-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.7k
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
refactor helper to use in cli in CLD #15647
Conversation
Flakeguard SummaryRan new or updated tests between View Flaky Detector Details | Compare Changes Found Flaky Tests ❌
ArtifactsFor detailed logs of the failed tests, please refer to the artifact failed-test-results-with-logs.json. |
AER Report: CI Core ran successfully ✅AER Report: Operator UI CI ran successfully ✅ |
c392124
to
95bf07c
Compare
@@ -91,6 +91,7 @@ func ApplyChangesets(t *testing.T, e deployment.Environment, timelockContractsPe | |||
NodeIDs: e.NodeIDs, | |||
Offchain: e.Offchain, | |||
OCRSecrets: e.OCRSecrets, | |||
GetContext: e.GetContext, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Dammit, another one. Shouldn't we be using NewEnvironment here instead of priming the struct anyway? Sigh.
(Not a review, just drive-by frustration)
} | ||
|
||
// Validate checks that all fields are non-nil, ensuring it's ready | ||
// for use generating views or interactions. | ||
func (state MCMSWithTimelockState) Validate() error { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
mv with contracts to proposalutils
// for a MCMSWithTimelock contract deployment. | ||
// It is public for use in product specific packages. | ||
// Either all fields are nil or all fields are non-nil. | ||
type MCMSWithTimelockContracts struct { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
to use MaybeLoad.. and avoid import cycle need to defn this in this package. mv of MCMSWithTimelockState
) | ||
|
||
func Test_NewAcceptOwnershipChangeset(t *testing.T) { | ||
t.Parallel() |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ci is timing out. parallelize many ccip tests
f4b09c6
to
ae0c33e
Compare
// If the block start is not provided, it assumes that the operations have not been scheduled yet | ||
// and executes all the operations for the given chain. | ||
// It is an error if there are no operations for the given chain. | ||
func RunTimelockExecutor(env deployment.Environment, cfg RunTimelockExecutorConfig) error { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sigh. It makes me nervous having this all accessible to changesets, as I want to avoid changesets themselves from ever executing this logic. But I guess this is fine for now - I agree, it probably ought to go into MCMS library though. We can move it there later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
do either of these make it better:
- in a real env (with non zero timelock) it doesn't matter b/c the duration must pass while in the timelock
- moving pkgs out of changeset
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think both help, yeah.
Flakeguard SummaryRan new or updated tests between View Flaky Detector Details | Compare Changes Found Flaky Tests ❌
ArtifactsFor detailed logs of the failed tests, please refer to the artifact failed-test-results-with-logs.json. |
@@ -221,8 +221,8 @@ func ConfirmCommitForAllWithExpectedSeqNums( | |||
return false | |||
} | |||
}, | |||
3*time.Minute, | |||
1*time.Second, | |||
tests.WaitTimeout(t), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
this fixed a lot of flakes
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
it may also be related to the recent ccip smoke test nightmares
ab, types.MCMSWithTimelockConfig{ | ||
Canceller: changeset.SingleGroupMCMS(t), | ||
Bypasser: changeset.SingleGroupMCMS(t), | ||
Proposer: changeset.SingleGroupMCMS(t), | ||
Canceller: proposalutils.SingleGroupMCMS(t), | ||
Bypasser: proposalutils.SingleGroupMCMS(t), | ||
Proposer: proposalutils.SingleGroupMCMS(t), | ||
TimelockMinDelay: big.NewInt(0), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why not just proposalutils.SingleGroupTimelockConfig(t)
?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
oversight. thanks
DPA-1396
refactor to support timelock runner as cli
Requires
Supports
https://github.com/smartcontractkit/chainlink-deployments/pull/333