add share unlocking mechanism to megavault #2169
Conversation
WalkthroughThe changes introduce a new feature for unlocking shares in a blockchain protocol, encompassing new message types, RPC methods, and modifications to existing structures. This includes the implementation of the Changes
Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant User
participant MsgServer
participant Keeper
participant DelayMsgKeeper
User->>MsgServer: UnlockShares(MsgUnlockShares)
MsgServer->>Keeper: Validate authority and ownerAddress
Keeper-->>MsgServer: Validation result
MsgServer->>Keeper: UnlockShares(ownerAddress)
Keeper->>DelayMsgKeeper: DelayMessageByBlocks(ctx, msg, blockDelay)
DelayMsgKeeper-->>Keeper: Message ID
Keeper-->>MsgServer: Unlocked shares count
MsgServer-->>User: MsgUnlockSharesResponse
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
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
Outside diff range, codebase verification and nitpick comments (1)
protocol/x/vault/keeper/keeper.go (1)
Missing
delayMsgKeeperParameter inNewKeeperCallThe
delayMsgKeeperparameter is not being passed in theNewKeepercall for thevaultmodule inprotocol/app/app.go. Ensure that this parameter is correctly integrated to avoid potential issues.
- File:
protocol/app/app.go- Line:
app.VaultKeeper = *vaultmodulekeeper.NewKeeper(Analysis chain
Line range hint
32-43: LGTM! But verify the new parameter usage.The updated function signature appears to be well-integrated. However, ensure that the new parameter
delayMsgKeeperis passed correctly when initializing theKeeper.The code changes are approved.
Run the following script to verify the usage of the new parameter:
Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the usage of the new parameter `delayMsgKeeper`. # Test: Search for the function calls. Expect: Correct parameter usage. rg --type go 'NewKeeper'Length of output: 5525
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the usage of the `delayMsgKeeper` parameter in the `NewKeeper` function calls. # Test: Search for calls to `NewKeeper` in the `protocol/x/vault/keeper/keeper.go` file. rg --type go 'NewKeeper' protocol/x/vault/keeper/keeper.go -A 3Length of output: 164
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the usage of the `delayMsgKeeper` parameter in the `NewKeeper` function calls across the codebase. # Test: Search for calls to `NewKeeper` across the entire codebase. rg --type go 'NewKeeper' -A 3Length of output: 18697
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the usage of the `delayMsgKeeper` parameter in the `NewKeeper` function calls related to the `vault` module. # Test: Search for calls to `NewKeeper` in the context of the `vault` module. rg --type go 'vaultmodulekeeper.NewKeeper' -A 3Length of output: 241
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files ignored due to path filters (1)
protocol/x/vault/types/tx.pb.gois excluded by!**/*.pb.go
Files selected for processing (12)
- indexer/packages/v4-protos/src/codegen/dydxprotocol/vault/tx.rpc.msg.ts (4 hunks)
- indexer/packages/v4-protos/src/codegen/dydxprotocol/vault/tx.ts (2 hunks)
- proto/dydxprotocol/vault/tx.proto (2 hunks)
- protocol/app/app.go (1 hunks)
- protocol/testutil/delaymsg/delaymsg_helpers.go (2 hunks)
- protocol/testutil/keeper/vault.go (1 hunks)
- protocol/x/vault/keeper/keeper.go (3 hunks)
- protocol/x/vault/keeper/msg_server_unlock_shares.go (1 hunks)
- protocol/x/vault/keeper/msg_server_unlock_shares_test.go (1 hunks)
- protocol/x/vault/keeper/shares.go (2 hunks)
- protocol/x/vault/keeper/shares_test.go (3 hunks)
- protocol/x/vault/types/expected_keepers.go (1 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (23)
protocol/x/vault/keeper/keeper.go (1)
18-19: LGTM! But verify the new field usage.The addition of the new field
delayMsgKeeperappears to be well-integrated. However, ensure that the new field is used appropriately in the rest of the codebase.The code changes are approved.
Run the following script to verify the usage of the new field:
Verification successful
Field
delayMsgKeeperis well-integrated and used appropriately.The
delayMsgKeeperfield is actively used across different modules, includingvaultandbridge, and is referenced in test files, indicating proper integration and testing. No issues found.Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the usage of the new field `delayMsgKeeper`. # Test: Search for the field usage. Expect: Appropriate usage in the codebase. rg --type go 'delayMsgKeeper'Length of output: 1822
protocol/testutil/keeper/vault.go (1)
57-57: LGTM!The addition of
&mocks.DelayMsgKeeper{}enhances the function's capability to include a new mock keeper for delayed message handling.The code changes are approved.
protocol/x/vault/types/expected_keepers.go (1)
33-42: LGTM!The
DelayMsgKeeperinterface is correctly defined and enhances the functionality by allowing delayed message processing.The code changes are approved.
indexer/packages/v4-protos/src/codegen/dydxprotocol/vault/tx.rpc.msg.ts (2)
51-55: LGTM!The
unlockSharesmethod is correctly implemented and enhances the functionality by allowing share unlocking operations.The code changes are approved.
30-30: LGTM!The constructor correctly binds the
unlockSharesmethod to the class instance.The code changes are approved.
protocol/x/vault/keeper/msg_server_unlock_shares_test.go (4)
3-16: LGTM!The imports are appropriate and necessary for the functionality being tested.
The code changes are approved.
18-51: LGTM!The test cases are well-defined, covering both positive and negative scenarios.
The code changes are approved.
53-75: LGTM!The test setup and execution are appropriate for the scenarios being tested.
The code changes are approved.
77-91: LGTM!The test assertions are comprehensive and ensure the correctness of the functionality.
The code changes are approved.
proto/dydxprotocol/vault/tx.proto (3)
27-29: LGTM!The new RPC method
UnlockSharesis appropriately defined and follows the existing pattern.The code changes are approved.
88-96: LGTM!The new message type
MsgUnlockSharesis appropriately defined and follows the existing pattern.The code changes are approved.
98-102: LGTM!The new response message type
MsgUnlockSharesResponseis appropriately defined and follows the existing pattern.The code changes are approved.
protocol/x/vault/keeper/shares.go (4)
5-11: LGTM!The imports are appropriate and necessary for the functionality being implemented.
The code changes are approved.
202-213: LGTM!The modification to include a call to
DelayMessageByBlocksenhances the control flow by integrating delayed messaging functionality.The code changes are approved.
223-264: LGTM!The new method
UnlockSharesis appropriately defined and follows the existing pattern. It retrieves the owner's share unlocks, processes them, and updates the state accordingly.The code changes are approved.
230-231: LGTM!The error handling in the
UnlockSharesmethod is comprehensive and ensures robustness.The code changes are approved.
Also applies to: 258-260
indexer/packages/v4-protos/src/codegen/dydxprotocol/vault/tx.ts (4)
107-112: LGTM!The
MsgUnlockSharesinterface is correctly defined with the required properties.The code changes are approved.
115-120: LGTM!The
MsgUnlockSharesSDKTypeinterface is correctly defined with the required properties and follows the SDK type naming conventions.The code changes are approved.
123-126: LGTM!The
MsgUnlockSharesResponseinterface is correctly defined with the optional propertyunlockedShares.The code changes are approved.
129-132: LGTM!The
MsgUnlockSharesResponseSDKTypeinterface is correctly defined with the optional propertyunlocked_sharesand follows the SDK type naming conventions.The code changes are approved.
protocol/x/vault/keeper/shares_test.go (2)
Line range hint
385-415: LGTM!The enhancements to the
TestLockSharesfunction are correctly implemented and improve the test coverage by including assertions for delayed messages.The code changes are approved.
420-578: LGTM!The
TestUnlockSharesfunction is well-structured and covers various scenarios for unlocking shares. The assertions ensure the expected outcomes are validated.The code changes are approved.
protocol/app/app.go (1)
1161-1161: LGTM!The addition of
app.DelayMsgKeeperto theNewfunction is correctly implemented.The code changes are approved.
| package keeper | ||
|
|
||
| import ( | ||
| "context" | ||
| "fmt" | ||
|
|
||
| errorsmod "cosmossdk.io/errors" | ||
|
|
||
| govtypes "github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk/x/gov/types" | ||
| "github.com/dydxprotocol/v4-chain/protocol/lib" | ||
| "github.com/dydxprotocol/v4-chain/protocol/x/vault/types" | ||
| ) | ||
|
|
||
| // UnlockShares unlocks an owner's shares. | ||
| func (k msgServer) UnlockShares( | ||
| goCtx context.Context, | ||
| msg *types.MsgUnlockShares, | ||
| ) (*types.MsgUnlockSharesResponse, error) { | ||
| // Check if authority is valid. | ||
| if !k.HasAuthority(msg.Authority) { | ||
| return nil, errorsmod.Wrapf( | ||
| govtypes.ErrInvalidSigner, | ||
| "invalid authority %s", | ||
| msg.Authority, | ||
| ) | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| ctx := lib.UnwrapSDKContext(goCtx, types.ModuleName) | ||
|
|
||
| if msg.OwnerAddress == "" { | ||
| return nil, fmt.Errorf("owner address cannot be empty") | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| unlockedShares, err := k.Keeper.UnlockShares(ctx, msg.OwnerAddress) | ||
| if err != nil { | ||
| return nil, err | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| return &types.MsgUnlockSharesResponse{ | ||
| UnlockedShares: unlockedShares, | ||
| }, nil | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ensure comprehensive error handling and validation.
- The error message for an empty owner address could be more descriptive.
- Consider logging the error returned by
k.Keeper.UnlockSharesfor better debugging. - Ensure that the
UnlockedSharesresponse is correctly populated.
Apply this diff to improve error handling and validation:
if msg.OwnerAddress == "" {
- return nil, fmt.Errorf("owner address cannot be empty")
+ return nil, errorsmod.Wrapf(
+ govtypes.ErrInvalidAddress,
+ "owner address cannot be empty",
+ )
}
unlockedShares, err := k.Keeper.UnlockShares(ctx, msg.OwnerAddress)
if err != nil {
- return nil, err
+ k.Logger(ctx).Error("failed to unlock shares", "error", err)
+ return nil, errorsmod.Wrapf(
+ govtypes.ErrInternal,
+ "failed to unlock shares for owner %s: %v",
+ msg.OwnerAddress,
+ err,
+ )
}
return &types.MsgUnlockSharesResponse{
UnlockedShares: unlockedShares,
}, nilCommittable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| package keeper | |
| import ( | |
| "context" | |
| "fmt" | |
| errorsmod "cosmossdk.io/errors" | |
| govtypes "github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk/x/gov/types" | |
| "github.com/dydxprotocol/v4-chain/protocol/lib" | |
| "github.com/dydxprotocol/v4-chain/protocol/x/vault/types" | |
| ) | |
| // UnlockShares unlocks an owner's shares. | |
| func (k msgServer) UnlockShares( | |
| goCtx context.Context, | |
| msg *types.MsgUnlockShares, | |
| ) (*types.MsgUnlockSharesResponse, error) { | |
| // Check if authority is valid. | |
| if !k.HasAuthority(msg.Authority) { | |
| return nil, errorsmod.Wrapf( | |
| govtypes.ErrInvalidSigner, | |
| "invalid authority %s", | |
| msg.Authority, | |
| ) | |
| } | |
| ctx := lib.UnwrapSDKContext(goCtx, types.ModuleName) | |
| if msg.OwnerAddress == "" { | |
| return nil, fmt.Errorf("owner address cannot be empty") | |
| } | |
| unlockedShares, err := k.Keeper.UnlockShares(ctx, msg.OwnerAddress) | |
| if err != nil { | |
| return nil, err | |
| } | |
| return &types.MsgUnlockSharesResponse{ | |
| UnlockedShares: unlockedShares, | |
| }, nil | |
| } | |
| package keeper | |
| import ( | |
| "context" | |
| "fmt" | |
| errorsmod "cosmossdk.io/errors" | |
| govtypes "github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk/x/gov/types" | |
| "github.com/dydxprotocol/v4-chain/protocol/lib" | |
| "github.com/dydxprotocol/v4-chain/protocol/x/vault/types" | |
| ) | |
| // UnlockShares unlocks an owner's shares. | |
| func (k msgServer) UnlockShares( | |
| goCtx context.Context, | |
| msg *types.MsgUnlockShares, | |
| ) (*types.MsgUnlockSharesResponse, error) { | |
| // Check if authority is valid. | |
| if !k.HasAuthority(msg.Authority) { | |
| return nil, errorsmod.Wrapf( | |
| govtypes.ErrInvalidSigner, | |
| "invalid authority %s", | |
| msg.Authority, | |
| ) | |
| } | |
| ctx := lib.UnwrapSDKContext(goCtx, types.ModuleName) | |
| if msg.OwnerAddress == "" { | |
| return nil, errorsmod.Wrapf( | |
| govtypes.ErrInvalidAddress, | |
| "owner address cannot be empty", | |
| ) | |
| } | |
| unlockedShares, err := k.Keeper.UnlockShares(ctx, msg.OwnerAddress) | |
| if err != nil { | |
| k.Logger(ctx).Error("failed to unlock shares", "error", err) | |
| return nil, errorsmod.Wrapf( | |
| govtypes.ErrInternal, | |
| "failed to unlock shares for owner %s: %v", | |
| msg.OwnerAddress, | |
| err, | |
| ) | |
| } | |
| return &types.MsgUnlockSharesResponse{ | |
| UnlockedShares: unlockedShares, | |
| }, nil | |
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files ignored due to path filters (1)
protocol/x/vault/types/tx.pb.gois excluded by!**/*.pb.go
Files selected for processing (12)
- indexer/packages/v4-protos/src/codegen/dydxprotocol/vault/tx.rpc.msg.ts (4 hunks)
- indexer/packages/v4-protos/src/codegen/dydxprotocol/vault/tx.ts (2 hunks)
- proto/dydxprotocol/vault/tx.proto (2 hunks)
- protocol/app/app.go (1 hunks)
- protocol/testutil/delaymsg/delaymsg_helpers.go (2 hunks)
- protocol/testutil/keeper/vault.go (1 hunks)
- protocol/x/vault/keeper/keeper.go (3 hunks)
- protocol/x/vault/keeper/msg_server_unlock_shares.go (1 hunks)
- protocol/x/vault/keeper/msg_server_unlock_shares_test.go (1 hunks)
- protocol/x/vault/keeper/shares.go (2 hunks)
- protocol/x/vault/keeper/shares_test.go (3 hunks)
- protocol/x/vault/types/expected_keepers.go (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (11)
- indexer/packages/v4-protos/src/codegen/dydxprotocol/vault/tx.rpc.msg.ts
- indexer/packages/v4-protos/src/codegen/dydxprotocol/vault/tx.ts
- proto/dydxprotocol/vault/tx.proto
- protocol/app/app.go
- protocol/testutil/delaymsg/delaymsg_helpers.go
- protocol/testutil/keeper/vault.go
- protocol/x/vault/keeper/keeper.go
- protocol/x/vault/keeper/msg_server_unlock_shares.go
- protocol/x/vault/keeper/msg_server_unlock_shares_test.go
- protocol/x/vault/keeper/shares_test.go
- protocol/x/vault/types/expected_keepers.go
Additional comments not posted (2)
protocol/x/vault/keeper/shares.go (2)
202-213: LGTM!The code correctly schedules an unlock message at the specified block height.
The code changes are approved.
223-264: LGTM!The
UnlockSharesmethod is correctly implemented, handling the retrieval, processing, and updating of share unlocks.The code changes are approved.
| @@ -2,11 +2,13 @@ package keeper | |||
|
|
|||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is it possible to use the E2E testing framework to add an E2E test of the flow of:
- lock shares til block X
- advance to block X
- check that shares are unlocked
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yeah this will be possible once there's a tx that calls LockShares. I was thinking once PML is integrated, we can add this e2e test. (before we have a tx that calls LockShares, e2e won't work)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Are you sure there's a need for a tx that calls LockShares? Isn't there an instance of the VaultsKeeper that's accessible on the test app in the E2E test framework?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we can call VaultsKeeper.LockShares keeper method but i don't think the state changes from that call persists once you advance to next block (as it's not part of a tx)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good point, possibly an E2E test with a delayed message w/ unlock shares could be useful (just to check authorities/everything else works) but not necessary.
| } | ||
|
|
||
| res, err := ms.UnlockShares(ctx, tc.msg) | ||
| newLockedShares, exists := k.GetOwnerShareUnlocks(ctx, tc.msg.OwnerAddress) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: Check newLockedShares is what's expected as well.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files ignored due to path filters (1)
protocol/x/vault/types/tx.pb.gois excluded by!**/*.pb.go
Files selected for processing (15)
- indexer/packages/v4-protos/src/codegen/dydxprotocol/vault/tx.rpc.msg.ts (4 hunks)
- indexer/packages/v4-protos/src/codegen/dydxprotocol/vault/tx.ts (2 hunks)
- proto/dydxprotocol/vault/tx.proto (2 hunks)
- protocol/app/app.go (1 hunks)
- protocol/app/msgs/all_msgs.go (1 hunks)
- protocol/app/msgs/internal_msgs.go (1 hunks)
- protocol/app/msgs/internal_msgs_test.go (1 hunks)
- protocol/testutil/delaymsg/delaymsg_helpers.go (2 hunks)
- protocol/testutil/keeper/vault.go (1 hunks)
- protocol/x/vault/keeper/keeper.go (3 hunks)
- protocol/x/vault/keeper/msg_server_unlock_shares.go (1 hunks)
- protocol/x/vault/keeper/msg_server_unlock_shares_test.go (1 hunks)
- protocol/x/vault/keeper/shares.go (2 hunks)
- protocol/x/vault/keeper/shares_test.go (3 hunks)
- protocol/x/vault/types/expected_keepers.go (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (9)
- indexer/packages/v4-protos/src/codegen/dydxprotocol/vault/tx.rpc.msg.ts
- indexer/packages/v4-protos/src/codegen/dydxprotocol/vault/tx.ts
- proto/dydxprotocol/vault/tx.proto
- protocol/testutil/keeper/vault.go
- protocol/x/vault/keeper/keeper.go
- protocol/x/vault/keeper/msg_server_unlock_shares.go
- protocol/x/vault/keeper/msg_server_unlock_shares_test.go
- protocol/x/vault/keeper/shares_test.go
- protocol/x/vault/types/expected_keepers.go
Additional comments not posted (9)
protocol/testutil/delaymsg/delaymsg_helpers.go (1)
21-35: Improve parameter naming and error handling.
- Consider using a more descriptive name for the
delayedmsgsparameter, such asdelayedMessages.- Ensure that the function handles cases where
GetMessagereturns an error, even thoughrequire.NoErroris used.Apply this diff to improve parameter naming and error handling:
func FilterDelayedMsgsByType[T sdk.Msg]( t testing.TB, - delayedmsgs []*delaymsgtypes.DelayedMessage, + delayedMessages []*delaymsgtypes.DelayedMessage, ) []*delaymsgtypes.DelayedMessage { - var filtered []*delaymsgtypes.DelayedMessage - for _, delayedmsg := range delayedmsgs { - msg, err := delayedmsg.GetMessage() + var filteredMessages []*delaymsgtypes.DelayedMessage + for _, delayedMessage := range delayedMessages { + msg, err := delayedMessage.GetMessage() require.NoError(t, err) if _, ok := msg.(T); ok { - filtered = append(filtered, delayedmsg) + filteredMessages = append(filteredMessages, delayedMessage) } } - return filtered + return filteredMessages }protocol/app/msgs/internal_msgs_test.go (1)
155-156: LGTM!The new message paths for unlocking shares are appropriately added.
protocol/x/vault/keeper/shares.go (2)
202-213: LGTM! But add E2E tests.The function is correctly implemented and the new code schedules an unlock message at the specified block height. However, consider adding E2E tests to ensure the functionality.
Refer to the existing comments for more details.
223-264: LGTM!The function is correctly implemented and handles the unlocking process efficiently.
protocol/app/msgs/internal_msgs.go (2)
199-199: LGTM!The addition of the
"/dydxprotocol.vault.MsgUnlockShares"message type is consistent with the PR objective of adding share unlocking functionality.
200-200: LGTM!The addition of the
"/dydxprotocol.vault.MsgUnlockSharesResponse"message type is consistent with the PR objective of adding share unlocking functionality.protocol/app/msgs/all_msgs.go (2)
256-256: LGTM!The addition of the
"/dydxprotocol.vault.MsgUnlockShares"message type is consistent with the PR objective of adding share unlocking functionality.
257-257: LGTM!The addition of the
"/dydxprotocol.vault.MsgUnlockSharesResponse"message type is consistent with the PR objective of adding share unlocking functionality.protocol/app/app.go (1)
1161-1161: LGTM! But verify the initialization and usage ofapp.DelayMsgKeeper.The addition of
app.DelayMsgKeeperto theNewfunction is correctly integrated. However, ensure that this new keeper is properly initialized and used within the application.The code changes are approved.
Run the following script to verify the initialization and usage of
app.DelayMsgKeeper:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (1)
- protocol/lib/ante/internal_msg.go (1 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (1)
protocol/lib/ante/internal_msg.go (1)
132-132: LGTM! But verify the usage ofMsgUnlockSharesin the codebase.The addition of
*vault.MsgUnlockSharesto the list of recognized internal messages is correct. However, ensure that the new message type is correctly handled in other parts of the codebase.The code changes are approved.
Run the following script to verify the usage of
MsgUnlockShares:Verification successful
MsgUnlockSharesis correctly integrated into the codebase.The
MsgUnlockSharesmessage type is well-handled across the codebase, including its definition, usage in server logic, registration in message handlers, and associated tests. This confirms that the addition of*vault.MsgUnlockSharesto the list of internal messages is appropriate and should function correctly.
- File:
protocol/x/vault/types/tx.pb.go- File:
protocol/x/vault/keeper/msg_server_unlock_shares.go- File:
protocol/x/vault/keeper/msg_server_unlock_shares_test.goScripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the usage of `MsgUnlockShares` in the codebase. # Test: Search for the usage of `MsgUnlockShares`. Expect: Correct handling in other parts of the codebase. rg --type go -A 5 $'MsgUnlockShares'Length of output: 22074
Changelist
Test Plan
unit tests
Author/Reviewer Checklist
state-breakinglabel.indexer-postgres-breakinglabel.PrepareProposalorProcessProposal, manually add the labelproposal-breaking.feature:[feature-name].backport/[branch-name].refactor,chore,bug.Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
MsgUnlockSharestype.Bug Fixes