Disable system calls from xcm & Refactoring emulated tests #1115
Conversation
Codecov ReportAttention:
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1115 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 49.74% 50.05% +0.31%
==========================================
Files 61 63 +2
Lines 3701 3736 +35
Branches 72 72
==========================================
+ Hits 1841 1870 +29
- Misses 1843 1849 +6
Partials 17 17
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
| @@ -360,6 +358,17 @@ pub mod pallet { | |||
| })?; | |||
| Ok(()) | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| pub fn refund_relayer( | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It seems we have now have this pattern in the emulated tests where we call these three functions in order:
- refund_relayer
- do_convert
- send_xcm
However this is problematic as internal implementation details are now leaking into the tests. It makes the tests more brittle, and less useful. The tests should treat submit as a black box.
I would rather refactor the submit extrinsic, so that it calls the following function, where verification is optional.
fn process_message(message: &Message, verify: bool) -> DispatchResultAnd then the simulated tests can call process_message(msg, false)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Notice @claravanstaden is making InboundQueueFixture auto-generated in #1119, then I would prefer to reuse it for the emulated test here. So there is no need to add the process_message(msg, false) function and just test the original submit function with the verification included.
The problem is that InboundQueueTest is for benchmark only and we want to use it also in unit/emulated tests. We did make #1013 for that purpose though closed it for some other high-priority PRs.
So maybe it's time to reopen it. Meanwhile In #1119 we also take it into consideration when generating InboundQueueFixture.
@vgeddes @claravanstaden WDYT?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I made a comment here: #1119 I would also like to use https://github.com/Snowfork/snowbridge/tree/main/parachain/pallets/ethereum-client/tests/fixtures in the runtime tests. Maybe worthwhile to split test fixtures out to a new crate.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Cool, ok, this all makes sense - lets split the fixture out into a separate crate - something like pallets/inbound-queue/fixtures.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ok now that we have the fixtures, its no longer necessary to have this refactor_relayer function. @yrong can you revert it?
Also helps reduce the amount of code which needs to be re-audited.
yrong
changed the title
yrong
changed the title
yrong
changed the title
Requires: Snowfork/polkadot-sdk#108