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

feat(test): fuzzed and symbolic tests #146

Merged
merged 43 commits into from
Aug 2, 2024
Merged

feat(test): fuzzed and symbolic tests #146

merged 43 commits into from
Aug 2, 2024

Conversation

simon-something
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

test/SUMMARY.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
bfloor should always return (a - a % BONE)
badd should be commutative
badd should be associative
0 should be identity for badd
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

badd should have 0 as identity?

Comment on lines 9 to 11
function bsub_exposed(uint256 a, uint256 b) external pure returns (uint256) {
return bsub(a, b);
}
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

i think this is unnecessary bc you're inheriting BNum
other way should be to import MockBNum from manual-smock/ that exposes all calls (with call_* naming standard)

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

it's a pretty weird case: I just needed the selector

    require(_b > _a);

    (bool succ,) = address(this).call(abi.encodeCall(EchidnaBNum.bsub_exposed, (_a, _b)));
    assert(!succ);
  }

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

// btoi should always return the floor(a / BONE) == (a - a%BONE) / BONE
// TODO: Too tightly coupled
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

just pointing out comments

// badd should never sum terms which have a sum gt uint max
function badd_overflow(uint256 _a, uint256 _b) public pure {
// precondition
// vm.assume(_a != type(uint256).max);
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

what are we testing here?

assert(_result1 == _result2);
}

//todo this one fails
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

👀

Copy link
Member

@wei3erHase wei3erHase left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

  • missing scripts to trigger tests: test:fuzz & test:symbolic
  • missing gitignore for corpuses and generated data
  • remaining TODOs and todos
  • Properties table is empty (no [x]s)

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

do we need this file?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

¯_(ツ)_/¯

foundry.toml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
foundry.toml Outdated
Comment on lines 20 to 21
# 1858: Some imports don't have the license identifier
ignored_error_codes = [2018, 2394, 5574, 3860, 1878]
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

WHICH ONES??! 👀

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

ToB properties...

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

1858 or 1878?

src/contracts/BPool.sol Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
test/SUMMARY.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@simon-something simon-something marked this pull request as ready for review July 23, 2024 15:11
Copy link

@0xteddybear 0xteddybear left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I find the lack of coverage of parts of the join flow a bit concerning, but the exitPool function is covered so perhaps there's something I'm missing? I ran

echidna test/invariants/fuzz/Protocol.t.sol  --contract FuzzProtocol --config test/invariants/fuzz/Protocol.yaml

and similarly for the other test files

I agree with weiber on that we should have npm scripts or something in the readme on how to run halmos/echidna

foundry.toml Outdated
Comment on lines 20 to 21
# 1858: Some imports don't have the license identifier
ignored_error_codes = [2018, 2394, 5574, 3860, 1878]

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

1858 or 1878?

test/SUMMARY.md Outdated

We used echidna to test these 23 properties. In addition to these, another fuzzing campaign as been led against the mathematical contracts (BNum and BMath). BMath properties are currently not triggered in CI, due to various rounding errors, and should be further validated.

Limitations/future improvements

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

should this be a section?

| there always should be between MIN_BOUND_TOKENS and MAX_BOUND_TOKENS bound in a pool | High level | 21 | | [x] |
| only the settler can commit a hash | High level | 22 | [x] | [x] |
| when a hash has been commited, only this order can be settled | High level | 23 | [ ] | [ ] |
| BToken should not break the ToB ERC20 properties** | High level | 24 | | [x] |

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

  • spot price before a swap should always be lower than after it|high level|25?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

wanna add it? I guess that should be fairly easy in the swap post-conditions

@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
# https://github.com/crytic/echidna/blob/master/tests/solidity/basic/default.yaml for more options
testMode: assertion
corpusDir: test/invariants/fuzz/corpuses/Protocol/

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

the difference between all of these .yaml seems to be the corpusDir

  • could we use a single config file?
  • what's the purpose behind having different corpus directories?

Copy link
Member Author

@simon-something simon-something Jul 26, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

if you replay a "common" directory, where they're all mixed, echidna spends some time trying "wrong" seq (ie trying to interact with non-deployed contracts) and dropping them -> check the echidna-corpus repo, different config files purpose is twofold: avoiding wasting time replaying "aberrant" seq; having flexibility when using the shell script (if one test shouldn't be an assert mode for instance, or deploy some libraries, etc)

test/SUMMARY.md Outdated


`Out given in:`
$\text{tokenAmountOut} = \text{tokenBalanceOut} \cdot \left( 1 - \left( \frac{\text{tokenBalanceIn}}{\text{tokenBalanceIn} + \left( \text{tokenAmountIn} \cdot \left(1 - \text{swapFee}\right)\right)} \right)^{\frac{\text{tokenWeightIn}}{\text{tokenWeightOut}}} \right)$

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

this expression doesn't seem to be renderable

Also, perhaps expressions as blocks would be easier to read? text in inline expressions gets real small

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

true true

.solhintignore Outdated
@@ -1,2 +1,3 @@
test/smock/*
test/manual-smock/*
test/invariants/*

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

there are not that many warnings, we could disable some rules (such as custom-errors) for the entire directory and add a few inline ignores (in the case of no-empty-blocks, for example)


function clamp(uint256 _value, uint256 _min, uint256 _max) internal returns (uint256) {
if (_min > _max) {
emit AssertionFailed();

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

why use the event here but assert(false) elsewhere?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

yeah, not super consistent, agree (this will become a std lib we can reuse, with rounding errors/approx eq, etc, maybe in echidna-corpus repo?)

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

should be BToken.t.sol for consistency

Comment on lines +81 to +96
_maxAmountsIn[i] = _maxIn;

tokens[i].mint(currentCaller, _maxIn);
hevm.prank(currentCaller);
tokens[i].approve(address(pool), _maxIn);
}

hevm.prank(currentCaller);
try pool.joinPool(_amountBpt, _maxAmountsIn) {
ghost_bptMinted += _amountBpt;
} catch {
assert(
pool.isFinalized() || pool.getCurrentTokens().length > bconst.MAX_BOUND_TOKENS()
|| currentCaller != pool.getController()
);
}

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

after a run of 50k calls I'm getting no coverage on this, perhaps there's something wrong with line 80?

the calls to _{mint,push}PoolShare in join are also not covered

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

  • 50k is rookie number -> check echidna-corpus repo to reuse bigger corpus (I think a bit more than 10m runs rn? Still not huge, but something, looking at cloud-fuzzing very soon(tm)(c))
  • you're right, bmul calls revert systematically -> I guess bptToken should have more constraints. Wanna give it a stab?

uint256 _outRatio = bnum.bmul_exposed(tokens[_tokenOut].balanceOf(address(pool)), bconst.MAX_OUT_RATIO());

assert(
_inComputed > _maxAmountIn // 5

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

this assert seems to always short-circuit on the first condition

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

why do you think so? Test fails if I remove any of the 3 conditions for me

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

then it's probably related to me running only 50k calls

@simon-something simon-something added the hold Do not merge for now label Jul 26, 2024
fs_permissions = [{ access = "read-write", path = ".forge-snapshots/"}]
# 2018: function can be view, so far only caused by mocks
# 2394: solc insists on reporting on every transient storage use
# 5574, 3860: bytecode size limit, so far only caused by test contracts
ignored_error_codes = [2018, 2394, 5574, 3860]
# 1878: Some imports don't have the license identifier
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

is this a halmos/echidna thing? we should issue them

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

src/contracts/BPool.sol Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/contracts/BPool.sol Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
0xteddybear and others added 5 commits July 29, 2024 12:58
* chore: fix linter setup

* chore: update smocked files

* chore: add missing spdx identifier

* chore: add an npm script to run echidna tests

* test: ensure SpotPriceAfterBelowSpotPriceBefore is never thrown

* chore: fix natspec issues

* test: ensure fuzz_joinExitPool body is runnable

* chore: cleaning up fuzz (#179)

* feat: creating BCoWPoolForTest to avoid modifying core contracts

* fix: test:echidna script

* fix: safeTransfer issue with echidna

* chore: update test contract licenses

* test: document property 25

* chore: remove unimplemented function

---------

Co-authored-by: Weißer Hase <wei3erhase@defi.sucks>
@wei3erHase wei3erHase force-pushed the feat/fuzz-symb-tests branch from bf490bb to 42d2a04 Compare July 31, 2024 12:38
@wei3erHase wei3erHase removed the hold Do not merge for now label Jul 31, 2024
wei3erHase and others added 5 commits August 1, 2024 22:00
* feat: improving bmath fuzz test

* chore: updating Properties file

* feat: adding min amount to test environment

* test: ensure results are 0.1% from each other (#187)

---------

Co-authored-by: teddy <teddy@defi.sucks>
* test: deal with previously commented code

* chore: pass name and symbol to ForTest contracts

* fix: work around hevm not supporting mcopy

* fix: remove unprovable property and replace it with two provable ones
@@ -53,7 +55,8 @@
"@defi-wonderland/natspec-smells": "1.1.3",
"@defi-wonderland/smock-foundry": "1.5.0",
"forge-gas-snapshot": "github:marktoda/forge-gas-snapshot#9161f7c",
"forge-std": "github:foundry-rs/forge-std#5475f85",
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

this will change the deployed build...

Copy link
Member

@wei3erHase wei3erHase left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

good to go! 🚀

@wei3erHase wei3erHase merged commit 01e8f91 into dev Aug 2, 2024
4 checks passed
@wei3erHase wei3erHase deleted the feat/fuzz-symb-tests branch August 2, 2024 08:14
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.

3 participants