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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

feat!: Ensure InitGenesis returns with non-empty validator set #9697

Merged
merged 73 commits into from
Oct 5, 2021
Merged

feat!: Ensure InitGenesis returns with non-empty validator set #9697

merged 73 commits into from
Oct 5, 2021

Conversation

aleem1314
Copy link
Contributor

@aleem1314 aleem1314 commented Jul 14, 2021 •
edited
Loading

Description

Closes: #8961

SDK allows InitGenesis to return with an empty validator set. In practice, the error for an empty validator set gets thrown in tendermint. To fix this,

  • Add non-empty validator set check to the mm.InitGenesis function. This will break simapp.Setup because it relies on an empty validator set #comment.
  • Update simapp.Setup to use a single validator.
  • Fix failing tests (Most of them are keeper tests).

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
  • added ! to 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
  • followed the guidelines for building modules
  • included the necessary unit and integration tests
  • added a changelog entry to CHANGELOG.md
  • included comments for documenting Go code
  • updated the relevant documentation or specification
  • reviewed "Files changed" and left comments if necessary
  • 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 ! in the type prefix if API or client breaking change
  • confirmed all author checklist items have been addressed
  • reviewed state machine logic
  • reviewed API design and naming
  • reviewed documentation is accurate
  • reviewed tests and test coverage
  • manually tested (if applicable)

@orijbot
Copy link

orijbot commented Jul 14, 2021

Visit https://dashboard.github.orijtech.com?pr=9697&repo=cosmos%2Fcosmos-sdk to see benchmark details.

@aleem1314
Copy link
Contributor Author

Did we not already complete this work? I recall seeing a PR that tackled this work? Or am I imagining things?

No. As mentioned here, I split this task into multiple smaller PR's #9938 and #10020.

@aleem1314 aleem1314 marked this pull request as ready for review September 20, 2021 13:39
colin-axner
colin-axner reviewed Sep 22, 2021
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@colin-axner colin-axner left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM! My only concern is areas of the testing code which now explicitly work around the existence of a genesis validator. This should be documented in the code otherwise a later reader will be very confused

x/bank/keeper/querier_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
x/staking/keeper/historical_info_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
x/bank/keeper/keeper_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
types/module/module.go Show resolved Hide resolved
x/staking/keeper/historical_info_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
x/staking/simulation/operations_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
x/slashing/simulation/operations_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
colin-axner
colin-axner approved these changes Sep 28, 2021
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@colin-axner colin-axner left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks great to me! Thanks for addressing my review suggestions

technicallyty
technicallyty approved these changes Oct 4, 2021
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@technicallyty technicallyty left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm!

@amaury1093 amaury1093 added A:automerge Automatically merge PR once all prerequisites pass. and removed A:automerge Automatically merge PR once all prerequisites pass. labels Oct 5, 2021
@amaury1093
Copy link
Contributor

@aleem1314 Could you resolve the small conflict? feel free to put automerge on right after!

@aleem1314 aleem1314 added the A:automerge Automatically merge PR once all prerequisites pass. label Oct 5, 2021
@mergify mergify bot merged commit 9094794 into master Oct 5, 2021
@mergify mergify bot deleted the aleem/8961-init-genesis branch October 5, 2021 12:02
larry0x pushed a commit to larry0x/cosmos-sdk that referenced this pull request May 22, 2023
@aleem1314
feat!: Ensure InitGenesis returns with non-empty validator set (cosmo…
6d0f4f0 
…s#9697)

<!--
The default pull request template is for types feat, fix, or refactor.
For other templates, add one of the following parameters to the url:
- template=docs.md
- template=other.md
-->

## Description

Closes: cosmos#8961 

SDK allows InitGenesis to return with an empty validator set. In practice, the error for an empty validator set gets thrown in tendermint. To fix this,

* Add non-empty validator set check to the `mm.InitGenesis` function. This will break `simapp.Setup` because it relies on an empty validator set [#comment](cosmos#8909 (comment)).
* Update `simapp.Setup` to use a single validator.
* Fix failing tests (Most of them are keeper tests).

<!-- Add a description of the changes that this PR introduces and the files that
are the most critical to review. -->

---

### 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...

- [x] included the correct [type prefix](https://github.com/commitizen/conventional-commit-types/blob/v3.0.0/index.json) in the PR title
- [x] added `!` to the type prefix if API or client breaking change
- [x] targeted the correct branch (see [PR Targeting](https://github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#pr-targeting))
- [x] provided a link to the relevant issue or specification
- [x] followed the guidelines for [building modules](https://github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk/blob/master/docs/building-modules)
- [ ] included the necessary unit and integration [tests](https://github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#testing)
- [x] added a changelog entry to `CHANGELOG.md`
- [ ] included comments for [documenting Go code](https://blog.golang.org/godoc)
- [ ] updated the relevant documentation or specification
- [x] reviewed "Files changed" and left comments if necessary
- [ ] 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](https://github.com/commitizen/conventional-commit-types/blob/v3.0.0/index.json) in the PR title
- [ ] confirmed `!` in the type prefix if API or client breaking change
- [ ] confirmed all author checklist items have been addressed 
- [ ] reviewed state machine logic
- [ ] reviewed API design and naming
- [ ] reviewed documentation is accurate
- [ ] reviewed tests and test coverage
- [ ] manually tested (if applicable)
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@technicallyty technicallyty technicallyty approved these changes

@colin-axner colin-axner colin-axner approved these changes

@aaronc aaronc Awaiting requested review from aaronc

@amaury1093 amaury1093 Awaiting requested review from amaury1093

@anilcse anilcse Awaiting requested review from anilcse

@alexanderbez alexanderbez Awaiting requested review from alexanderbez

Assignees

@technicallyty technicallyty

Labels
A:automerge Automatically merge PR once all prerequisites pass. C:Simulations C:x/auth C:x/bank C:x/distribution distribution module related C:x/feegrant C:x/genutil genutil module issues C:x/gov C:x/mint C:x/params C:x/slashing C:x/staking
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Ensure InitGenesis returns with non-empty validator set
6 participants
@aleem1314 @orijbot @alexanderbez @colin-axner @amaury1093 @technicallyty