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

test(sims): fix test cases feegrant #19863

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Mar 26, 2024

Conversation

EmilGeorgiev
Copy link
Contributor

@EmilGeorgiev EmilGeorgiev commented Mar 25, 2024

In the file tests/sims/feegrant/operation_test.go tests failed because test accounts are not added to the account keeper

Fixed: #19862

Description

Closes: #19862

Author Checklist

All items are required. Please add a note to the item if the item is not applicable and
please add links to any relevant follow up issues.

I have...

  • included the correct type prefix in the PR title
  • confirmed ! in the type prefix if API or client breaking change
  • targeted the correct branch (see PR Targeting)
  • provided a link to the relevant issue or specification
  • reviewed "Files changed" and left comments if necessary
  • included the necessary unit and integration tests
  • added a changelog entry to CHANGELOG.md
  • updated the relevant documentation or specification, including comments for documenting Go code
  • confirmed all CI checks have passed

Reviewers Checklist

All items are required. Please add a note if the item is not applicable and please add
your handle next to the items reviewed if you only reviewed selected items.

I have...

  • confirmed the correct type prefix in the PR title
  • confirmed all author checklist items have been addressed
  • reviewed state machine logic, API design and naming, documentation is accurate, tests and test coverage

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Tests
    • Enhanced the account creation and setting process in tests to ensure proper funding with initial coins.

In the file tests/sims/feegrant/operation_test.go tests failed
becasue test accounts are not added to the accoint keeper

Fixed: cosmos#19862
@EmilGeorgiev EmilGeorgiev requested a review from a team as a code owner March 25, 2024 17:39
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Mar 25, 2024

Walkthrough

The change involves creating and setting up new accounts in the operations_test.go file within the feegrant tests suite. This update is crucial for ensuring that accounts exist and are recognized by the account keeper before attempting operations that involve account balances, addressing the issue of tests failing due to nil pointer dereferences when accounts are not found.

Changes

File Path Change Summary
tests/sims/feegrant/operations_test.go Added account creation and setup using NewAccountWithAddress and SetAccount before funding.

Assessment against linked issues

Objective Addressed Explanation
Tests in /tests/sims/feegrant failed due to nil pointer dereference when account not found (#19862)

Related issues

  • TestStatusCommand is flaky #17446: The changes made in this PR do not directly address the issues related to the TestStatusCommand test flakiness or the panic caused by non-existent file access in the Cosmos SDK repository. The issues are unrelated to account creation and management in the feegrant tests suite.

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?

Share

Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>.
    • Generate unit-tests for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit tests for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.
    • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit tests.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.

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 as PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger a review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Additionally, you can add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.

CodeRabbit Configration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • The JSON schema for the configuration file is available here.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/coderabbit-overrides.v2.json

CodeRabbit Discord Community

Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Review Status

Actionable comments generated: 1

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yml

Commits Files that changed from the base of the PR and between c466887 and e33f54d.
Files selected for processing (1)
  • tests/sims/feegrant/operations_test.go (1 hunks)

Comment on lines +89 to +90
acc := suite.accountKeeper.NewAccountWithAddress(suite.ctx, account.Address)
suite.accountKeeper.SetAccount(suite.ctx, acc)
Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot Mar 25, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The addition of NewAccountWithAddress and SetAccount methods correctly addresses the issue of test accounts not being added to the account keeper, which was causing nil pointer dereferences. This change ensures that test accounts are properly initialized and set in the account keeper before being used in tests, thereby preventing the previously observed runtime errors.

However, it's important to ensure that the NewAccountWithAddress method does not have side effects that could affect other tests or the overall test suite's behavior. Additionally, consider adding a check after setting the account to verify that it has been correctly added to the account keeper. This could further improve the robustness of the tests.

Would you like me to provide an example of how to verify that accounts have been correctly added to the account keeper?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

All tests in the test suite are affected, now they pass. Before that they all failed.

Account is properly added to the keeper because all the tests passes. Why I should check that when the production code will failed if it is not. If we follow that logic we should check that account is fund correctly or that the context is properly created and so on.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@EmilGeorgiev, thank you for your insight. You make a valid point about the balance between ensuring robustness and avoiding redundancy in tests. Given that all tests in the suite now pass, indicating that the accounts are properly added to the account keeper, it's reasonable to rely on these outcomes as confirmation of the accounts being correctly set up. Your approach highlights the importance of practicality in testing, ensuring that we focus on what truly matters for the integrity of the code without overcomplicating the test suite. I appreciate your perspective on this matter.

@julienrbrt julienrbrt changed the title fix: test cases failed test(sims): fix test cases feegrant Mar 25, 2024
@sontrinh16 sontrinh16 added this pull request to the merge queue Mar 26, 2024
Merged via the queue into cosmos:main with commit 6e9528a Mar 26, 2024
55 of 57 checks passed
meetrick pushed a commit to meetrick/cosmos-sdk that referenced this pull request Mar 28, 2024
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.

tests in /tests/sims/feegrant failed
4 participants