feat(core, apps): 'PacketData' interface added and implemented #4200
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
srdtrk
requested review from
colin-axner,
AdityaSripal and
damiannolan
as code owners
crodriguezvega
approved these changes
Jul 30, 2023
Codecov Report
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #4200 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 79.45% 79.48% +0.03%
==========================================
Files 188 188
Lines 12990 13005 +15
==========================================
+ Hits 10321 10337 +16
+ Misses 2240 2239 -1
Partials 429 429
|
colin-axner
approved these changes
Jul 31, 2023
Comment on lines
73
to
76
| // NOTES: | ||
| // - The sender address is set at the source chain and not validated by | ||
| // a signature check in IBC. | ||
| // - sourcePortID is not used in this implementation. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| // NOTES: | |
| // - The sender address is set at the source chain and not validated by | |
| // a signature check in IBC. | |
| // - sourcePortID is not used in this implementation. | |
| // NOTE: | |
| // - The sender address is set by the packet sender and may not have been validated a signature check if the packet sender isn't the transfer module. | |
| // - The sender address must only be used by modules on the sending chain. | |
| // - sourcePortID is not used in this implementation. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Some nits:
Is it necessary to say if the packet sender isn't the transfer module. Because in pfm, the packet sender is still technically the transfer module. Pfm just submits a MsgTransfer on behalf of a user I believe.
Should we use should instead of must in The sender address must only be used by modules on the sending chain.
For now, I'll paste your suggestion.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good questions, what if we rather state:
- The sender address is the sender embedded in the packet data. The sender authentication is handled by the module which requested the packet to be sent.
and for
Should we use should instead of must in The sender address must only be used by modules on the sending chain.
I'm not sure what the language semantics dictate here, but I'd like to communicate that it is fully unsafe to use the packet sender on the destination chain without additional logic, whichever you think conveys that
colin-axner
approved these changes
Aug 1, 2023
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ACK, replied to your comment, happy for my suggestions to be readjusted as your see fit
mergify bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 1, 2023
* refactor(core/exported): moved packet interfaces to packet.go * feat(core/exported): created PacketData interface * feat(transfer): implemented PacketData for transfer * feat(ica): implemented PacketData * docs(transfer.adr8): updated godocs of GetPacketSender * style(adr8): renamed parameter srcPortID -> sourcePortID * docs(core.adr8): updated godocs for PacketData interface * docs(core.adr8): improved godocs for PacketData interface * docs(core.adr8): updated godocs * docs(transfer.adr8): updated godocs * style(ica_test): removed unneeded comment * docs(ica.adr8): updated godocs * style(ica): fixed revive linter complaint * docs(transfer.adr8): updated GetPacketSender's godocs * style(transfer, ica): ran golangci-lin (cherry picked from commit ec68438) # Conflicts: # modules/apps/27-interchain-accounts/types/packet.go # modules/apps/27-interchain-accounts/types/packet_test.go # modules/apps/transfer/types/packet.go # modules/apps/transfer/types/packet_test.go # modules/core/exported/packet.go
srdtrk
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 4, 2023
…ort #4200) (#4219) * feat(core, apps): 'PacketData' interface added and implemented (#4200) * refactor(core/exported): moved packet interfaces to packet.go * feat(core/exported): created PacketData interface * feat(transfer): implemented PacketData for transfer * feat(ica): implemented PacketData * docs(transfer.adr8): updated godocs of GetPacketSender * style(adr8): renamed parameter srcPortID -> sourcePortID * docs(core.adr8): updated godocs for PacketData interface * docs(core.adr8): improved godocs for PacketData interface * docs(core.adr8): updated godocs * docs(transfer.adr8): updated godocs * style(ica_test): removed unneeded comment * docs(ica.adr8): updated godocs * style(ica): fixed revive linter complaint * docs(transfer.adr8): updated GetPacketSender's godocs * style(transfer, ica): ran golangci-lin (cherry picked from commit ec68438) # Conflicts: # modules/apps/27-interchain-accounts/types/packet.go # modules/apps/27-interchain-accounts/types/packet_test.go # modules/apps/transfer/types/packet.go # modules/apps/transfer/types/packet_test.go # modules/core/exported/packet.go * fix: fixed backporting conflicts * fix: used TrimPrefix because CutPrefix was added in go1.20 * style(ica_test): typo fixed --------- Co-authored-by: srdtrk <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: srdtrk <[email protected]>
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.
Description
This PR reduces the diff when reviewing the adr8 PR #3939.
PacketDatadefines an optional interface which PacketData's may implement.closes: #XXXX
Commit Message / Changelog Entry
see the guidelines for commit messages. (view raw markdown for examples)
Before we can merge this PR, please make sure that all the following items have been
checked off. If any of the checklist items are not applicable, please leave them but
write a little note why.
Linked to Github issue with discussion and accepted design OR link to spec that describes this work.docs/) or specification (x/<module>/spec/).godoccomments.Files changedin the Github PR explorer.Codecov Reportin the comment section below once CI passes.