Add persistence test for htlc in the LocalRemoved state #3645
Conversation
Increase coverage and prepare for attributable failures which are going to extend the update_fail_htlc message with an additional field that needs to be persisted as well.
|
I've assigned @valentinewallace as a reviewer! |
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #3645 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 89.16% 90.25% +1.08%
==========================================
Files 152 155 +3
Lines 118791 127106 +8315
Branches 118791 127106 +8315
==========================================
+ Hits 105921 114715 +8794
+ Misses 10312 9940 -372
+ Partials 2558 2451 -107 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
| @@ -15306,6 +15306,80 @@ mod tests { | |||
| nodes[1].logger.assert_log_contains("lightning::ln::channelmanager", "Payment preimage didn't match payment hash", 1); | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| #[test] | |||
| fn test_htlc_localremoved_persistence() { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We're generally trying to avoid adding any tests in channelmanager.rs since it's already massive. Could we move this to reload_tests.rs or another test file?
| @@ -15306,6 +15306,80 @@ mod tests { | |||
| nodes[1].logger.assert_log_contains("lightning::ln::channelmanager", "Payment preimage didn't match payment hash", 1); | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| #[test] | |||
| fn test_htlc_localremoved_persistence() { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Mind adding a comment with a high level summary of what the test is covering?
|
👋 The first review has been submitted! Do you think this PR is ready for a second reviewer? If so, click here to assign a second reviewer. |
Increase coverage and prepare for attributable failures which are going to extend the update_fail_htlc message with an additional field that needs to be persisted as well (#3611)