[Vaults] feat: Dashboard UX updates #915
Open
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Jeday
reviewed
Jan 9, 2025
| function _burn(uint256 _amountOfShares) internal { | ||
| STETH.transferSharesFrom(msg.sender, address(vaultHub), _amountOfShares); | ||
| function _burn(address _sender, uint256 _amountOfShares) internal { | ||
| if (_sender == address(this)) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We might be able to skip this check, hear me out. I check steth code.
You need to set infinity steth allowance to address(this) at contract init.
This will allow you to call transferSharesFrom with _sender==address(this).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Infinity steth allowance looks acceptable to me here. However, the condition also does not bother me much.
I need feedback from more experienced individuals (like AP or EM) because having an unlimited allowance doesn’t seem safu.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks like we have woo wide permissions for the contact when adding infinity steth allowance, so better stick with original code.
tamtamchik
reviewed
Jan 9, 2025
test/0.8.25/vaults/dashboard/contracts/LidoLocator__HarnessForDashboard.sol
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
test/0.8.25/vaults/dashboard/contracts/LidoLocator__HarnessForDashboard.sol
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
|
||
| uint256 stETHAmount = WSTETH.unwrap(_amountOfWstETH); | ||
| uint256 sharesAmount = STETH.getSharesByPooledEth(stETHAmount); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do we need this? Isn't _amountOfWstETH already the same as sharesAmount?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It seems that using _amountOfWstETH is the correct approach. However, we need to conduct a test with small numbers to check for rounding issues.
| function _burn(uint256 _amountOfShares) internal { | ||
| STETH.transferSharesFrom(msg.sender, address(vaultHub), _amountOfShares); | ||
| function _burn(address _sender, uint256 _amountOfShares) internal { | ||
| if (_sender == address(this)) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Infinity steth allowance looks acceptable to me here. However, the condition also does not bother me much.
I need feedback from more experienced individuals (like AP or EM) because having an unlimited allowance doesn’t seem safu.
…ashboard-ux-updates
|
Hardhat Unit Tests Coverage SummaryDiff against masterResults for commit: 186e266 Minimum allowed coverage is ♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
A short summary of the changes.
Context
General
Dashboard Contract
LidoLocatorfor retrievingstETHandwstETHcontract addresses.stETHtowstETH.getMintableSharestoprojectedMintableShares.mintWstETHto utilize the initial approval ofstETH.burnWstETHto align with changes in the_burnmethod.burnWithPermitto align with changes in the_burnmethod.burnWstETHWithPermitto align with changes in the_burnmethod.burn->burnSharesmint->mintSharesburn/fundmethods to accommodate changes in_burn/_fund:_fundnow takesvalueas an argument._burnnow accepts_senderand_amountOfSharesas arguments._sendertype, eithertransferSharesortransferSharesFromis executed.transferSharesis used if the operation originates from the Dashboard contract to avoid additionalstETHapprovals.Delegation Contract
fund/burnmethods to account for updates to_burn/_fundin the Dashboard contract.Testing
Permitfunctionality when the shares-to-stETHratio is not 1:1 (e.g.,1 share = 0.5 stETH,1 share = 2 stETH).LidoLocatorsetup in the constructor.Additional Notes
Permitmechanism withstETHduring rebalancing of the shares-to-stETHratio will still use thevalueofstETHtokens. As a result, the values passed to theburnWithPermitmethod and those signed in thePermitmay differ. To address this, theStETHPermitcontract would need updates, but this could introduce unnecessary overhead.Problem
What problem this PR solves, link relevant issue if it exists
Solution
Your proposed solution