-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 23
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
fix: use nanoseconds instead of seconds in sp1 light client #408
Conversation
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #408 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 99.86% 99.86%
=======================================
Files 14 14
Lines 740 744 +4
=======================================
+ Hits 739 743 +4
Misses 1 1 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
looks good, just wondered about the 128 vs 256 usage
function _validateClientStateAndTime( | ||
IICS07TendermintMsgs.ClientState memory publicClientState, | ||
uint64 time | ||
uint128 time |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
why not uint256? Seems like we are using that elsewhere here
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
rust returns nanos as u128
. I think this is a nice reminder to us that this field is a nanos. Making us less likely to confuse.
/// @param root commitment root (i.e app hash) | ||
/// @param nextValidatorsHash next validators hash | ||
struct ConsensusState { | ||
uint64 timestamp; | ||
uint128 timestamp; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ditto on uint256
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Not gonna write on the others, but any reason we mix?
Description
zellic audit issue
Before we can merge this PR, please make sure that all the following items have been
checked off. If any of the checklist items are not applicable, please leave them but
write a little note why.
godoc
comments.Files changed
in the GitHub PR explorer.SonarCloud Report
in the comment section below once CI passes.