feat!: Add a parameter that determines whether consumer chains allow inactive validators to validate them

[p-offtermatt]

Description

Closes: #1951

---

Author Checklist

All items are required. Please add a note to the item if the item is not applicable and
please add links to any relevant follow up issues.

I have...

• Included the correct type prefix in the PR title
• Added ! to the type prefix if the change is state-machine breaking
• Confirmed this PR does not introduce changes requiring state migrations, OR migration code has been added to consumer and/or provider modules
• Targeted the correct branch (see PR Targeting)
• Provided a link to the relevant issue or specification
• Followed the guidelines for building SDK modules
• Included the necessary unit and integration tests
• Added a changelog entry to CHANGELOG.md
• Included comments for documenting Go code
• Updated the relevant documentation or specification
• Reviewed "Files changed" and left comments if necessary
• Confirmed all CI checks have passed
• If this PR is library API breaking, bump the go.mod version string of the repo, and follow through on a new major release

Reviewers Checklist

All items are required. Please add a note if the item is not applicable and please add
your handle next to the items reviewed if you only reviewed selected items.

I have...

• confirmed the correct type prefix in the PR title
• confirmed ! the type prefix if the change is state-machine breaking
• confirmed this PR does not introduce changes requiring state migrations, OR confirmed migration code has been added to consumer and/or provider modules
• confirmed all author checklist items have been addressed
• reviewed state machine logic
• reviewed API design and naming
• reviewed documentation is accurate
• reviewed tests and test coverage

Summary by CodeRabbit

• New Features

  • Introduced the allow_inactive_vals parameter for consumer chains, allowing greater flexibility in validator management.
  • Enhanced validation processes with updated descriptions for MaxValidatorRank and MinStake parameters.

• Documentation

  • Updated documentation to reflect changes and enhancements regarding inactive validator parameters.

• Tests

  • Expanded test coverage for new allow_inactive_vals functionality in consumer proposals.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

Walkthrough

This update introduces the allow_inactive_vals parameter, allowing consumer chains to specify if inactive validators can validate transactions. This enhancement improves flexibility in validator selection and may boost both efficiency and security. The implementation spans across various components, including protocol buffers, validation logic, and documentation, ensuring thorough integration and usability.

Changes

File Path	Change Summary
.changelog/unreleased/features/...2066-inactive-vals.md, .../state-breaking/...2066-inactive-vals.md	Introduced allow_inactive_vals parameter in consumer chain validation logic.
docs/docs/adrs/adr-017-allowing-inactive-validators.md	Added AllowInactiveVals parameter; updated descriptions for MaxValidatorRank and MinStake.
proto/interchain_security/ccv/provider/v1/provider.proto, tx.proto	Added allow_inactive_vals boolean field to ConsumerAdditionProposal, ConsumerModificationProposal, MsgConsumerAddition, and MsgConsumerModification.
tests/e2e/actions.go, steps_inactive_vals.go	Enhanced SubmitConsumerAdditionProposalAction struct with new fields: MaxValidatorRank, MinStake, and AllowInactiveVals.
x/ccv/provider/keeper/...legacy_proposal.go, keeper.go, keeper_test.go	Updated methods to handle inactive validators. Added new methods for managing inactive validator settings.
x/ccv/provider/types/...legacy_proposal.go	Updated NewConsumerAdditionProposal and NewConsumerModificationProposal functions to include allowInactiveVals parameter.

Sequence Diagram(s)

sequenceDiagram
    participant Chain
    participant Validator
    participant Proposal

    Chain->>Proposal: Submit consumer addition proposal
    Proposal->>Validator: Check if inactive validators allowed
    alt Inactive validators allowed
        Validator->>Chain: Validate transaction
    else Inactive validators not allowed
        Validator->>Chain: Validation failed
    end

Loading

Assessment against linked issues

Objective	Addressed	Explanation
Top N chains need an active set size cap or disable inactive validators (1951)	✅
Allow consumer chains to disable non-provider validators from validating (1916)	✅
Update documentation about inactive validators validating on consumer chains (1914)	✅
Implement a way for validators not in the active set to validate (1913)	✅

---

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?

Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>.
  • Generate unit testing code for this file.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
  • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.
  • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
  • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
  • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
  • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

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 as PR comments)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
• @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Additionally, you can add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

• You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
• Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
• If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 4

Outside diff range, codebase verification and nitpick comments (10)

x/ccv/provider/keeper/legacy_proposal_test.go (1)

67-67: Verify the function usage in the codebase.

The code changes are approved. However, ensure that all function calls to providertypes.NewConsumerAdditionProposal match the new signature.

• x/ccv/provider/proposal_handler_test.go: The instances here do not show the allowInactiveValidators parameter.
• x/ccv/provider/keeper/proposal_test.go: Multiple instances here do not show the allowInactiveValidators parameter.
• x/ccv/provider/keeper/legacy_proposal_test.go: Instances here do not show the allowInactiveValidators parameter.
• testutil/keeper/unit_test_helpers.go: The instance here does not show the allowInactiveValidators parameter.

Please update these instances to match the new function signature.

Analysis chain

LGTM! But verify the function usage in the codebase.

The code changes are approved.

However, ensure that all function calls to providertypes.NewConsumerAdditionProposal match the new signature.

Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify all function calls to `providertypes.NewConsumerAdditionProposal` match the new signature.

# Test: Search for the function usage. Expect: Only occurances of the new signature.
rg --type go -A 5 $'providertypes.NewConsumerAdditionProposal'

Length of output: 5177

docs/docs/adrs/adr-017-allowing-inactive-validators.md (2)

65-65: Remove trailing spaces.

There are trailing spaces at the end of the line.

- * Introduce extra per-consumer-chain parameters: 
+ * Introduce extra per-consumer-chain parameters:

Tools

Markdownlint

65-65: Expected: 0 or 2; Actual: 1
Trailing spaces

(MD009, no-trailing-spaces)

---

66-66: Remove trailing spaces.

There are trailing spaces at the end of the line.

- * `MinStake`: is the minimum amount of stake a validator must have to be considered for validation on the consumer chain. 
+ * `MinStake`: is the minimum amount of stake a validator must have to be considered for validation on the consumer chain.

Tools

Markdownlint

66-66: Expected: 0 or 2; Actual: 1
Trailing spaces

(MD009, no-trailing-spaces)

x/ccv/provider/types/legacy_proposal.go (2)

63-63: Update all function calls to include the new parameter allowInactiveVals.

The following instances of NewConsumerAdditionProposal do not include the new parameter allowInactiveVals:

• testutil/keeper/unit_test_helpers.go
• x/ccv/provider/proposal_handler_test.go
• x/ccv/provider/types/legacy_proposal_test.go
• x/ccv/provider/keeper/legacy_proposal_test.go
• x/ccv/provider/keeper/proposal_test.go
• x/ccv/provider/client/legacy_proposal_handler.go

Please update these instances to include the new parameter.

Analysis chain

LGTM! Verify the new parameter usage.

The addition of the allowInactiveVals parameter looks correct.

However, ensure that all calls to NewConsumerAdditionProposal are updated to include the new parameter.

Also applies to: 87-87

Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify all function calls to `NewConsumerAdditionProposal` include the new parameter.

# Test: Search for the function usage. Expect: Only occurrences of the new signature.
rg --type go -A 5 $'NewConsumerAdditionProposal'

Length of output: 15462

---

254-254: Some calls to NewConsumerModificationProposal need to be updated to include the new parameter allowInactiveVals.

The following locations need attention:

• x/ccv/provider/types/legacy_proposal_test.go
• x/ccv/provider/keeper/legacy_proposal_test.go

Please update these calls to include the new parameter.

Analysis chain

LGTM! Verify the new parameter usage.

The addition of the allowInactiveVals parameter looks correct.

However, ensure that all calls to NewConsumerModificationProposal are updated to include the new parameter.

Also applies to: 267-267

Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify all function calls to `NewConsumerModificationProposal` include the new parameter.

# Test: Search for the function usage. Expect: Only occurrences of the new signature.
rg --type go -A 5 $'NewConsumerModificationProposal'

Length of output: 3750

x/ccv/provider/keeper/keeper_test.go (2)

811-812: Add a description for the new test case.

Consider adding a comment to describe the purpose of the new test case for allow_inactive_vals.

// Test setting and getting the AllowInactiveValidators parameter

---

870-882: Ensure consistent formatting and improve readability.

The new test case is correctly implemented but could benefit from consistent formatting and improved readability.

{
  name: "Allow Inactive Validators",
  settingFunc: func(ctx sdk.Context, id string, val int64) { k.SetAllowInactiveValidators(ctx, id, val == 1) },
  getFunc: func(ctx sdk.Context, id string) (int64, bool) {
    val, found := k.GetAllowInactiveValidators(ctx, id)
    res := int64(0) // default value
    if val {
      res = 1
    }
    return res, found
  },
  initialValue: 1,
  updatedValue: 0,
},

x/ccv/provider/keeper/partial_set_security_test.go (2)

826-876: Add a description for the new test case.

Consider adding a comment to describe the purpose of the new test case for disallowing inactive validators.

// Test if inactive validators are disallowed and ensure the number of validators does not exceed MaxProviderConsensusValidators

---

859-874: Add sanity check description.

Consider adding a comment to describe the purpose of the sanity check.

// Sanity check: Ensure that we only get 0 next validators if either maxProviderConsensusVals is 0 or the maximal validator power is less than the min stake

tests/e2e/actions.go (1)

266-268: Ensure new struct fields are documented.

The new fields MaxValidatorRank, MinStake, and AllowInactiveVals enhance the struct's functionality. Ensure these fields are documented for clarity.

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 3

Outside diff range, codebase verification and nitpick comments (2)

x/ccv/provider/keeper/keeper.go (2)

1668-1685: Consider adding validation for chainID parameter.

The chainID parameter is not validated. Consider adding validation to ensure it is not empty or invalid.

if chainID == "" {
  return
}

---

1701-1709: Consider adding validation for chainID parameter.

The chainID parameter is not validated. Consider adding validation to ensure it is not empty or invalid.

if chainID == "" {
  return
}