Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fix(crypto): fix nested multisigs fail to marshal #20404

Closed

Conversation

tuantran1702
Copy link
Contributor

@tuantran1702 tuantran1702 commented May 15, 2024

Description

Closes: #20382

Issue appears after #19869, but I am unable to find the root of cause. For now workaround Marshal -> MarshalJSON seems to fix the bug

Fixes the issue by overriding the MarshalAmino


Author Checklist

All items are required. Please add a note to the item if the item is not applicable and
please add links to any relevant follow up issues.

I have...

  • included the correct type prefix in the PR title
  • confirmed ! in the type prefix if API or client breaking change
  • targeted the correct branch (see PR Targeting)
  • provided a link to the relevant issue or specification
  • reviewed "Files changed" and left comments if necessary
  • included the necessary unit and integration tests
  • added a changelog entry to CHANGELOG.md
  • updated the relevant documentation or specification, including comments for documenting Go code
  • confirmed all CI checks have passed

Reviewers Checklist

All items are required. Please add a note if the item is not applicable and please add
your handle next to the items reviewed if you only reviewed selected items.

I have...

  • confirmed the correct type prefix in the PR title
  • confirmed all author checklist items have been addressed
  • reviewed state machine logic, API design and naming, documentation is accurate, tests and test coverage

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Bug Fixes

    • Improved JSON marshaling for multisig keys to ensure consistent data formatting.
  • Tests

    • Added a new test to verify the output of nested multisig keys.
    • Updated existing tests to focus on JSON marshaling for better coverage.

Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented May 15, 2024

Walkthrough

The changes primarily address a regression issue with nested multisigs in the Cosmos SDK. The Bytes() method in LegacyAminoPubKey now uses JSON marshaling instead of binary marshaling to resolve the issue. Corresponding test functions have been updated or added to ensure the correctness of JSON marshaling and nested multisig key outputs.

Changes

File Path Change Summary
crypto/keys/multisig/multisig.go Modified Bytes() method in LegacyAminoPubKey to use AminoCdc.MustMarshalJSON(m).
crypto/keys/multisig/multisig_test.go Replaced TestAminoBinaryNested with TestAminoMarshalJSON for testing JSON marshaling.
crypto/keys/multisig/amino.go Added MarshalAmino and UnmarshalAmino functions to override amino binary marshaling. Adjusted MarshalAminoJSON.
client/keys/output_test.go Added TestBech32KeysOutputNestedMsig to verify output of nested multisig key structures.

Assessment against linked issues

Objective Addressed Explanation
Resolve regression issue with nested multisigs failing marshal/unmarshal in main (#20382)
Ensure JSON marshaling is used instead of binary marshaling for LegacyAminoPubKey (#20382)
Add test functions to verify JSON marshaling and nested multisig key outputs (#20382)

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?

Share
Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.
    • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.

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)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger a review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Additionally, you can add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.

CodeRabbit Configration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

@github-actions github-actions bot added C:CLI C:Keys Keybase, KMS and HSMs labels May 15, 2024
@tuantran1702 tuantran1702 marked this pull request as ready for review May 15, 2024 17:39
@tuantran1702 tuantran1702 requested a review from a team as a code owner May 15, 2024 17:39
Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 1

Review Details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yml
Review profile: CHILL

Commits Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 1643711 and db715be.
Files selected for processing (3)
  • client/keys/output_test.go (1 hunks)
  • crypto/keys/multisig/multisig.go (1 hunks)
  • crypto/keys/multisig/multisig_test.go (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
  • crypto/keys/multisig/multisig_test.go
Additional Context Used
Path-based Instructions (2)
client/keys/output_test.go (2)

Pattern **/*.go: Review the Golang code for conformity with the Uber Golang style guide, highlighting any deviations.


Pattern **/*_test.go: "Assess the unit test code assessing sufficient code coverage for the changes associated in the pull request"

crypto/keys/multisig/multisig.go (1)

Pattern **/*.go: Review the Golang code for conformity with the Uber Golang style guide, highlighting any deviations.

Additional comments not posted (2)
client/keys/output_test.go (1)

69-69: LGTM! The test function is well-implemented and covers the necessary cases.

crypto/keys/multisig/multisig.go (1)

44-44: LGTM! Ensure this change does not introduce any unintended side effects in other parts of the codebase.

client/keys/output_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

Review Details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yml
Review profile: CHILL

Commits Files that changed from the base of the PR and between db715be and 81b7b3b.
Files selected for processing (1)
  • client/keys/output_test.go (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
  • client/keys/output_test.go

@@ -41,7 +41,7 @@ func (m *LegacyAminoPubKey) Address() cryptotypes.Address {

// Bytes returns the proto encoded version of the LegacyAminoPubKey
func (m *LegacyAminoPubKey) Bytes() []byte {
return AminoCdc.MustMarshal(m)
return AminoCdc.MustMarshalJSON(m)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This does not seem the correct way of handling the problem, based off:

image

This is most likely related to the LegacyAminoPubKey not being registered in some codec somewhere.

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

Review Details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yml
Review profile: CHILL

Commits Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 81b7b3b and fc94fbf.
Files selected for processing (1)
  • crypto/keys/multisig/amino.go (1 hunks)
Files not reviewed due to errors (1)
  • crypto/keys/multisig/amino.go (no review received)
Additional Context Used
Path-based Instructions (1)
crypto/keys/multisig/amino.go (1)

Pattern **/*.go: Review the Golang code for conformity with the Uber Golang style guide, highlighting any deviations.

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

Review Details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yml
Review profile: CHILL

Commits Files that changed from the base of the PR and between fc94fbf and dbeb769.
Files selected for processing (1)
  • crypto/keys/multisig/multisig_test.go (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
  • crypto/keys/multisig/multisig_test.go

@tuantran1702 tuantran1702 marked this pull request as draft May 19, 2024 01:25
@facundomedica
Copy link
Member

This looks like a fix to me, I've seen something similar with other types, secp256k1 keys iirc

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
C:CLI C:Keys Keybase, KMS and HSMs
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[Bug]: Regression, nested multisigs fail marshal/unmarshal in main
4 participants