test: vaults fuzzing #918
Draft
test: vaults fuzzing #918
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
|
Hardhat Unit Tests Coverage SummaryDiff against masterResults for commit: 7d05ee2 Minimum allowed coverage is ♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results |
tamtamchik
reviewed
Jan 13, 2025
| import {StdUtils} from "forge-std/StdUtils.sol"; | ||
| import {Vm} from "forge-std/Vm.sol"; | ||
| import {console2} from "forge-std/console2.sol"; | ||
| import {Protocol__Deployment, ILido} from "./Protocol__Deployment.t.sol"; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe better naming is Protocol__Context so as to put methods related to the protocol interactions later, e.g., adding / removing permissions, impersonating agents, etc...
tamtamchik
force-pushed
the
feat/vaults-fuzzing-share-rate
branch
from
1d41029 to
7d05ee2
Compare
tamtamchik
reviewed
Feb 2, 2025
|
|
||
| // 0.002792 * 10^18 | ||
| // 0.0073 * 10^18 | ||
| uint256 constant maxYiedPerOperatorWei = 2_792_000_000_000_000; // which % of slashing could be? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| uint256 constant maxYiedPerOperatorWei = 2_792_000_000_000_000; // which % of slashing could be? | |
| uint256 constant maxYieldPerOperatorWei = 2_792_000_000_000_000; // which % of slashing could be? |
?
| // for testing purposes only | ||
| pragma solidity ^0.8.0; | ||
|
|
||
| import "foundry/lib/forge-std/src/Vm.sol"; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| import "foundry/lib/forge-std/src/Vm.sol"; |
Already present below
| import {StdCheats} from "forge-std/StdCheats.sol"; | ||
| import {StdUtils} from "forge-std/StdUtils.sol"; | ||
| import {Vm} from "forge-std/Vm.sol"; | ||
| import {console2} from "../../foundry/lib/forge-std/src/console2.sol"; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| import {console2} from "../../foundry/lib/forge-std/src/console2.sol"; | |
| import {console2} from "forge-std/console2.sol"; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Better to put it into test/0.8.25/contracts and rename it like SecondOpinionOracle__MockForAccountingFuzzing
| @@ -3,8 +3,11 @@ | |||
|
|
|||
| pragma solidity 0.8.9; | |||
|
|
|||
| import {StakingRouter} from "contracts/0.8.9/StakingRouter.sol"; | |||
|
|
|||
| contract StakingRouter__MockForLidoAccounting { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Noticed that this file is being used in the accounting unit tests. It would be better to clone the file and rename it to StakingRouter__MockForLidoAccountingFuzzing to clarify its purpose. Separating the mocks will simplify mock management and ensure that they do not interfere with other tests.
| * forge-config: default.invariant.depth = 256 | ||
| * forge-config: default.invariant.fail-on-revert = true | ||
| */ | ||
| function invariant_totalShares() public view { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Maybe add an invariant that lido.getExternalShares = startExternalBalance + mintedExternal - burnedExternal? So we'll know it something is odd inside a math for external shares?
| // if (_report.timestamp >= block.timestamp) revert IncorrectReportTimestamp(_report.timestamp, block.timestamp); | ||
| vm.warp(_timestamp + 1); | ||
|
|
||
| fuzz._lidoExecutionLayerRewardVaultWei = bound(fuzz._lidoExecutionLayerRewardVaultWei, 0, 1_000) * 1 ether; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Providing comments on why the bounding appears as it does would be helpful during reviews and test updates.
|
|
||
| function handleOracleReport(FuzzValues memory fuzz) external { | ||
| uint256 _timeElapsed = 86_400; | ||
| uint256 _timestamp = 1_737_366_566 + _timeElapsed; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why do we need a specific timestamp? Can block.timestamp be used?
| } | ||
|
|
||
| contract AccountingHandler is CommonBase, StdCheats, StdUtils { | ||
| struct Ghost { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Maybe add a boundary holder to track minimum and maximum values used in all the runs, so we can review them after the test and ensure we're not missing any potential values chunks?
|
|
||
| pragma solidity 0.8.9; | ||
|
|
||
| contract SecondOpinionOracle__Mock { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not sure that we need that mock. We can harness OracleReportSanityChecker and just return true on _askSecondOpinion.
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.
Test shareRate with fuzzing