extend subtensor extension by open-junius · Pull Request #2569 · opentensor/subtensor

open-junius · 2026-04-07T06:47:09Z

Description

The PR try to add extension for all Pays::no extrinsic, to guarantee no one misuse it as malicious attack.

Related Issue(s)

Closes #[issue number]

Type of Change

Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
Documentation update
Other (please describe):

Breaking Change

If this PR introduces a breaking change, please provide a detailed description of the impact and the migration path for existing applications.

Checklist

I have performed a self-review of my own code
I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
I have run ./scripts/fix_rust.sh to ensure my code is formatted and linted correctly
I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
My changes generate no new warnings
I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
Any dependent changes have been merged and published in downstream modules

Screenshots (if applicable)

Please include any relevant screenshots or GIFs that demonstrate the changes made.

Additional Notes

Please provide any additional information or context that may be helpful for reviewers.

evgeny-s · 2026-04-16T15:40:06Z

+        setup_reserves(
            netuid,
            1_000_000_000_000_u64.into(),
            1_000_000_000_000_u64.into(),


Let's start adding TypeScript tests for newly added extrinsics, maybe as a separate PR, for previously added.
You can check examples of those tests here.

I don't get your point. The PR doesn't add any new extrinsic. setup_reserves is a helper function in test.

shamil-gadelshin

Looks good overall. I found a minor issue.

shamil-gadelshin · 2026-04-17T14:38:10Z

        Ok(())
    }
+
+    /// Same checks as [`Self::do_serve_prometheus`] before storage writes (for transaction extension).


It makes sense to use validate_serve_prometheus within do_serve_prometheus if it is the same code to remove a duplication.

will remove the redundant part.

thewhaleking

edited

thewhaleking

One blocking bug in the new reveal_mechanism_weights SignedExtension arm — it discards mecid and looks up the commit hash under the wrong storage index, so any reveal under mecid != MechId::MAIN is rejected at the pool as CommitNotFound. Inline suggestion attached. Caught by bittensor e2e test_commit_and_reveal_weights_legacy.

thewhaleking · 2026-05-14T16:57:17Z

+            Some(Call::reveal_mechanism_weights {
+                netuid,
+                mecid: _,
+                uids,
+                values,
+                salt,
+                version_key,
+            }) => {
+                if Self::check_weights_min_stake(who, *netuid) {
+                    let provided_hash = Pallet::<T>::get_commit_hash(
+                        who,
+                        NetUidStorageIndex::from(*netuid),
+                        uids,
+                        values,
+                        salt,
+                        *version_key,
+                    );
+                    match Pallet::<T>::find_commit_block_via_hash(provided_hash) {
+                        Some(commit_block) => {
+                            if Pallet::<T>::is_reveal_block_range(*netuid, commit_block) {
+                                Ok((Default::default(), (), origin))
+                            } else {
+                                Err(CustomTransactionError::CommitBlockNotInRevealRange.into())
+                            }
+                        }
+                        None => Err(CustomTransactionError::CommitNotFound.into()),
+                    }
+                } else {
+                    Err(CustomTransactionError::StakeAmountTooLow.into())
+                }
+            }


Thank you! will fix it.

open-junius · 2026-05-15T01:45:45Z

@thewhaleking there are two failed test cases now.

commit_and_reveal need to reveal at a valid block range
change_take hotkey should exist and valid coldkey-hotkey relation.
please check again.

thewhaleking · 2026-05-15T08:31:24Z

@thewhaleking there are two failed test cases now.

commit_and_reveal need to reveal at a valid block range

change_take hotkey should exist and valid coldkey-hotkey relation.
please check again.

Great. bittensor#3352 will fix these aswell. Thanks!

evgeny-s · 2026-05-15T12:24:50Z

+                    .map(|validity| (validity, (), origin.clone()))
+            }
+
+            Some(Call::swap_hotkey_v2 {


This one is Pays::Yes.

will remove this call.

evgeny-s · 2026-05-15T12:30:47Z

+            }
+            Some(Call::increase_take { hotkey, take: _ })
+            | Some(Call::decrease_take { hotkey, take: _ }) => {
+                Self::result_to_validity(Pallet::<T>::do_take_checks(who, hotkey), 0u64)


We also check if the take is in range, so probably it makes sense to add this check as well, otherwise we don't check the whole thing we do in the extrinsic.

It makes sense to add the check for value scope. I will add it.

l0r1s · 2026-05-15T14:17:00Z

+                if Self::check_weights_min_stake(who, *netuid) {
+                    let provided_hash = Pallet::<T>::get_commit_hash(
+                        who,
+                        Pallet::<T>::get_mechanism_storage_index(*netuid, *mecid),
+                        uids,
+                        values,
+                        salt,
+                        *version_key,
+                    );
+                    match Pallet::<T>::find_commit_block_via_hash(provided_hash) {
+                        Some(commit_block) => {
+                            if Pallet::<T>::is_reveal_block_range(*netuid, commit_block) {
+                                Ok((Default::default(), (), origin))
+                            } else {
+                                Err(CustomTransactionError::CommitBlockNotInRevealRange.into())
+                            }
+                        }
+                        None => Err(CustomTransactionError::CommitNotFound.into()),
+                    }
+                } else {
+                    Err(CustomTransactionError::StakeAmountTooLow.into())
+                }


Nesting could be reduced, only a suggestion

Suggested change

if Self::check_weights_min_stake(who, *netuid) {

let provided_hash = Pallet::<T>::get_commit_hash(

who,

Pallet::<T>::get_mechanism_storage_index(*netuid, *mecid),

uids,

values,

salt,

*version_key,

);

match Pallet::<T>::find_commit_block_via_hash(provided_hash) {

Some(commit_block) => {

if Pallet::<T>::is_reveal_block_range(*netuid, commit_block) {

Ok((Default::default(), (), origin))

} else {

Err(CustomTransactionError::CommitBlockNotInRevealRange.into())

}

}

None => Err(CustomTransactionError::CommitNotFound.into()),

}

} else {

Err(CustomTransactionError::StakeAmountTooLow.into())

}

if !Self::check_weights_min_stake(who, *netuid) {

return Err(CustomTransactionError::StakeAmountTooLow.into());

}

let provided_hash = Pallet::<T>::get_commit_hash(

who,

NetUidStorageIndex::from(*netuid),

uids,

values,

salt,

*version_key,

);

let Some(commit_block) = Pallet::<T>::find_commit_block_via_hash(provided_hash)

else {

return Err(CustomTransactionError::CommitNotFound.into());

};

if !Pallet::<T>::is_reveal_block_range(*netuid, commit_block) {

return Err(CustomTransactionError::CommitBlockNotInRevealRange.into());

}

Ok((Default::default(), (), origin))

open-junius · 2026-05-15T14:28:28Z

@thewhaleking add the value scope check for delegate take. need to update e2e tests. thanks!

Some(Call::increase_take { hotkey, take })
            | Some(Call::decrease_take { hotkey, take }) => {
                if *take < Pallet::<T>::get_min_delegate_take() {
                    return Err(CustomTransactionError::DelegateTakeTooLow.into());
                }
                if *take > Pallet::<T>::get_max_delegate_take() {
                    return Err(CustomTransactionError::DelegateTakeTooHigh.into());
                }

extend subtensor extension

2a31546

open-junius self-assigned this Apr 7, 2026

open-junius added 7 commits April 7, 2026 16:49

fix all extension

d1572de

fix clippy

9729f19

remove unnessary check

75697ee

more unit tests

51e4a93

remove unnecessary error mapping

c3c261c

clean up code

d704889

Merge branch 'devnet-ready' into subtensor-dispatch

56455fd

open-junius added the skip-cargo-audit This PR fails cargo audit but needs to be merged anyway label Apr 15, 2026

evgeny-s reviewed Apr 16, 2026

View reviewed changes

open-junius marked this pull request as ready for review April 17, 2026 03:10

open-junius requested review from JohnReedV, ales-otf, evgeny-s, gztensor, l0r1s, sam0x17 and shamil-gadelshin April 17, 2026 03:10

shamil-gadelshin requested changes Apr 17, 2026

View reviewed changes

open-junius added 2 commits April 18, 2026 09:31

remove redundant code

94338a9

Merge branch 'devnet-ready' into subtensor-dispatch

d33b245

open-junius requested a review from shamil-gadelshin April 20, 2026 02:22

open-junius added 3 commits May 13, 2026 16:06

merge with denvet-ready

78ce740

fix unit tests

9cd028e

fix clippy

1660bb2

open-junius removed request for ales-otf May 13, 2026 09:12

open-junius added 2 commits May 13, 2026 23:00

bump version

b69a78f

Merge branch 'devnet-ready' into subtensor-dispatch

2e454cf

thewhaleking mentioned this pull request May 14, 2026

run do_take_checks at pool validation latent-to/bittensor#3350

Merged

thewhaleking requested changes May 14, 2026

View reviewed changes

fix reveal_mechanism_weights extension check

16a9853

thewhaleking mentioned this pull request May 15, 2026

Test Fixes latent-to/bittensor#3352

Merged

thewhaleking previously approved these changes May 15, 2026

View reviewed changes

evgeny-s reviewed May 15, 2026

View reviewed changes

minor upate according to comments

d009b0b

open-junius dismissed thewhaleking’s stale review via d009b0b May 15, 2026 13:34

l0r1s previously approved these changes May 15, 2026

View reviewed changes

fix unit tests

6487465

open-junius dismissed l0r1s’s stale review via 6487465 May 15, 2026 14:25

open-junius requested a review from thewhaleking May 18, 2026 11:40

thewhaleking mentioned this pull request May 18, 2026

Fixes tests in subtensor 2569 latent-to/bittensor#3355

Merged

thewhaleking approved these changes May 18, 2026

View reviewed changes

open-junius requested review from evgeny-s and l0r1s May 18, 2026 23:49

JohnReedV approved these changes May 19, 2026

View reviewed changes

evgeny-s approved these changes May 19, 2026

View reviewed changes

sam0x17 merged commit 0c90190 into devnet-ready May 19, 2026
387 of 392 checks passed

sam0x17 mentioned this pull request May 21, 2026

mainnet deploy 5/26/2026 #2643

Open

Conversation

open-junius commented Apr 7, 2026

Description

Related Issue(s)

Type of Change

Breaking Change

Checklist

Screenshots (if applicable)

Additional Notes

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

shamil-gadelshin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

thewhaleking left a comment • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

thewhaleking left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

thewhaleking May 14, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

open-junius commented May 15, 2026

Uh oh!

thewhaleking commented May 15, 2026

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

open-junius commented May 15, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

7 participants

thewhaleking left a comment •

edited

Loading

thewhaleking May 14, 2026 •

edited

Loading