fix: check denom routes at time of gauge creation #8136
Conversation
| @@ -16,6 +16,7 @@ import ( | |||
| sdk "github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk/types" | |||
|
|
|||
| "github.com/osmosis-labs/osmosis/osmomath" | |||
| appparams "github.com/osmosis-labs/osmosis/v24/app/params" | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The changes in this file are the only actual changes. All other changes are just fixing tests to register routes so they don't fail at this step (which is good / expected behavior).
czarcas7ic
changed the title
czarcas7ic
requested review from
mattverse,
AlpinYukseloglu and
p0mvn
as code owners
WalkthroughThe recent updates aim to refine the blockchain's incentive mechanisms by strengthening rules for reward distributions through ProtoRev, a new system element. Changes include verifying reward routes and denominations, adjusting fee timings for smart accounts, and eliminating outdated unbonding behaviors. These updates enhance operational efficiency and system resilience. Changes
Recent Review DetailsConfiguration used: CodeRabbit UI Files selected for processing (1)
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? TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
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)
Additionally, you can add CodeRabbit Configration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
Out of diff range and nitpick comments (9)
CHANGELOG.md (9)
Line range hint
992-992: Adjust heading level for consistency.- ### v6.4.0 + ## v6.4.0
Line range hint
1004-1004: Adjust heading level for consistency.- ### v6.3.1 + ## v6.3.1
Line range hint
1013-1013: Adjust heading level for consistency.- ### v6.3.0 + ## v6.3.0
Line range hint
1018-1018: Adjust heading level for consistency.- ### v6.2.0 + ## v6.2.0
Line range hint
1070-1070: Adjust heading level for consistency.- ### v6.0.0 + ## v6.0.0
Line range hint
331-331: Remove trailing punctuation from heading for consistency.- ## v24.0.0 + ## v24.0.0
Line range hint
594-594: Convert bare URL to a markdown link for better readability.- https://github.com/osmosis-labs/osmosis/releases/tag/v6.4.0 + [v6.4.0](https://github.com/osmosis-labs/osmosis/releases/tag/v6.4.0)
Line range hint
652-652: Convert bare URL to a markdown link for better readability.- https://github.com/osmosis-labs/osmosis/releases/tag/v6.3.1 + [v6.3.1](https://github.com/osmosis-labs/osmosis/releases/tag/v6.3.1)
Line range hint
1233-1233: Ensure there are no empty links in the document.Please provide a valid URL or remove the empty link.
* use uosmo var * fix lint * tidy
github-actions
bot
added
C:x/lockup
C:CLI
C:x/gamm
|
Important Notice This PR includes modifications to the
Please let us know if you need any help. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
Out of diff range and nitpick comments (3)
CHANGELOG.md (3)
Line range hint
762-762: Duplicate entry for PR #7622 under version "v24.0.0". Ensure it does not represent the same change listed twice.
Line range hint
603-603: The URL for PR #558 is bare and should be formatted as a markdown link for consistency with other entries.- * [#558](https://github.com/osmosis-labs/cosmos-sdk/pull/558) Gracefully log when there is a pruning error instead of panic + * [#558](https://github.com/osmosis-labs/cosmos-sdk/pull/558) Gracefully log when there is a pruning error instead of panic
Line range hint
340-340: Remove the period at the end of the heading for consistency with other headings.- ### Fee Market Parameter Updates. + ### Fee Market Parameter Updates
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
Out of diff range and nitpick comments (3)
CHANGELOG.md (3)
Line range hint
339-339: Inconsistent heading level for "State Breaking" under version "v24.0.0".Adjust the heading level to maintain consistency with other sections.
Line range hint
602-602: Bare URL used in the changelog entry for PR #7250.Consider using a markdown link format to improve readability and accessibility.
Line range hint
660-660: Bare URL used in the changelog entry for PR #7258.Consider using a markdown link format to improve readability and accessibility.
Closes: #XXX
What is the purpose of the change
Angelo from BitSong pointed out that their gauge rewards were not paying out. This was because there was no protorev hot route assigned for the reward denom. If we are unable to determine if the value of the token being distributed is greater than the min epoch distribution threshold, then we don't distribute it. As they pointed out, we should just prevent the ability to create a gauge with rewards that are unable to be distributed.
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Bug Fixes
Documentation
Error Handling