgrade transactions test made an assertion against
the bytecode that is in the bindings. This needs to be modified
because the upgrade txs cannot ever change as they are part of
consensus. Any modification to the bindings means that the assertion
will fail. We should test against the expected value directly
instead of going through the binding that has no guarantee
to be on a particular version and will change over time.

* op-node: fix test
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants