Skip to content

Conversation

distractedm1nd
Copy link
Contributor

@distractedm1nd distractedm1nd commented Jun 27, 2025

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Tests
    • Improved test stability by adjusting wait intervals and using active polling instead of fixed delays during synchronization checks.

Copy link

vercel bot commented Jun 27, 2025

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name Status Preview Comments Updated (UTC)
prism ✅ Ready (Inspect) Visit Preview 💬 Add feedback Jun 27, 2025 10:05am

Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Jun 27, 2025

Caution

Review failed

The pull request is closed.

Walkthrough

The test logic in crates/node_types/prover/src/prover/tests/mod.rs was updated to adjust synchronization timing. Iteration counts were reduced, sleep intervals were increased, and a fixed delay was replaced with a polling loop to check for commitment synchronization, aiming for more active and reliable test waiting.

Changes

File(s) Change Summary
crates/node_types/prover/src/prover/tests/mod.rs Adjusted test timing: reduced loop iterations from 50 to 10, increased sleep durations, and replaced a fixed 5-second sleep with a polling loop for commitment synchronization.

Sequence Diagram(s)

sequenceDiagram
    participant Test as Test Function
    participant Prover as Prover Node
    participant Fullnode as Fullnode

    Test->>Prover: Submit initial transactions
    Test->>Test: Sleep 150ms
    loop Up to 10 iterations
        Test->>Fullnode: Check sync status
        Test->>Test: Sleep 500ms
    end
    loop Until commitments match
        Test->>Prover: Get commitment
        Test->>Fullnode: Get commitment
        alt Commitments match
            Test->>Test: Proceed
        else
            Test->>Test: Sleep 200ms
        end
    end
Loading

Possibly related issues

Possibly related PRs

Suggested reviewers

  • Zombeescott

Poem

In the warren of code, the rabbits did tweak,
Sleepy loops grew longer, iterations grew meek.
No more fixed waiting, but polling instead—
Now tests hop in rhythm, less flakiness to dread!
🐇✨


📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 59ce877 and 766485e.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • crates/node_types/prover/src/prover/tests/mod.rs (4 hunks)
✨ Finishing Touches
  • 📝 Generate Docstrings
🧪 Generate Unit Tests
  • Create PR with Unit Tests
  • Post Copyable Unit Tests in Comment
  • Commit Unit Tests in branch fix-race

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share
🪧 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>, please review it.
    • Explain this complex logic.
    • 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 explain this code block.
    • @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 gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and explain its main purpose.
    • @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.

Support

Need help? Create a ticket on our support page for assistance with any issues or questions.

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 using 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 generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate sequence diagram to generate a sequence diagram of the changes in this PR.
  • @coderabbitai auto-generate unit tests to generate unit tests for this 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.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

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.

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
crates/node_types/prover/src/prover/tests/mod.rs (1)

2-2: Remove unused import.

The digest::Digest import is not used in this file and should be removed to clean up the imports.

-use prism_common::{digest::Digest, test_transaction_builder::TestTransactionBuilder};
+use prism_common::test_transaction_builder::TestTransactionBuilder;
📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between c87081e and 59ce877.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • crates/node_types/prover/src/prover/tests/mod.rs (5 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🧠 Learnings (2)
📓 Common learnings
Learnt from: jns-ps
PR: deltadevsde/prism#147
File: crates/node_types/prover/src/prover/tests.rs:120-129
Timestamp: 2024-10-25T08:50:21.262Z
Learning: Avoid including debug print statements in test functions in `crates/node_types/prover/src/prover/tests.rs`.
Learnt from: jns-ps
PR: deltadevsde/prism#147
File: crates/common/src/test_ops.rs:27-44
Timestamp: 2024-10-29T08:34:32.445Z
Learning: In `crates/common/src/test_ops.rs`, methods in test code are deliberately kept short for brevity, even if this results in abbreviated method names.
Learnt from: distractedm1nd
PR: deltadevsde/prism#146
File: crates/common/src/tree.rs:114-126
Timestamp: 2024-11-01T07:52:07.324Z
Learning: In `UpdateProof::verify` within `crates/common/src/tree.rs`, the `old_hashchain` and `hashchain_after_update` are different hashchains, so caching their serialized values is not feasible.
crates/node_types/prover/src/prover/tests/mod.rs (5)
Learnt from: jns-ps
PR: deltadevsde/prism#147
File: crates/node_types/prover/src/prover/tests.rs:120-129
Timestamp: 2024-10-25T08:50:21.262Z
Learning: Avoid including debug print statements in test functions in `crates/node_types/prover/src/prover/tests.rs`.
Learnt from: jns-ps
PR: deltadevsde/prism#147
File: crates/common/src/test_ops.rs:27-44
Timestamp: 2024-10-29T08:34:32.445Z
Learning: In `crates/common/src/test_ops.rs`, methods in test code are deliberately kept short for brevity, even if this results in abbreviated method names.
Learnt from: distractedm1nd
PR: deltadevsde/prism#146
File: crates/common/src/tree.rs:114-126
Timestamp: 2024-11-01T07:52:07.324Z
Learning: In `UpdateProof::verify` within `crates/common/src/tree.rs`, the `old_hashchain` and `hashchain_after_update` are different hashchains, so caching their serialized values is not feasible.
Learnt from: jns-ps
PR: deltadevsde/prism#198
File: crates/common/src/transaction_builder.rs:450-483
Timestamp: 2025-01-13T15:35:17.509Z
Learning: In the Prism codebase, transactions are protected by a comprehensive signature that covers the entire transaction including account ID, operation, nonce, and verifying key. This transaction-level signature provides security against replay attacks and unauthorized modifications, making operation-level signatures primarily useful for data authenticity rather than transaction security.
Learnt from: distractedm1nd
PR: deltadevsde/prism#146
File: crates/common/src/hashchain.rs:164-174
Timestamp: 2024-11-01T07:51:25.629Z
Learning: In `crates/common/src/hashchain.rs`, extracting duplicated key validation logic between different operation types is not feasible without refactoring the underlying enum structs to use the same type.
🪛 GitHub Check: clippy
crates/node_types/prover/src/prover/tests/mod.rs

[failure] 2-2:
unused import: digest::Digest

⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (6)
  • GitHub Check: unused dependencies
  • GitHub Check: coverage
  • GitHub Check: build-and-push-image
  • GitHub Check: unit-test
  • GitHub Check: integration-test
  • GitHub Check: Analyze (javascript-typescript)
🔇 Additional comments (4)
crates/node_types/prover/src/prover/tests/mod.rs (4)

369-369: Good optimization of sync loop frequency.

Reducing iterations from 50 to 10 while increasing sleep duration maintains the same total timeout but reduces unnecessary polling frequency.


386-386: Appropriate sleep duration adjustment.

The increased sleep duration complements the reduced loop iterations, maintaining the same 5-second total timeout while being less resource-intensive.


404-404: Reasonable timing adjustment for transaction processing.

The slight increase from 100ms to 150ms provides more buffer time for initial transaction processing before racing transactions are submitted.


422-424: Excellent improvement: replace fixed delay with active polling.

Replacing the fixed 5-second sleep with a polling loop that checks for commitment synchronization is a significant improvement. This approach makes the test more reliable and responsive by proceeding as soon as the condition is met rather than waiting for an arbitrary timeout.

@distractedm1nd distractedm1nd merged commit 6e2d17e into main Jun 27, 2025
10 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants