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(rpc test): StateCall and StateReplay #4435

Draft
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

hanabi1224
Copy link
Contributor

@hanabi1224 hanabi1224 commented Jun 20, 2024

Summary of changes

For a detailed explanation, see #4432 (comment)

Changes introduced in this pull request:

  • fix RPC test for StateCall and StateReplay by ignoring the ReturnTrace::exit_code field

Manually tested with the same snapshot that causes CI failures in https://github.com/ChainSafe/forest/actions/runs/9593268587/job/26453560366#step:5:39

forest-tool api compare /data/forest_snapshot_calibnet_2024-06-20_height_1718049.forest.car.zst --forest *** --lotus *** --n-tipsets 10 --filter-file /data/filter-list --miner-address t0111551 --worker-address t3sw466j35hqjbch5x7tcr7ona6idsgzypoturfci2ajqsfrrwhp7ty3ythtd7x646adaidnvxpdr5b2ftcciq
     Running `target/quick/forest-tool api compare /home/me/fr/snapshots/calibnet/forest_snapshot_calibnet_2024-06-20_height_1718049.forest.car.zst --filter StateReplay`
| RPC Method                | Forest | Lotus |
|---------------------------|--------|-------|
| Filecoin.StateReplay (48) | Valid  | Valid |
     Running `target/quick/forest-tool api compare /home/me/fr/snapshots/calibnet/forest_snapshot_calibnet_2024-06-20_height_1718049.forest.car.zst --filter StateCall`
| RPC Method              | Forest | Lotus |
|-------------------------|--------|-------|
| Filecoin.StateCall (48) | Valid  | Valid |

Reference issue to close (if applicable)

Closes

Other information and links

Change checklist

  • I have performed a self-review of my own code,
  • I have made corresponding changes to the documentation,
  • I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works (if possible),
  • I have made sure the CHANGELOG is up-to-date. All user-facing changes should be reflected in this document.

@hanabi1224 hanabi1224 marked this pull request as ready for review June 20, 2024 13:08
@hanabi1224 hanabi1224 requested a review from a team as a code owner June 20, 2024 13:08
@hanabi1224 hanabi1224 requested review from LesnyRumcajs and elmattic and removed request for a team June 20, 2024 13:08
@LesnyRumcajs
Copy link
Member

I recommend we don't merge this so that it's clearly visible that the Forest and Lotus output differs at the currently used versions.

@hanabi1224 hanabi1224 marked this pull request as draft June 20, 2024 14:47
@LesnyRumcajs
Copy link
Member

@hanabi1224 what do we do with this draft?

@lemmih lemmih mentioned this pull request Jul 22, 2024
4 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants