feat(contracts): add withdrawTo to ValidatorPool contract

[0xHansLee]

Summary by CodeRabbit

• New Features
  • Introduced a new withdrawal functionality in the Validator Pool, enabling users to directly transfer a specified amount to a given address.
  • Added test functions to ensure the withdrawal process functions correctly, including testing withdrawals to specific addresses and handling balance adjustments accurately.
  • Implemented a test to check for reverting withdrawals to the zero address.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

The update introduces a new withdrawal feature in the ValidatorPool.sol contract, allowing users to withdraw a specified amount to a designated address. A corresponding test function test_withdraw_to_succeeds in the ValidatorPoolTest contract validates this functionality, ensuring accurate balance adjustments post-withdrawal.

Changes

File	Change Summary
.../contracts/L1/ValidatorPool.sol	Added withdrawTo function for withdrawing a specified amount to a given address.
.../contracts/test/ValidatorPool.t.sol	Added test_withdraw_to_succeeds to test the new withdrawal functionality and balance adjustments. Added test_withdraw_to_zero_address_reverts to check for reverting withdrawals to the zero address.

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

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

---

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-tests 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 tests 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 tests.
  • @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.
• The JSON schema for the configuration file is available here.
• 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/coderabbit-overrides.v2.json

CodeRabbit Discord Community

Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.

[coderabbitai]

Review Status

Actionable comments generated: 2

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between b5621b2 and 024c58a.

Files selected for processing (2)

• packages/contracts/contracts/L1/ValidatorPool.sol (1 hunks)
• packages/contracts/contracts/test/ValidatorPool.t.sol (1 hunks)

[coderabbitai]

Review Status

Actionable comments generated: 0

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between b5621b2 and fb15fae.

Files selected for processing (2)

• packages/contracts/contracts/L1/ValidatorPool.sol (1 hunks)
• packages/contracts/contracts/test/ValidatorPool.t.sol (1 hunks)

Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)

• packages/contracts/contracts/L1/ValidatorPool.sol
• packages/contracts/contracts/test/ValidatorPool.t.sol

[coderabbitai]

Review Status

Actionable comments generated: 0

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between b5621b2 and 42455c1.

Files selected for processing (2)

• packages/contracts/contracts/L1/ValidatorPool.sol (1 hunks)
• packages/contracts/contracts/test/ValidatorPool.t.sol (1 hunks)

Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)

• packages/contracts/contracts/L1/ValidatorPool.sol
• packages/contracts/contracts/test/ValidatorPool.t.sol

[coderabbitai]

Review Status

Actionable comments generated: 0

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between b5621b2 and b1a61f8.

Files selected for processing (3)

• packages/contracts/.gas-snapshot (6 hunks)
• packages/contracts/contracts/L1/ValidatorPool.sol (1 hunks)
• packages/contracts/contracts/test/ValidatorPool.t.sol (1 hunks)

Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)

• packages/contracts/contracts/L1/ValidatorPool.sol
• packages/contracts/contracts/test/ValidatorPool.t.sol

Additional comments: 2

packages/contracts/.gas-snapshot (2)

• 382-382: The gas cost for test_withdraw_to_succeeds is 167576. This adjustment is crucial to understand the performance impact of the newly introduced withdrawTo function. Ensure that this gas cost is within acceptable limits and does not indicate a significant performance regression. It's also important to compare this cost with similar functions to ensure consistency.
• 350-383: The gas cost adjustments across various functions in the ValidatorPoolTest class, including test_addPendingBond_succeeds, test_createBond_succeeds, test_increaseBond_succeeds, and others, indicate changes in the contract's performance characteristics. It's important to ensure that these adjustments are justified by the changes made to the ValidatorPool contract and do not introduce inefficiencies. Additionally, verify that the gas costs for new or modified functions, such as test_withdraw_to_succeeds, are in line with expectations and do not significantly impact the contract's usability due to high gas costs.

[kangsorang]

LGTM

[seolaoh]

LGTM except that the bindings need to be updated!

[0xHansLee]

LGTM except that the bindings need to be updated!

Thank you for pointing out. I'll add it soon.

[coderabbitai]

Review Status

Actionable comments generated: 0

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between b5621b2 and 6840f93.

Files selected for processing (5)

• kroma-bindings/bindings/validatorpool.go (2 hunks)
• kroma-bindings/bindings/validatorpool_more.go (1 hunks)
• packages/contracts/.gas-snapshot (6 hunks)
• packages/contracts/contracts/L1/ValidatorPool.sol (1 hunks)
• packages/contracts/contracts/test/ValidatorPool.t.sol (1 hunks)

Files not summarized due to errors (2)

• kroma-bindings/bindings/validatorpool.go: Error: Message exceeds token limit
• kroma-bindings/bindings/validatorpool_more.go: Error: Message exceeds token limit

Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (3)

• packages/contracts/.gas-snapshot
• packages/contracts/contracts/L1/ValidatorPool.sol
• packages/contracts/contracts/test/ValidatorPool.t.sol

Additional comments: 8

kroma-bindings/bindings/validatorpool_more.go (3)

• 16-16: The ValidatorPoolDeployedBin constant holds the deployed bytecode for the ValidatorPool contract. Ensure this bytecode matches the actual deployed bytecode of the contract.
• 16-16: The ValidatorPoolStorageLayoutJSON constant defines the storage layout for the ValidatorPool contract. Verify that this JSON matches the actual storage layout defined in the Solidity contract.
• 16-16: In the init function, the use of panic for error handling is appropriate for initialization code where failure is not an option. However, it might be helpful to add a comment explaining why panic is used here, for the sake of clarity and maintainability.

kroma-bindings/bindings/validatorpool.go (5)

• 34-34: The metadata, ABI, and Bin variables are correctly defined and follow best practices by encouraging access through the ValidatorPoolMetaData struct.

Also applies to: 35-35

• 34-34: The DeployValidatorPool function is correctly implemented, handling deployment and error scenarios appropriately.
• 34-34: The contract, caller, transactor, and filterer structs, along with their methods, are correctly implemented and provide the necessary functionality to interact with the smart contract.
• 34-34: The event handling logic, including iterators and filter functions for various contract events, is correctly implemented and follows best practices.
• 900-920: The withdrawTo method is correctly implemented, aligning with the PR objectives to enhance user control over withdrawals.