Custom channels itest: Use group keys on some payments & invoices #995
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this is a good start as a sanity check for some of the new logic. I think we'll want to more or less run each test w/ both asset ID and group key, but that might eventually be a bit unwieldy when it comes to execution time.
Ultimately, we do expect most of the primary use cases to use group keys, so pehrhaps it's fine to lean towards coverage there?
itest/assets_test.go
Outdated
|
|
||
| case len(groupID) > 0: | ||
| groupHash := sha256.Sum256(groupID) | ||
| targetID = hex.EncodeToString(groupHash[:]) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hmm, do we need to modify what we return as JsonHtlc to start to include a distinct group key field? IIRC, it's all TLV within the db/lnd, so shouldn't be a big lift there, and should be backwards compat.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hmm, good idea. We can definitely add that to make certain things easier. Even if it's just informative to the user and useful in itests (but not explicitly expected in the RFQ logic).
I agree with you here, ideally we'd want to even focus more on group key usage compared to single asset IDs. I'll think of an approach that lets us run everything in assetID / groupkey mode, and see if it's worth the trouble. Otherwise, we could just add groupkey explicit itests, and support the hybrid mode on the more extensive edge-case itests |
itest/assets_test.go
Outdated
|
|
||
| case len(groupID) > 0: | ||
| groupHash := sha256.Sum256(groupID) | ||
| targetID = hex.EncodeToString(groupHash[:]) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hmm, good idea. We can definitely add that to make certain things easier. Even if it's just informative to the user and useful in itests (but not explicitly expected in the RFQ logic).
GeorgeTsagk
force-pushed
the
tapd-groupkeys
branch
from
2d7defe to
072cc37
Compare
|
Added an extra commit which lets us run the liquidity edge cases in assetID & groupKey mode This way the edge case coverage is repeated for group keys without re-writing the whole test We could take a similar approach for all other tests, so please take a look and LMK if you agree with that approach. It would ofcs lead to running everything twice, so double total itest time. |
GeorgeTsagk
force-pushed
the
tapd-groupkeys
branch
from
072cc37 to
e75169c
Compare
GeorgeTsagk
force-pushed
the
tapd-groupkeys
branch
from
e75169c to
673009d
Compare
|
rebased on |
itest/assets_test.go
Outdated
| targetID = hex.EncodeToString(assetID) | ||
|
|
||
| case len(groupID) > 0: | ||
| groupHash := sha256.Sum256(groupID) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Same here, re x-coordinate. I wonder why this didn't cause things to fail? Or did this still point to the old commit in tapd?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think you started the review a bit before I rebased & used latest ref to tapd, which also changed these lines in the LiT side
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ok so it was the wrong commit (other comment)
itest/litd_custom_channels_test.go
Outdated
| @@ -1896,10 +1918,13 @@ func testCustomChannelsLiquidityEdgeCases(ctx context.Context, | |||
|
|
|||
| logBalance(t.t, nodes, assetID, "10k sats") | |||
|
|
|||
| opts = []payOpt{} | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: var opts []payOpt to match empty initialization style above?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
can't redeclare it, i'm just setting it again
GeorgeTsagk
force-pushed
the
tapd-groupkeys
branch
from
673009d to
da3cca1
Compare
|
unified the helpers / itests commit to make things simpler |
github-project-automation
bot
moved this from 🏗 In progress
to 👀 In review
in Taproot-Assets Project Board
GeorgeTsagk
force-pushed
the
tapd-groupkeys
branch
from
da3cca1 to
9f885cc
Compare
|
@Roasbeef: review reminder |
GeorgeTsagk
force-pushed
the
tapd-groupkeys
branch
from
9f885cc to
21d7652
Compare
GeorgeTsagk
force-pushed
the
tapd-groupkeys
branch
from
21d7652 to
2cb1bb2
Compare
We add support for group keys on payments and invoices across the itests. This includes all the required helpers and optional arguments to make adding invoices and sending payments group-key enabled. In order to run the liquidity edge cases twice, once using only asset IDs and once using only group keys, we need to extract the main logic into a re-usable function that has the group key option on the top level. If the group key flag is set, then we append the respective group key opt to the payment & invoice related calls.
GeorgeTsagk
force-pushed
the
tapd-groupkeys
branch
from
2cb1bb2 to
91e5c85
Compare
GeorgeTsagk
added
the
no-changelog
github-project-automation
bot
moved this from 👀 In review
to ✅ Done
in Taproot-Assets Project Board
Description
We sprinkle around some group keys across the grouped asset custom channels test. Some of the invoices and payments in that test now use a group key instead of a specific asset ID.
Related tapd PR: https://github.com/lightninglabs/taproot-assets/pull/1423/commits
For the liquidity edge cases itest, we now support running it in assetID & groupKey mode, meaning we can go through the full suite of edge cases by using either a single assetID or a groupKey.