Refactor createGauge to accomodate for CL gauges #5383

hieuvubk · 2023-06-01T08:16:19Z

Closes: #4833

What is the purpose of the change

Currently, LockQueryType enum has an index 0 as ByDuration. So if we pass lockuptypes.QueryCondition{}, distrTo.LockQueryType will default to ByDuration and enter the loop => I change the indexes for passing the loop.
Add test for case disTo.Denom = "" when we pass lockuptypes.QueryCondition{}

Testing and Verifying

(Please pick one of the following options)

This change is a trivial rework / code cleanup without any test coverage.

(or)

This change is already covered by existing tests, such as (please describe tests).

(or)

This change added tests and can be verified as follows:

(example:)

Added unit test that validates ...
Added integration tests for end-to-end deployment with ...
Extended integration test for ...
Manually verified the change by ...

Documentation and Release Note

Does this pull request introduce a new feature or user-facing behavior changes?
Changelog entry added to Unreleased section of CHANGELOG.md?

Where is the change documented?

Specification (x/{module}/README.md)
Osmosis documentation site
Code comments?
N/A

stackman27

thank you for the PR

just have few questions before ACK :))

stackman27 · 2023-06-01T19:24:16Z

proto/osmosis/lockup/lock.proto

-  ByDuration = 0;
-  ByTime = 1;
+  ByTime = 0;
+  ByDuration = 1;


why was this changed again?

Even if we pass lockuptypes.QueryCondition{} to the function, it will still get the default value of distrTo.LockQueryType which is the first value of LockQueryType (In this case ByDuration => thus causing an error in the loop. )
So I just change the index to bypass.

for CL the we are not distributing via locktypes so, what i originally thought was that we could skip distrTo check below;

if distrTo.LockQueryType == lockuptypes.ByDuration { durationOk := false for _, duration := range durations { if duration == distrTo.Duration { durationOk = true break } } if !durationOk { return 0, fmt.Errorf("invalid duration: %d", distrTo.Duration) } } // check if denom this gauge pays out to exists on-chain if distrTo.Denom != "" && !k.bk.HasSupply(ctx, distrTo.Denom) && !strings.Contains(distrTo.Denom, "osmovaloper") { return 0, fmt.Errorf("denom does not exist: %s", distrTo.Denom) }

by passing empty queryCondition. lmk if that makes sense

Yeah I understand ur idea. But the problem I face is even calling CreateGauge with empty queryCondition. It is still assigned a value in the function.
Thinking about adding new value to LockQueryType enum to bypass both ByDuration & ByTime. Lmk what u think about that

i see what about changing the enumType to something like pretty much what you suggested;

enum LockQueryType { option (gogoproto.goproto_enum_prefix) = false; UNSPECIFIED = 0; ByTime = 0; ByDuration = 1; }

if this works, hopefully we donot have to make lots of core logic changes and it works with existing queryCondition

Yeah we r same page 🙌

stackman27 · 2023-06-01T19:26:38Z

x/incentives/types/msgs.go

@@ -55,10 +55,6 @@ func (m MsgCreateGauge) ValidateBasic() error {
 		return errors.New("distribution period should be 1 epoch for perpetual gauge")
 	}

-	if lockuptypes.LockQueryType_name[int32(m.DistributeTo.LockQueryType)] != "ByDuration" {


why was this removed as well?

In CreateGauge for CL pool we don't want to limit just using ByDuration right? Or lmk if im wrong

can we add this back and add a clause that if lockTypes are used it has to be "byDuration"?

AlpinYukseloglu · 2023-06-06T07:50:36Z

x/pool-incentives/keeper/keeper_test.go

@@ -220,7 +219,7 @@ func (s *KeeperTestSuite) TestCreateConcentratedLiquidityPoolGauge() {
 				s.Require().True(gaugeInfo.IsPerpetual)
 				s.Require().Empty(gaugeInfo.Coins)
 				s.Require().Equal(s.Ctx.BlockTime(), gaugeInfo.StartTime)
-				s.Require().Equal(appParams.BaseCoinUnit, gaugeInfo.DistributeTo.Denom)
+				// s.Require().Equal(appParams.BaseCoinUnit, gaugeInfo.DistributeTo.Denom)


Suggested change

// s.Require().Equal(appParams.BaseCoinUnit, gaugeInfo.DistributeTo.Denom)

s.Require().Equal(appParams.BaseCoinUnit, gaugeInfo.DistributeTo.Denom)

In CreateGauge we pass empty queryCondition so I dont think we should check gaugeInfo.DistributeTo.Denom cause its alway be "" as I think. If im wrong pls fix me

AlpinYukseloglu · 2023-06-06T07:51:09Z

x/pool-incentives/keeper/keeper_test.go

@@ -8,7 +8,6 @@ import (
 	"github.com/stretchr/testify/suite"

 	"github.com/osmosis-labs/osmosis/v16/app/apptesting"
-	appParams "github.com/osmosis-labs/osmosis/v16/app/params"


Assuming this was removed accidentally

hieuvubk · 2023-06-08T11:59:42Z

Hey @stackman27 I updated your last request & got new err about cosmwasm, even reverting to the previous commit its still happen. Duno what cause the err.

stackman27 · 2023-06-08T15:07:35Z

hi @hieuvubk thank you so much for all the work you've put into this PR but recently we caught a feature that was lacking with external gauges and decided to work on it in this PR (#5459)

while doing so we also fixed this issue. So i believe we can hold this PR on for now and close it when we merge this PR

hieuvubk · 2023-06-09T06:47:04Z

hi @hieuvubk thank you so much for all the work you've put into this PR but recently we caught a feature that was lacking with external gauges and decided to work on it in this PR (#5459)

while doing so we also fixed this issue. So i believe we can hold this PR on for now and close it when we merge this PR
I got it thank u

AlpinYukseloglu · 2023-06-14T07:21:17Z

Closing this as the other PR got merged. Thanks for working on this @hieuvubk

hieuvubk added 3 commits June 1, 2023 15:04

update LockQueryType enum, default value is ByTime

dcc3fe4

use lockuptypes.QueryCondition{}, add check denom empty

9190730

update test

c544e5c

hieuvubk requested review from czarcas7ic, p0mvn, mattverse and stackman27 as code owners June 1, 2023 08:16

hieuvubk requested a review from pysel June 1, 2023 08:16

github-actions bot added C:x/incentives C:x/lockup C:x/pool-incentives labels Jun 1, 2023

expand condition for CL gauges creation

3e02f5f

mattverse added V:state/compatible/no_backport State machine compatible PR, depends on prior breaks A:no-changelog V:state/breaking State machine breaking PR and removed V:state/compatible/no_backport State machine compatible PR, depends on prior breaks labels Jun 1, 2023

stackman27 reviewed Jun 1, 2023

View reviewed changes

hieuvubk added 2 commits June 5, 2023 13:29

resolve conflict

2d3e6e0

update lock.pb.go

aacbbd4

AlpinYukseloglu reviewed Jun 6, 2023

View reviewed changes

hieuvubk added 2 commits June 7, 2023 17:59

add new LockQueryType for CL gauge

6862cd9

update MsgCreateGauge ValidateBasic condition

0458c57

AlpinYukseloglu closed this Jun 14, 2023

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Refactor createGauge to accomodate for CL gauges #5383

Refactor createGauge to accomodate for CL gauges #5383

hieuvubk commented Jun 1, 2023 •

edited

Loading

stackman27 left a comment

stackman27 Jun 1, 2023

hieuvubk Jun 2, 2023

stackman27 Jun 5, 2023

hieuvubk Jun 6, 2023

stackman27 Jun 6, 2023 •

edited

Loading

hieuvubk Jun 6, 2023

stackman27 Jun 1, 2023

hieuvubk Jun 2, 2023

stackman27 Jun 7, 2023 •

edited

Loading

AlpinYukseloglu Jun 6, 2023

hieuvubk Jun 7, 2023

AlpinYukseloglu Jun 6, 2023

hieuvubk commented Jun 8, 2023

stackman27 commented Jun 8, 2023

hieuvubk commented Jun 9, 2023

AlpinYukseloglu commented Jun 14, 2023

	// s.Require().Equal(appParams.BaseCoinUnit, gaugeInfo.DistributeTo.Denom)
	s.Require().Equal(appParams.BaseCoinUnit, gaugeInfo.DistributeTo.Denom)

Refactor createGauge to accomodate for CL gauges #5383

Refactor createGauge to accomodate for CL gauges #5383

Conversation

hieuvubk commented Jun 1, 2023 • edited Loading

What is the purpose of the change

Testing and Verifying

Documentation and Release Note

stackman27 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

stackman27 Jun 6, 2023 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

stackman27 Jun 7, 2023 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

hieuvubk commented Jun 8, 2023

stackman27 commented Jun 8, 2023

hieuvubk commented Jun 9, 2023

AlpinYukseloglu commented Jun 14, 2023

hieuvubk commented Jun 1, 2023 •

edited

Loading

stackman27 Jun 6, 2023 •

edited

Loading

stackman27 Jun 7, 2023 •

edited

Loading