Run the fuzz test vector with --runs=1 in CI
#1363
Comments
github-merge-queue bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Oct 8, 2024
### What Change two locations of the soroban-sdk-macros which were gated on the contract crates `testutils` feature, to be gated on the SDK's `testutils` feature. ### Why Recently I introduced a bug into the sdk across two changes: - #1344 - #1336 The bug was that I changed how some code was gated to be gated on whether the contract's `testutils` feature was enabled, rather than on the SDKs. Sometime ago in the following issue I changed how all of a contract's testutils are enabled/disabled, by being enabled/disabled by the SDK's testutils feature: - #1301 That change was good, it fixed a horrid issue with testing contracts where you could have some contracts in testutils mode, and others not, leading to strange errors when importing native contracts for testing. However, when I worked on the two issues above, I inadvertently forgot that we had changed the structure of how testutils code got enabled, and I introduced across those two PRs two new locations where we followed the old pattern and gated on the contract feature set, not the SDKs. For most users this will have presented no issues because there all of these testutilities are always enabled in a contract's own tests. This masked the issue in all of our own tests, but broke setups like fuzzing where the contract gets imported. All of our fuzz projects unfortunately don't currently build the fuzz components, and so this got missed until someone (me) tried to use them. ### Known limitations This change doesn't introduce a test to detect this type of breakage. I think the way we can detect this in the future is have our pre-existing test vector build as part of CI. This issue is tracking that follow up work: - #1363 ### Merging This fix is targeting main, but we need a similar fix to target v21, because part of this bug was introduced into v21.7.2. Once this change merges to main, I will partially cherry-pick it into a backport patch release.
leighmcculloch
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Oct 9, 2024
### What Change two locations of the soroban-sdk-macros which were gated on the contract crates `testutils` feature, to be gated on the SDK's `testutils` feature. ### Why Recently I introduced a bug into the sdk across two changes: - #1344 - #1336 The bug was that I changed how some code was gated to be gated on whether the contract's `testutils` feature was enabled, rather than on the SDKs. Sometime ago in the following issue I changed how all of a contract's testutils are enabled/disabled, by being enabled/disabled by the SDK's testutils feature: - #1301 That change was good, it fixed a horrid issue with testing contracts where you could have some contracts in testutils mode, and others not, leading to strange errors when importing native contracts for testing. However, when I worked on the two issues above, I inadvertently forgot that we had changed the structure of how testutils code got enabled, and I introduced across those two PRs two new locations where we followed the old pattern and gated on the contract feature set, not the SDKs. For most users this will have presented no issues because there all of these testutilities are always enabled in a contract's own tests. This masked the issue in all of our own tests, but broke setups like fuzzing where the contract gets imported. All of our fuzz projects unfortunately don't currently build the fuzz components, and so this got missed until someone (me) tried to use them. ### Known limitations This change doesn't introduce a test to detect this type of breakage. I think the way we can detect this in the future is have our pre-existing test vector build as part of CI. This issue is tracking that follow up work: - #1363 ### Merging This fix is targeting main, but we need a similar fix to target v21, because part of this bug was introduced into v21.7.2. Once this change merges to main, I will partially cherry-pick it into a backport patch release. (cherry picked from commit 1eaa5d8)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Run the fuzz test vector with
--runs=1in CI to make sure it continues to work.The code doesn't get executed in CI so it can quickly become out of date.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: