Improve test coverage action [@coderabbit ignore] #790
Conversation
…to gasless-revisited
|
Important Review skippedIgnore keyword(s) in the title. Ignored keywords (1)
Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the You can disable this status message by setting the WalkthroughThe changes introduce enhancements to the GitHub Actions workflow for coverage reporting, including a new step to identify modified Solidity files. Additionally, a new Changes
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? TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
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 using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 3
Outside diff range, codebase verification and nitpick comments (2)
docs/Permit2Proxy.md (1)
1-126: Comprehensive Review of DocumentationThe documentation for the Permit2 Proxy contract is well-structured and informative. It provides a clear description of the contract's capabilities and usage. However, there are a few areas that could be improved:
- Language and Grammar: Some sentences are overly complex and could be simplified for better readability. For example, the repeated use of "in order to" could be shortened to "to" without losing meaning.
- Technical Accuracy: Ensure that all code snippets are syntactically correct and that the described functionality matches the actual implementation in the smart contracts.
- Consistency: The documentation should consistently use technical terms and formatting to avoid confusion.
Consider simplifying complex sentences and ensuring consistency in technical terminology and formatting. Here's a suggested edit for better readability:
- It can only be called by the signer in order to prevent front-running attacks. + It can only be called by the signer to prevent front-running attacks.Tools
LanguageTool
[style] ~16-~16: Consider a shorter alternative to avoid wordiness.
Context: ...re. It can only be called by the signer in order to prevent front-running attacks. ```soli...(IN_ORDER_TO_PREMIUM)
[style] ~44-~44: Consider a shorter alternative to avoid wordiness.
Context: ...ct. It can only be called by the signer in order to prevent front-running attacks. ```soli...(IN_ORDER_TO_PREMIUM)
[misspelling] ~63-~63: Use “an” instead of ‘a’ if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. ‘an article’, ‘an hour’.
Context: ...gasless flow by allowing a user to sign a Uniswap Permit2 message hash which incl...(EN_A_VS_AN)
[style] ~87-~87: Consider a shorter alternative to avoid wordiness.
Context: ...id message hash that can then be signed in order to be executed later by another wallet. `...(IN_ORDER_TO_PREMIUM)
.github/workflows/enforceTestCoverage.yml (1)
Line range hint
57-179: Review of GitHub Actions Workflow for Test CoverageThe GitHub Actions workflow is well-structured and targets an important aspect of software quality: test coverage. The workflow includes steps to identify modified Solidity files, generate a coverage report, and enforce a minimum coverage threshold. However, there are a few areas that require attention:
- Correctness of Shell Commands: Some shell commands used in the workflow might not handle edge cases well, such as spaces in filenames or unexpected characters in file paths.
- Performance: The workflow could be optimized to reduce runtime, especially in how it processes coverage data.
- Clarity and Maintainability: Some parts of the script are complex and could benefit from additional comments or documentation to explain their purpose and mechanics.
Address potential issues with shell commands and consider optimizing the workflow to improve performance and maintainability. Here are some specific suggestions:
- Ensure that shell commands correctly handle edge cases, such as spaces in filenames.
- Optimize the processing of coverage data to reduce the runtime of the workflow.
# Suggested fix for handling spaces in filenames MODIFIED_FILES=$(git diff --name-only --diff-filter=AM origin/main | grep '^src/.*\.sol$' | tr '\n' ' ')
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (14)
- .github/workflows/enforceTestCoverage.yml (6 hunks)
- .gitmodules (1 hunks)
- config/permit2.json (1 hunks)
- deployments/_deployments_log_file.json (1 hunks)
- deployments/arbitrum.staging.json (1 hunks)
- docs/Permit2Proxy.md (1 hunks)
- docs/README.md (1 hunks)
- lib/Permit2 (1 hunks)
- remappings.txt (1 hunks)
- script/demoScripts/demoPermit2Proxy.ts (1 hunks)
- script/deploy/facets/DeployPermit2Proxy.s.sol (1 hunks)
- src/Periphery/Permit2Proxy.sol (1 hunks)
- test/solidity/Periphery/Permit2Proxy.t.sol (1 hunks)
- tsconfig.json (2 hunks)
Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (2)
- docs/README.md
- lib/Permit2
Additional context used
Gitleaks
deployments/arbitrum.staging.json
47-47: Detected a Generic API Key, potentially exposing access to various services and sensitive operations.
(generic-api-key)
LanguageTool
docs/Permit2Proxy.md
[style] ~16-~16: Consider a shorter alternative to avoid wordiness.
Context: ...re. It can only be called by the signer in order to prevent front-running attacks. ```soli...(IN_ORDER_TO_PREMIUM)
[style] ~44-~44: Consider a shorter alternative to avoid wordiness.
Context: ...ct. It can only be called by the signer in order to prevent front-running attacks. ```soli...(IN_ORDER_TO_PREMIUM)
[misspelling] ~63-~63: Use “an” instead of ‘a’ if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. ‘an article’, ‘an hour’.
Context: ...gasless flow by allowing a user to sign a Uniswap Permit2 message hash which incl...(EN_A_VS_AN)
[style] ~87-~87: Consider a shorter alternative to avoid wordiness.
Context: ...id message hash that can then be signed in order to be executed later by another wallet. `...(IN_ORDER_TO_PREMIUM)
actionlint
.github/workflows/enforceTestCoverage.yml
66-66: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2206:warning:4:17: Quote to prevent word splitting/globbing, or split robustly with mapfile or read -a
(shellcheck)
66-66: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2199:error:47:11: Arrays implicitly concatenate in [[ ]]. Use a loop (or explicit * instead of @)
(shellcheck)
66-66: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2076:warning:47:39: Remove quotes from right-hand side of =~ to match as a regex rather than literally
(shellcheck)
Additional comments not posted (23)
tsconfig.json (2)
3-3: Update to modern JavaScript target approved.The change to "es2020" allows for the use of modern JavaScript features. However, ensure compatibility with all dependencies and the runtime environment.
11-13: Library configuration updated to "es2020".This update aligns the library support with the new target version. Ensure that no older features are inadvertently removed that are still required by the project.
remappings.txt (1)
12-12: Addition ofpermit2library remapping approved.Ensure that the path
lib/Permit2/src/is correctly set up and that the library is accessible from this path..gitmodules (1)
25-27: Addition ofPermit2submodule approved.Ensure that the URL
https://github.com/Uniswap/Permit2is accessible and that the submodule is correctly integrated into the project.config/permit2.json (1)
1-31: Verify address format consistency and clarify empty addresses.The JSON file is well-structured, but there are a few points that need attention:
- The address at line 30 (
zksync) has a different format compared to others. Please confirm if this is correct.- Several networks such as
aurora,boba,fantom, etc., have empty addresses. If this is intentional, consider documenting the reason or handling these cases explicitly in the code.deployments/arbitrum.staging.json (1)
47-48: Approve the newPermit2Proxyentry and address potential security concern.The addition of the
Permit2Proxyaddress is correctly implemented. Regarding the static analysis flag on theTokenWrapperaddress, it appears to be a false positive typical of Ethereum addresses. However, ensure that all addresses are verified and not placeholders to avoid security risks.Tools
Gitleaks
47-47: Detected a Generic API Key, potentially exposing access to various services and sensitive operations.
(generic-api-key)
script/demoScripts/demoPermit2Proxy.ts (2)
1-19: Review of Imports and ConstantsThe imports and constants are well-defined and organized. However, it's crucial to ensure that all imported modules (
viem,viem/accounts,viem/chains,citty) are part of the project dependencies and are properly documented. Additionally, the use of environment variables (e.g.,PRIVATE_KEY) should be secure and not expose sensitive information inadvertently.Verification successful
Imports Verified in
demoPermit2Proxy.tsThe imported modules
viemandcittyare correctly listed in the project's dependencies withinpackage.json. No issues were found with the imports in the script.
viemis listed with version^2.18.7.cittyis listed with version^0.1.6.Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify that all imported modules are part of the project dependencies. # Test: Search for the imported modules in package.json. Expect: Entries for each module. rg --type json -A 5 '"dependencies"' package.json | rg '"viem"|"citty"'Length of output: 73
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Locate the package.json file and display its contents to verify dependencies. fd -H -I -t f -e json -g 'package.json' --exec catLength of output: 4345
117-117: Review of Script ExecutionThe
runMainfunction is used to execute the main command. This approach is standard for scripts intended to be run from the command line. Ensure that therunMainfunction is well-tested, especially since it handles command line arguments and initiates significant application logic.src/Periphery/Permit2Proxy.sol (7)
46-55: Constructor Implementation is CorrectThe constructor correctly initializes immutable variables and calculates a hash for
PERMIT_WITH_WITNESS_TYPEHASH. Consider adding a comment explaining the purpose ofPERMIT_WITH_WITNESS_TYPEHASHto improve code readability.
60-105: Function Implementation for EIP-2612 Signature Handling is CorrectThe function
callDiamondWithEIP2612Signatureis implemented correctly with secure token handling and proper error handling for external calls. Consider adding more detailed comments to explain each step, such as the permit mechanism, token transfer, and calldata execution, to enhance code clarity.
107-137: Function Implementation for Permit2 Handling is CorrectThe function
callDiamondWithPermit2correctly implements the Permit2 mechanism for token transfers and calldata execution. Adding comments to explain the use of Permit2 and its advantages over traditional permit mechanisms could provide better context for future maintainers.
140-179: Function Implementation for Permit2 with Witness is CorrectThe function
callDiamondWithPermit2Witnesscorrectly implements an enhanced security mechanism using a witness hash. Adding a detailed comment explaining the purpose and importance of the witness hash could help future developers understand its role in enhancing security.
182-219: Function Implementation for Generating Permit2 Message Hash is CorrectThe function
getPermit2MsgHashis implemented correctly, ensuring secure message hash generation for signing. Consider adding comments to explain each component of the message hash, such as the domain separator, permit, and witness, to enhance understanding for future developers.
265-275: Internal Function for Executing Calldata is CorrectThe function
_executeCalldatais implemented correctly, using low-level calls with robust error handling. Adding a comment to explain the choice of low-level calls and the importance of error checking could improve code maintainability.
278-355: Nonce Management Functions are Correctly ImplementedThe nonce management functions are implemented correctly, handling edge cases and efficiently searching for valid nonces. Consider adding comments to explain the logic behind nonce searching and handling edge cases, which could help future developers understand the complexities involved.
deployments/_deployments_log_file.json (1)
22457-22471: Validate JSON structure and data consistency.The JSON structure appears correctly formatted and includes comprehensive details for the
Permit2Proxydeployment. However, there are a few points to consider:
- Data Type Consistency: The
VERIFIEDfield is represented as a string ("true") rather than a boolean (true). This might cause issues if the system expects a boolean type. Confirm whether this representation aligns with the system's requirements.- Security and Accuracy: Ensure that the
ADDRESSandCONSTRUCTOR_ARGSare correct and have been double-checked for accuracy and security implications, especially since they involve direct interactions with the blockchain.- Formatting and Readability: While the JSON is well-structured, consider adding comments or documentation within the JSON or in accompanying documentation to explain the purpose and usage of each field, especially for less obvious fields like
SALTandCONSTRUCTOR_ARGS.Consider running a JSON schema validation to ensure all fields meet the expected formats and types. Additionally, verify the correctness of the
ADDRESSandCONSTRUCTOR_ARGSwith the blockchain records.test/solidity/Periphery/Permit2Proxy.t.sol (7)
1-2: Header and Pragma Directive:The SPDX license identifier and pragma directive are correctly set. The pragma version
^0.8.17ensures compatibility with Solidity compiler versions starting from 0.8.17 and above, which is suitable for modern Solidity development.
12-29: Contract Declaration and Storage Variables:The contract
Permit2ProxyTestis well-structured with clear sections for constants, storage, and types. The use of constants for addresses likePERMIT2_ADDRESSandDIAMOND_ADDRESSenhances readability and maintainability. The storage variables are appropriately declared with internal visibility, which is good practice for test contracts.
49-69: Setup Function:The
setUpfunction initializes the testing environment effectively. It sets a custom block number for forking, initializes base testing configurations, and sets up necessary contract instances and permissions. The use ofvm.prankandvm.labelfrom the Foundry test suite demonstrates a good understanding of Ethereum testing practices.However, the infinite approval in line 68 could potentially be risky in a production environment but is acceptable in a test setup.
75-104: Test Functions for EIP2612 Permit Functionality:The test functions are comprehensive and cover various scenarios including successful execution, re-use of signatures, expired signatures, and invalid signatures. The use of
vm.expectRevertandvm.expectEmitensures that the contract behavior is thoroughly tested against expected outcomes.Also applies to: 106-143, 145-173, 175-203, 205-232
234-367: Permit2 Specific Tests:These tests validate the
Permit2functionality integrated with thePermit2Proxy. The tests check for successful calls, handling of different addresses, and the use of witnesses. The detailed setup of test parameters and the use of custom errors likeInvalidSignerandInvalidNonceenhance the robustness of the test suite.
369-417: Security and Edge Case Handling:The tests for transferring more tokens than intended and using signatures from another wallet are crucial for security. These tests ensure that the contract handles edge cases and potential attack vectors effectively.
419-650: Helper Functions:The helper functions like
_getPermitTransferFromParamsand_generateEIP2612MsgHashare well-implemented, providing necessary functionalities for the tests. The use of internal and private visibility for these functions is appropriate, ensuring they are not accessible externally.
| // SPDX-License-Identifier: UNLICENSED | ||
| pragma solidity ^0.8.17; | ||
|
|
||
| import { DeployScriptBase } from "./utils/DeployScriptBase.sol"; | ||
| import { Permit2Proxy } from "lifi/Periphery/Permit2Proxy.sol"; | ||
| import { stdJson } from "forge-std/Script.sol"; | ||
|
|
||
| contract DeployScript is DeployScriptBase { | ||
| using stdJson for string; | ||
|
|
||
| constructor() DeployScriptBase("Permit2Proxy") {} | ||
|
|
||
| function run() | ||
| public | ||
| returns (Permit2Proxy deployed, bytes memory constructorArgs) | ||
| { | ||
| constructorArgs = getConstructorArgs(); | ||
|
|
||
| deployed = Permit2Proxy(deploy(type(Permit2Proxy).creationCode)); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| function getConstructorArgs() internal override returns (bytes memory) { | ||
| string memory deployments = string.concat( | ||
| root, | ||
| "/deployments/", | ||
| network, | ||
| ".", | ||
| fileSuffix, | ||
| "json" | ||
| ); | ||
| string memory deploymentsJSON = vm.readFile(deployments); | ||
|
|
||
| address diamond = deploymentsJSON.readAddress(".LiFiDiamond"); | ||
|
|
||
| // get path of permit2 config file | ||
| string memory permit2ProxyConfig = string.concat( | ||
| root, | ||
| "/config/permit2.json" | ||
| ); | ||
|
|
||
| // read file into json variable | ||
| string memory permit2ProxyConfigJSON = vm.readFile(permit2ProxyConfig); | ||
|
|
||
| // extract wrapped token address for the given network | ||
| address permit2Address = permit2ProxyConfigJSON.readAddress( | ||
| string.concat(".", network) | ||
| ); | ||
|
|
||
| return abi.encode(diamond, permit2Address); | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Approve the deployment script structure with a suggestion for improvement.
The deployment script is well-structured and modular. However, consider adding error handling for file operations (vm.readFile) to ensure graceful handling of missing or malformed JSON files.
| const main = defineCommand({ | ||
| meta: { | ||
| name: 'demo-permit2', | ||
| description: 'Demonstrate a Permit2 tx', | ||
| }, | ||
| args: { | ||
| signerKey: { | ||
| type: 'string', | ||
| description: 'Private key of signer', | ||
| required: true, | ||
| }, | ||
| executorKey: { | ||
| type: 'string', | ||
| description: 'Private key of the executor', | ||
| required: true, | ||
| }, | ||
| }, | ||
| async run({ args }) { | ||
| const SIGNER_PRIVATE_KEY = `0x${args.signerKey}` as Hex | ||
| const EXECUTOR_PRIVATE_KEY = `0x${args.executorKey}` as Hex | ||
|
|
||
| // Setup the required ABI | ||
| const permit2ProxyAbi = parseAbi([ | ||
| 'function getPermit2MsgHash(bytes,address,uint256,uint256,uint256) external view returns (bytes32)', | ||
| 'function nextNonce(address owner) external view returns (uint256)', | ||
| 'function callDiamondWithPermit2Witness(bytes,address,((address,uint256),uint256,uint256),bytes) external', | ||
| ]) | ||
|
|
||
| // Setup a READ-ONLY client | ||
| const client = createPublicClient({ | ||
| chain: arbitrum, | ||
| transport: http(), | ||
| }) | ||
|
|
||
| // Setup a signer account | ||
| const account = privateKeyToAccount(SIGNER_PRIVATE_KEY) | ||
|
|
||
| // Get calldata to bridge USDT from LIFI API | ||
| const url = | ||
| 'https://li.quest/v1/quote?fromChain=ARB&toChain=POL&fromToken=0xFd086bC7CD5C481DCC9C85ebE478A1C0b69FCbb9&toToken=0xc2132D05D31c914a87C6611C10748AEb04B58e8F&fromAddress=0xb9c0dE368BECE5e76B52545a8E377a4C118f597B&toAddress=0xb9c0dE368BECE5e76B52545a8E377a4C118f597B&fromAmount=5000000' | ||
| const options = { method: 'GET', headers: { accept: 'application/json' } } | ||
| const lifiResp = await fetch(url, options) | ||
| const calldata = (await lifiResp.json()).transactionRequest.data | ||
|
|
||
| // Get the nonce from the PERMIT2 contract | ||
| const nonce = await client.readContract({ | ||
| address: PERMIT2_PROXY_ADDRESS, | ||
| abi: permit2ProxyAbi, | ||
| functionName: 'nextNonce', | ||
| args: [account.address], | ||
| }) | ||
|
|
||
| // Get latest block | ||
| const block = await client.getBlock() | ||
|
|
||
| // Construct a valid message hash to sign using Permit2Proxy's utility func | ||
| const msgHash = await client.readContract({ | ||
| address: PERMIT2_PROXY_ADDRESS, | ||
| abi: permit2ProxyAbi, | ||
| functionName: 'getPermit2MsgHash', | ||
| args: [ | ||
| calldata, | ||
| USDT_ADDRESS, | ||
| parseUnits('5', 6), | ||
| nonce, | ||
| block.timestamp + 1200n, | ||
| ], | ||
| }) | ||
| console.log(msgHash) | ||
|
|
||
| // Sign the message hash | ||
| const rsvSig = await sign({ hash: msgHash, privateKey: SIGNER_PRIVATE_KEY }) | ||
| const signature = serializeSignature(rsvSig) | ||
| console.log(signature) | ||
|
|
||
| // Setup the parameters for the executor to call | ||
| const tokenPermissions = [USDT_ADDRESS, parseUnits('5', 6)] | ||
| const permit = [tokenPermissions, nonce, block.timestamp + 1200n] | ||
|
|
||
| // Instantiate the executor account and a WRITE enabled client | ||
| const executorAccount = privateKeyToAccount(EXECUTOR_PRIVATE_KEY) | ||
| const walletClient = createWalletClient({ | ||
| account: executorAccount, | ||
| chain: arbitrum, | ||
| transport: http(), | ||
| }) | ||
|
|
||
| // Execute using the Permit2 Proxy | ||
| const tx = await walletClient.writeContract({ | ||
| address: PERMIT2_PROXY_ADDRESS, | ||
| abi: permit2ProxyAbi, | ||
| functionName: 'callDiamondWithPermit2Witness', | ||
| args: [calldata, account.address, permit, signature], | ||
| }) | ||
| }, | ||
| }) | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Review of Main Command Definition and Execution Flow
The command defined in this script handles complex interactions with a blockchain, including reading and writing contracts. The use of async/await is appropriate for handling asynchronous operations. However, there are several areas that require attention:
- Security: Ensure that the private keys used in the script are handled securely and not exposed in logs or error messages.
- Error Handling: The script should include try-catch blocks around blockchain interactions to handle potential errors gracefully.
- Code Clarity: Some parts of the code, such as the construction of URLs and the handling of blockchain transactions, could be refactored into separate functions to improve readability and maintainability.
Consider refactoring the script to improve error handling and code clarity. Here's a suggested refactor for better error handling:
try {
// Existing blockchain interaction code
} catch (error) {
console.error('Failed to execute blockchain interaction:', error);
}| import { Test, TestBase, DSTest, ILiFi, console, ERC20 } from "../utils/TestBase.sol"; | ||
| import { Permit2Proxy } from "lifi/Periphery/Permit2Proxy.sol"; | ||
| import { ISignatureTransfer } from "permit2/interfaces/ISignatureTransfer.sol"; | ||
| import { PermitHash } from "permit2/libraries/PermitHash.sol"; | ||
| import { ERC20 } from "../utils/TestBase.sol"; | ||
| import { PolygonBridgeFacet } from "lifi/Facets/PolygonBridgeFacet.sol"; | ||
| import { ERC20Permit } from "@openzeppelin/contracts/token/ERC20/extensions/ERC20Permit.sol"; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Imports and Dependencies:
The imports are well-organized and cover necessary functionalities such as testing utilities, the main Permit2Proxy contract, and related interfaces and libraries. However, there is a redundant import of ERC20 from TestBase.sol on line 8, as it is already imported on line 4.
Consider removing the duplicate import to clean up the code and avoid confusion:
- import { ERC20 } from "../utils/TestBase.sol";Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| import { Test, TestBase, DSTest, ILiFi, console, ERC20 } from "../utils/TestBase.sol"; | |
| import { Permit2Proxy } from "lifi/Periphery/Permit2Proxy.sol"; | |
| import { ISignatureTransfer } from "permit2/interfaces/ISignatureTransfer.sol"; | |
| import { PermitHash } from "permit2/libraries/PermitHash.sol"; | |
| import { ERC20 } from "../utils/TestBase.sol"; | |
| import { PolygonBridgeFacet } from "lifi/Facets/PolygonBridgeFacet.sol"; | |
| import { ERC20Permit } from "@openzeppelin/contracts/token/ERC20/extensions/ERC20Permit.sol"; | |
| import { Test, TestBase, DSTest, ILiFi, console, ERC20 } from "../utils/TestBase.sol"; | |
| import { Permit2Proxy } from "lifi/Periphery/Permit2Proxy.sol"; | |
| import { ISignatureTransfer } from "permit2/interfaces/ISignatureTransfer.sol"; | |
| import { PermitHash } from "permit2/libraries/PermitHash.sol"; | |
| import { PolygonBridgeFacet } from "lifi/Facets/PolygonBridgeFacet.sol"; | |
| import { ERC20Permit } from "@openzeppelin/contracts/token/ERC20/extensions/ERC20Permit.sol"; |
0xDEnYO
changed the title
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 3
Outside diff range, codebase verification and nitpick comments (2)
.github/workflows/enforceTestCoverage.yml (2)
31-31: Optimize Git fetch depth.Fetching the entire Git history (
fetch-depth: 0) can slow down the workflow, especially in large repositories. If the history is not required for subsequent steps, consider fetching only the last few commits to improve performance.
162-165: Ensure the per-file coverage report is correctly formatted.The script writes the per-file coverage report to a text file. It's important to ensure that the file format is consistent and readable, especially when dealing with multiple files. Consider adding headers or additional formatting to enhance readability.
+ echo "Coverage Report Per File:" > per_file_coverage_report.txt for FILE in "${!FILE_COVERAGE_SUMMARY[@]}"; do echo "${FILE_COVERAGE_SUMMARY[$FILE]}" done >> per_file_coverage_report.txt
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (1)
- .github/workflows/enforceTestCoverage.yml (8 hunks)
Additional context used
actionlint
.github/workflows/enforceTestCoverage.yml
68-68: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2206:warning:4:17: Quote to prevent word splitting/globbing, or split robustly with mapfile or read -a
(shellcheck)
68-68: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2199:error:47:11: Arrays implicitly concatenate in [[ ]]. Use a loop (or explicit * instead of @)
(shellcheck)
68-68: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2076:warning:47:39: Remove quotes from right-hand side of =~ to match as a regex rather than literally
(shellcheck)
Additional comments not posted (1)
.github/workflows/enforceTestCoverage.yml (1)
9-9: Clarify the trigger types for the workflow.The workflow is triggered by various pull request events (
opened,synchronize,reopened,ready_for_review). It's important to ensure that this aligns with the intended use cases for running the coverage checks. If the workflow is intended to run only when the PR is ready for review, consider removing other triggers to conserve CI resources and avoid redundant runs.
| # Step to get modified or added files in the src/ folder | ||
| - name: Get Modified Files | ||
| id: get_modified_files | ||
| run: | | ||
| # Get list of modified or added files in src directory | ||
| MODIFIED_FILES=$(git diff --name-only --diff-filter=AM origin/main | grep '^src/.*\.sol$') | ||
| echo "modified_files=$MODIFIED_FILES" >> "$GITHUB_ENV" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Improve the script for fetching modified files.
The script uses git diff to fetch modified or added Solidity files. However, it's crucial to ensure that the base branch (origin/main) is up-to-date to avoid missing any recent changes. Consider adding a git fetch step before this to ensure accuracy.
+ git fetch origin main
MODIFIED_FILES=$(git diff --name-only --diff-filter=AM origin/main | grep '^src/.*\.sol$')Committable suggestion was skipped due to low confidence.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Since we are checking out the repo in an earlier step in the same file, is it not automatically ensured that we have the latest version?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@0xDEnYO, the actions/checkout step does indeed clone the repository, but it doesn't automatically fetch the latest changes from the remote base branch (origin/main). By default, it only fetches the latest commit of the branch being checked out. Therefore, to ensure that the git diff command compares against the most up-to-date version of origin/main, it's recommended to add a git fetch step before running the git diff command. This will ensure that any recent changes to origin/main are included in the comparison.
Let me know if you need further clarification!
| # Check if the file is in the list of modified files | ||
| if [[ " ${MODIFIED_FILES[@]} " =~ "$FILE_NAME" ]]; then | ||
| # Calculate line coverage percentage for the current file | ||
| LINE_COVERAGE_PERCENTAGE=$(echo "scale=2; $FILE_LINES_HIT / $FILE_LINES_FOUND * 100" | bc) | ||
| FILE_COVERAGE_SUMMARY["$FILE_NAME"]="File: $FILE_NAME - Line Coverage: $LINE_COVERAGE_PERCENTAGE% ($FILE_LINES_HIT / $FILE_LINES_FOUND)" | ||
| fi |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Refine the calculation of coverage percentages.
The script calculates line coverage percentages using bc. It's important to ensure that division by zero is handled to avoid runtime errors. Consider adding a check before performing the division.
+ if [ "$FILE_LINES_FOUND" -eq 0 ]; then
+ LINE_COVERAGE_PERCENTAGE="N/A"
+ else
LINE_COVERAGE_PERCENTAGE=$(echo "scale=2; $FILE_LINES_HIT / $FILE_LINES_FOUND * 100" | bc)
+ fiCommittable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| # Check if the file is in the list of modified files | |
| if [[ " ${MODIFIED_FILES[@]} " =~ "$FILE_NAME" ]]; then | |
| # Calculate line coverage percentage for the current file | |
| LINE_COVERAGE_PERCENTAGE=$(echo "scale=2; $FILE_LINES_HIT / $FILE_LINES_FOUND * 100" | bc) | |
| FILE_COVERAGE_SUMMARY["$FILE_NAME"]="File: $FILE_NAME - Line Coverage: $LINE_COVERAGE_PERCENTAGE% ($FILE_LINES_HIT / $FILE_LINES_FOUND)" | |
| fi | |
| # Check if the file is in the list of modified files | |
| if [[ " ${MODIFIED_FILES[@]} " =~ "$FILE_NAME" ]]; then | |
| # Calculate line coverage percentage for the current file | |
| if [ "$FILE_LINES_FOUND" -eq 0 ]; then | |
| LINE_COVERAGE_PERCENTAGE="N/A" | |
| else | |
| LINE_COVERAGE_PERCENTAGE=$(echo "scale=2; $FILE_LINES_HIT / $FILE_LINES_FOUND * 100" | bc) | |
| fi | |
| FILE_COVERAGE_SUMMARY["$FILE_NAME"]="File: $FILE_NAME - Line Coverage: $LINE_COVERAGE_PERCENTAGE% ($FILE_LINES_HIT / $FILE_LINES_FOUND)" | |
| fi |
|
|
||
| - name: Generate Coverage Summary | ||
| run: | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Address shellcheck warnings in the script.
Static analysis has flagged several issues:
- SC2206: Ensure that arrays are handled correctly to prevent word splitting.
- SC2199 and SC2076: Improve regex handling in conditional checks.
These issues can lead to unexpected behavior and should be corrected.
- MODIFIED_FILES=(${MODIFIED_FILES})
+ read -r -a MODIFIED_FILES <<< "$MODIFIED_FILES"
- if [[ " ${MODIFIED_FILES[@]} " =~ "$FILE_NAME" ]]; then
+ if [[ " ${MODIFIED_FILES[*]} " =~ $FILE_NAME ]]; thenCommittable suggestion was skipped due to low confidence.
Tools
actionlint
68-68: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2206:warning:4:17: Quote to prevent word splitting/globbing, or split robustly with mapfile or read -a
(shellcheck)
68-68: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2199:error:47:11: Arrays implicitly concatenate in [[ ]]. Use a loop (or explicit * instead of @)
(shellcheck)
68-68: shellcheck reported issue in this script: SC2076:warning:47:39: Remove quotes from right-hand side of =~ to match as a regex rather than literally
(shellcheck)
Which Jira task belongs to this PR?
Why did I implement it this way?
Checklist before requesting a review
Checklist for reviewer (DO NOT DEPLOY and contracts BEFORE CHECKING THIS!!!)