This repository has been archived by the owner on Oct 22, 2024. It is now read-only.
Pull in latest Reserve Transfer code #14
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add AssetTransferFilter trait for configuring transfer types. Implement it for XcmExecutor based on existing executor teleports and reserves configuration. Filter assets on pallet-xcm::limited_teleport_assets() based on above.
…erves 'reserve_transfer_assets()' assumed all provided `assets` (fees included) have same, local reserve. This commit enhances the extrinsic to support various scenarios: - transferring assets with reserve on destination, - transferring assets with reserve on remote/third-party chain, - transferring assets with reserve different than the reserve of the asset to be used as fees - meaning can use to transfer random asset with random reserve while using DOT for fees on all involved chains, even if local chain is NOT a reserve location of DOT (aka most chains), - transferring assets with any type of local/dest/remote reserve while using fees which can be teleported between involved chains. All of the above is done by pallet inner logic without the user having to specify which scenario/reserves/teleports/etc. The correct scenario and corresponding XCM programs are identified, and respectively, built automatically based on runtime configuration of trusted teleporters and trusted reserves. Current limitations: - while `fees` and "non-fee" `assets` CAN have different reserves (or fees CAN be teleported), the remaining "non-fee" `assets` CANNOT have different reserve locations (this is also implicitly enforced by `MAX_ASSETS_FOR_TRANSFER=2`, but this can be safely increased in the future). - `fees` and "non-fee" `assets` CANNOT have **different remote** reserves (this can also be supported in the future, but adds even more complexity while possibly not being worth it - we'll see what the future holds).
…et-xcm-fully-support-reserve-transfers
…tytech#1912) This PR moves syncing-related code from `sc-network-common` to `sc-network-sync`. Unfortunately, some parts are tightly integrated with networking, so they were left in `sc-network-common` for now: 1. `SyncMode` in `common/src/sync.rs` (used in `NetworkConfiguration`). 2. `BlockAnnouncesHandshake`, `BlockRequest`, `BlockResponse`, etc. in `common/src/sync/message.rs` (used in `src/protocol.rs` and `src/protocol/message.rs`). More substantial refactoring is needed to decouple syncing and networking completely, including getting rid of the hardcoded sync protocol. ## Release notes Move syncing-related code from `sc-network-common` to `sc-network-sync`. Delete `ChainSync` trait as it's never used (the only implementation is accessed directly from `SyncingEngine` and exposes a lot of public methods that are not part of the trait). Some new trait(s) for syncing will likely be introduced as part of Sync 2.0 refactoring to represent syncing strategies.
Run CI using new image with nightly 2023-11-01 cc paritytech#2113 cc paritytech/ci_cd#896
…aritytech#1189) helps paritytech#439. closes paritytech#473. PR link in the older substrate repository: paritytech/substrate#13498. # Context Rewards payout is processed today in a single block and limited to `MaxNominatorRewardedPerValidator`. This number is currently 512 on both Kusama and Polkadot. This PR tries to scale the nominators payout to an unlimited count in a multi-block fashion. Exposures are stored in pages, with each page capped to a certain number (`MaxExposurePageSize`). Starting out, this number would be the same as `MaxNominatorRewardedPerValidator`, but eventually, this number can be lowered through new runtime upgrades to limit the rewardeable nominators per dispatched call instruction. The changes in the PR are backward compatible. ## How payouts would work like after this change Staking exposes two calls, 1) the existing `payout_stakers` and 2) `payout_stakers_by_page`. ### payout_stakers This remains backward compatible with no signature change. If for a given era a validator has multiple pages, they can call `payout_stakers` multiple times. The pages are executed in an ascending sequence and the runtime takes care of preventing double claims. ### payout_stakers_by_page Very similar to `payout_stakers` but also accepts an extra param `page_index`. An account can choose to payout rewards only for an explicitly passed `page_index`. **Lets look at an example scenario** Given an active validator on Kusama had 1100 nominators, `MaxExposurePageSize` set to 512 for Era e. In order to pay out rewards to all nominators, the caller would need to call `payout_stakers` 3 times. - `payout_stakers(origin, stash, e)` => will pay the first 512 nominators. - `payout_stakers(origin, stash, e)` => will pay the second set of 512 nominators. - `payout_stakers(origin, stash, e)` => will pay the last set of 76 nominators. ... - `payout_stakers(origin, stash, e)` => calling it the 4th time would return an error `InvalidPage`. The above calls can also be replaced by `payout_stakers_by_page` and passing a `page_index` explicitly. ## Commission note Validator commission is paid out in chunks across all the pages where each commission chunk is proportional to the total stake of the current page. This implies higher the total stake of a page, higher will be the commission. If all the pages of a validator's single era are paid out, the sum of commission paid to the validator across all pages should be equal to what the commission would have been if we had a non-paged exposure. ### Migration Note Strictly speaking, we did not need to bump our storage version since there is no migration of storage in this PR. But it is still useful to mark a storage upgrade for the following reasons: - New storage items are introduced in this PR while some older storage items are deprecated. - For the next `HistoryDepth` eras, the exposure would be incrementally migrated to its corresponding paged storage item. - Runtimes using staking pallet would strictly need to wait at least `HistoryDepth` eras with current upgraded version (14) for the migration to complete. At some era `E` such that `E > era_at_which_V14_gets_into_effect + HistoryDepth`, we will upgrade to version X which will remove the deprecated storage items. In other words, it is a strict requirement that E<sub>x</sub> - E<sub>14</sub> > `HistoryDepth`, where E<sub>x</sub> = Era at which deprecated storages are removed from runtime, E<sub>14</sub> = Era at which runtime is upgraded to version 14. - For Polkadot and Kusama, there is a [tracker ticket](paritytech#433) to clean up the deprecated storage items. ### Storage Changes #### Added - ErasStakersOverview - ClaimedRewards - ErasStakersPaged #### Deprecated The following can be cleaned up after 84 eras which is tracked [here](paritytech#433). - ErasStakers. - ErasStakersClipped. - StakingLedger.claimed_rewards, renamed to StakingLedger.legacy_claimed_rewards. ### Config Changes - Renamed MaxNominatorRewardedPerValidator to MaxExposurePageSize. ### TODO - [x] Tracker ticket for cleaning up the old code after 84 eras. - [x] Add companion. - [x] Redo benchmarks before merge. - [x] Add Changelog for pallet_staking. - [x] Pallet should be configurable to enable/disable paged rewards. - [x] Commission payouts are distributed across pages. - [x] Review documentation thoroughly. - [x] Rename `MaxNominatorRewardedPerValidator` -> `MaxExposurePageSize`. - [x] NMap for `ErasStakersPaged`. - [x] Deprecate ErasStakers. - [x] Integrity tests. ### Followup issues [Runtime api for deprecated ErasStakers storage item](paritytech#426) --------- Co-authored-by: Javier Viola <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Ross Bulat <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: command-bot <>
Co-authored-by: Marcin S <[email protected]>
CI image has been updated in the shared snippet, reverting the variable back.
This will remove `core-devs` from being required reviewers of PRs,
This is a port (and hopefully a small improvement) of @kianenigma's PR from the old Substrate repo: paritytech/substrate#13987. Following paritytech#1689 I moved the documentation of all macros relevant to this PR from `frame_support_procedural` to `pallet_macros` while including a hint for RA users. Question: Again with respect to paritytech#1689: Is there a good reason why we should *not* enhance paths with links to our current rustdocs? For example, instead of ```rust /// **Rust-Analyzer users**: See the documentation of the Rust item in /// `frame_support::pallet_macros::storage`. ``` we could write ```rust /// **Rust-Analyzer users**: See the documentation of the Rust item in /// [`frame_support::pallet_macros::storage`](https://paritytech.github.io/polkadot-sdk/master/frame_support/pallet_macros/attr.storage.html). ``` This results in a clickable link like this: <img width="674" alt="image" src="https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/assets/10713977/c129e622-3942-4eeb-8acf-93ee4efdc99d"> I don't really expect the links to become outdated any time soon, but I think this would be a great UX improvement over just having paths. TODOs: - [ ] Add documentation for `constant_name` macro - [x] Add proper documentation for different `QueryKinds`, i.e. `OptionQuery`, `ValueQuery`, `ResultQuery`. One example for each. Custom `OnEmpty` should be moved to `QueryKinds` trait doc page. - [ ] Rework `type_value` docs --------- Co-authored-by: kianenigma <[email protected]>
…et-xcm-fully-support-reserve-transfers
…-transfers' into alistair/merge-from-adrian
Merge from Reserve Transfer Branch
claravanstaden
approved these changes
Nov 2, 2023
vgeddes
approved these changes
Nov 2, 2023
* adds transfer token user fee * updates fee calc * starts with adding snowbridge conf * updates fee * correct ROC amount * correct ROC amount --------- Co-authored-by: claravanstaden <Cats 4 life!>
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
No description provided.