Update system API for 128 bit cycles tests

[AlexandraZapuc]

Following up on our discussion regarding the multivalue target feature support, we have decided to update the experimental System Api and not rely on this feature anymore.

This MR updates the tests according to the Public Spec.

[nomeata]

Thanks, that reduces my worries!

I wonder if its worth simplifying the universal canister interface, undo the addition of I128 to the interface, and use two I64 for the arguments, and Blob for the results. This way the universal canister does less and is closer to the system API. WDYT, @marcin-dziadus ?

[marcin-dziadus]

Thanks, that reduces my worries!

I wonder if its worth simplifying the universal canister interface, undo the addition of I128 to the interface, and use two I64 for the arguments, and Blob for the results. This way the universal canister does less and is closer to the system API. WDYT, @marcin-dziadus ?

Sorry for the late response - I was on vacation for a few days.
@nomeata Yes, it's a very good point! I'll take care of it.

[marcin-dziadus]

@nomeata I'm done with the refactoring, could you please take a look?

BTW, one of the checks is constantly failing. Do you perhaps know why?

[nomeata]

About the failing check: A nne nix release nieeds an optio to be set; have a look at dfinity/motoko#2880 for how to fix this.

[marcin-dziadus]

About the failing check: A nne nix release nieeds an optio to be set; have a look at dfinity/motoko#2880 for how to fix this.

Thanks a lot! (for this, as well as the review)

[nomeata]

@marcin-dziadus, guess we missed the chance to use ic-ref-test to catch bugs in production: It doesn't actually test if cycle balances above 2^64 work, right? If we did, this might have prevented https://forum.dfinity.org/t/panicked-at-failed-to-serialize-message-errorimpl-code-message-the-number-cant-be-stored-in-cbor-offset-0-build-rs-canister-sandbox-common-src-transport-rs55/10729?u=nomeata…

[nomeata]

Hmm, nevermind, there is a test here:

          let large = 2^(65::Int)
          ic_top_up ic00 cid large

so now I am curious how that relates to the bug I reported at the forum.

Is ic-ref-test still run against the replica as part of CI?

[marcin-dziadus]

Yes, it is, but we haven't released a new version of ic-ref(-test) for a while.
The 128 bit API is not included in v18.0 which is currently run on a regular basis against the replica.

[nomeata]

So the replica ships with features that don't have an spec acceptance test in CI yet? I guess we can't have everything

[marcin-dziadus]

We should optimise the process. I will raise this issue.