test(systemtests): fix query block-results in TestStakeUnstake for v2 #22782
Conversation
mmsqe
requested review from
julienrbrt,
hieuvubk,
kocubinski and
a team
as code owners
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughThe pull request modifies the configuration file Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
Suggested reviewers
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: .coderabbit.yml 📒 Files selected for processing (2)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (1)
🧰 Additional context used📓 Path-based instructions (1)tests/systemtests/staking_test.go (3)Pattern Pattern Pattern 🔇 Additional comments (2)tests/systemtests/staking_test.go (2)
The conditional logic appropriately handles different system versions by querying the correct endpoint for block results. This maintains compatibility while allowing for version-specific behavior. Line range hint The test thoroughly covers the staking workflow:
The assertions are well-placed and verify the expected outcomes at each step. Let's verify the test coverage for related staking operations: ✅ Verification successfulLet me gather more specific information about staking test coverage. Test coverage is comprehensive and well-structured across all levels The test coverage for staking operations is extensive and thorough, with tests at multiple levels:
The original review comment correctly assessed the test coverage as comprehensive. 🏁 Scripts executedThe following scripts were executed for the analysis: Script: #!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for other staking-related test cases to ensure comprehensive coverage
# Look for other staking test files
fd -e go -x grep -l "staking" {}
# Check for other staking-related test functions
ast-grep --pattern 'func Test$_($_) {
$$$
"staking"
$$$
}'
Length of output: 9397 Script: #!/bin/bash
# Check for system test coverage of staking operations
rg -A 5 "func Test.*" tests/systemtests/staking_test.go
# Check for integration test coverage of staking operations
rg -A 5 "func Test.*" tests/integration/staking/keeper/
Length of output: 30867 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
Documentation and Community
|
julienrbrt
added
the
backport/v0.52.x
… (backport #22782) (#22784) Co-authored-by: mmsqe <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Julien Robert <[email protected]>
Description
updates: #22753
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...
!in the type prefix if API or client breaking changeCHANGELOG.mdReviewers 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.
Please see Pull Request Reviewer section in the contributing guide for more information on how to review a pull request.
I have...
Summary by CodeRabbit
Chores
Tests