perf: reduce the number of ValidateDenom calls in bank.SendCoins #20354
Conversation
WalkthroughWalkthroughThe recent changes across the Changes
Tip New Features and ImprovementsReview SettingsIntroduced new personality profiles for code reviews. Users can now select between "Chill" and "Assertive" review tones to tailor feedback styles according to their preferences. The "Assertive" profile posts more comments and nitpicks the code more aggressively, while the "Chill" profile is more relaxed and posts fewer comments. AST-based InstructionsCodeRabbit offers customizing reviews based on the Abstract Syntax Tree (AST) pattern matching. Read more about AST-based instructions in the documentation. Community-driven AST-based RulesWe are kicking off a community-driven initiative to create and share AST-based rules. Users can now contribute their AST-based rules to detect security vulnerabilities, code smells, and anti-patterns. Please see the ast-grep-essentials repository for more information. New Static Analysis ToolsWe are continually expanding our support for static analysis tools. We have added support for Tone SettingsUsers can now customize CodeRabbit to review code in the style of their favorite characters or personalities. Here are some of our favorite examples:
Revamped Settings PageWe have redesigned the settings page for a more intuitive layout, enabling users to find and adjust settings quickly. This change was long overdue; it not only improves the user experience but also allows our development team to add more settings in the future with ease. Going forward, the changes to Miscellaneous
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 as PR comments)
Additionally, you can add CodeRabbit Configration File (
|
tropicaldog
changed the title
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
Review Details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yml
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (2)
- types/coin.go (1 hunks)
- x/bank/keeper/send.go (3 hunks)
Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
- types/coin.go
Additional Context Used
Path-based Instructions (1)
x/bank/keeper/send.go (1)
Pattern
**/*.go: Review the Golang code for conformity with the Uber Golang style guide, highlighting any deviations.
Additional comments not posted (3)
x/bank/keeper/send.go (3)
187-189: Validation ofamtcoins added at the start ofSendCoinsfunction enhances early error detection and reduces redundant validation deeper in the call stack.
225-225: Removal of coin validation fromsubUnlockedCoinsfunction aligns with the goal of reducing redundant validations and clarifies the function's responsibility.
270-270: Updated comment inaddCoinsfunction clarifies that coin amounts should be validated prior to being passed, ensuring clear communication of responsibilities.
Yeah but |
yea we can look at doing this. Want to give it a stab |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
Review Details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yml
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (1)
- x/bank/keeper/keeper.go (2 hunks)
Additional Context Used
Path-based Instructions (1)
x/bank/keeper/keeper.go (1)
Pattern
**/*.go: Review the Golang code for conformity with the Uber Golang style guide, highlighting any deviations.
Additional comments not posted (2)
x/bank/keeper/keeper.go (2)
369-372: Validation check foramountsensures only valid coins are minted. This is a good safety measure.
412-414: Validation check foramountsensures only valid coins are burned. This is a good safety measure.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The changes look good. 🏌️
I check all the callers if the amount is validated to fail with the correct error. This is given (at the moment). There is also a safety net in setBalance that ensures only valid denoms are stored.
☝️ Nevertheless this PR only solves the problem to a certain degree.
The subUnlockedCoins method uses locked := sdk.NewCoin(coin.Denom, lockedCoins.AmountOf(coin.Denom)) which comes with 2 denom checks which could be avoided by locked, ok := lockedCoins.Find(coin.Denom).
Please also see #19529 (comment) before closing the Issue
x/bank/keeper/send.go
Outdated
| @@ -218,13 +222,9 @@ func (k BaseSendKeeper) SendCoins(ctx context.Context, fromAddr, toAddr sdk.AccA | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| // subUnlockedCoins removes the unlocked amt coins of the given account. An error is | |||
| // returned if the resulting balance is negative or the initial amount is invalid. | |||
| // returned if the resulting balance is negative. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: here and SendCoins: some godoc comment about the amount assumptions would be helpful
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
Review Details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yml
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (1)
- x/bank/keeper/send.go (4 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
- x/bank/keeper/send.go
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
Review Details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yml
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (1)
- x/bank/keeper/send.go (4 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
- x/bank/keeper/send.go
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
Review Details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yml
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (1)
- x/bank/keeper/keeper.go (2 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
- x/bank/keeper/keeper.go
Description
Partially addresses: #19529
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.
I have...
Summary by CodeRabbit