[VEN-3101][VEN-3102]: XVS, XVS Vault and XVS Bridge on Berachain #505
Conversation
chechu
changed the title
web3rover
changed the title
hardhat.config.ts
Outdated
| @@ -222,7 +222,10 @@ const config: HardhatUserConfig = { | |||
| berachainbartio: { | |||
| url: process.env.ARCHIVE_NODE_berachainbartio || "https://bartio.rpc.berachain.com", | |||
| chainId: 80084, | |||
| accounts: DEPLOYER_PRIVATE_KEY ? [`0x${DEPLOYER_PRIVATE_KEY}`] : [], | |||
| // accounts: DEPLOYER_PRIVATE_KEY ? [`0x${DEPLOYER_PRIVATE_KEY}`] : [], | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why we have commented this?
vips/vip-453/bsctestnet.ts
Outdated
| [ | ||
| { | ||
| target: ACM, | ||
| signature: "giveCallPermission(address,string,address)", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we also add them in Aggregator, WDYT?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So that we can have all permission related thing at one place, i.e. in ACMAggregator
vips/vip-453/bsctestnet.ts
Outdated
| maxDailyReceiveLimit: parseUnits("102000", 18), | ||
| maxSingleReceiveTransactionLimit: parseUnits("20400", 18), | ||
| }, | ||
| ]; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We should also add base and unichain configuration.
vips/vip-453/bsctestnet.ts
Outdated
| ]; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| const vip452 = () => { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| const vip452 = () => { | |
| const vip453 = () => { |
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| describe("Pre-VIP behaviour", async () => { | ||
| it("Bridge Owner != multisig", async () => { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Shouldn't it be Normal Timelock?
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| it("Trusted remote should not exist for any network(bsctestnet, opbnbtestnet, sepolia, arbitumsepolia, zksyncsepolia)", async () => { | ||
| await expect(xvsBridge.getTrustedRemoteAddress(LzChainId.bsctestnet)).to.be.revertedWith( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would also add base and unichain sepolia.
| testForkedNetworkVipCommands("vip453 configures bridge", await vip453()); | ||
|
|
||
| describe("Post-VIP behaviour", async () => { | ||
| it("Should set bridge owner to multisig", async () => { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| it("Should set bridge owner to multisig", async () => { | |
| it("Should set bridge owner to Normal Timelock", async () => { |
|
|
||
| it("Should set correct max single receive limit for all six networks", async () => { | ||
| let limit = await xvsBridge.chainIdToMaxSingleReceiveTransactionLimit(LzChainId.bsctestnet); | ||
| expect(limit).equals(parseUnits("20400", 18)); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| expect(limit).equals(parseUnits("20400", 18)); | |
| expect(limit).equals(SINGLE_RECEIVE_LIMIT); |
Just for consistency
| expect(limit).equals(MIN_DEST_GAS); | ||
| }); | ||
| }); | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we use checkXVSBridge to test bridge on Berachain?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It is meant to test the other networks
| expect(isActive).equals(true); | ||
| }); | ||
| }); | ||
| }); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would also check for pause state of vault.
vips/vip-453/permissions.ts
Outdated
| }, | ||
| }; | ||
|
|
||
| function splitPermissions( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It seems we need to configure 93 permissions for this VIP, so we don't need to split them into different chunks. I would remote this logic from this specific file. If we need it in the future, we could add it to the src/permissions.ts file.
This VIP is specific for berachainbartio, we can assume it, and remove the network dimension from the different variables in this file (berachainbartio), to simplify it.
chechu
force-pushed
the
feat/berachain-xvs
branch
2 times, most recently
from
a3500c4 to
0cb0a6f
Compare
Description
Resolves VEN