mirror of
https://github.com/pezkuwichain/pezkuwi-subxt.git
synced 2026-06-18 10:41:01 +00:00
ca91d34059fb17e965fe4dd5662d512ca61da533
5 Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 Dcompoze
|
002d9260f9 |
Fix spelling mistakes across the whole repository (#3808)
**Update:** Pushed additional changes based on the review comments. **This pull request fixes various spelling mistakes in this repository.** Most of the changes are contained in the first **3** commits: - `Fix spelling mistakes in comments and docs` - `Fix spelling mistakes in test names` - `Fix spelling mistakes in error messages, panic messages, logs and tracing` Other source code spelling mistakes are separated into individual commits for easier reviewing: - `Fix the spelling of 'authority'` - `Fix the spelling of 'REASONABLE_HEADERS_IN_JUSTIFICATION_ANCESTRY'` - `Fix the spelling of 'prev_enqueud_messages'` - `Fix the spelling of 'endpoint'` - `Fix the spelling of 'children'` - `Fix the spelling of 'PenpalSiblingSovereignAccount'` - `Fix the spelling of 'PenpalSudoAccount'` - `Fix the spelling of 'insufficient'` - `Fix the spelling of 'PalletXcmExtrinsicsBenchmark'` - `Fix the spelling of 'subtracted'` - `Fix the spelling of 'CandidatePendingAvailability'` - `Fix the spelling of 'exclusive'` - `Fix the spelling of 'until'` - `Fix the spelling of 'discriminator'` - `Fix the spelling of 'nonexistent'` - `Fix the spelling of 'subsystem'` - `Fix the spelling of 'indices'` - `Fix the spelling of 'committed'` - `Fix the spelling of 'topology'` - `Fix the spelling of 'response'` - `Fix the spelling of 'beneficiary'` - `Fix the spelling of 'formatted'` - `Fix the spelling of 'UNKNOWN_PROOF_REQUEST'` - `Fix the spelling of 'succeeded'` - `Fix the spelling of 'reopened'` - `Fix the spelling of 'proposer'` - `Fix the spelling of 'InstantiationNonce'` - `Fix the spelling of 'depositor'` - `Fix the spelling of 'expiration'` - `Fix the spelling of 'phantom'` - `Fix the spelling of 'AggregatedKeyValue'` - `Fix the spelling of 'randomness'` - `Fix the spelling of 'defendant'` - `Fix the spelling of 'AquaticMammal'` - `Fix the spelling of 'transactions'` - `Fix the spelling of 'PassingTracingSubscriber'` - `Fix the spelling of 'TxSignaturePayload'` - `Fix the spelling of 'versioning'` - `Fix the spelling of 'descendant'` - `Fix the spelling of 'overridden'` - `Fix the spelling of 'network'` Let me know if this structure is adequate. **Note:** The usage of the words `Merkle`, `Merkelize`, `Merklization`, `Merkelization`, `Merkleization`, is somewhat inconsistent but I left it as it is. ~~**Note:** In some places the term `Receival` is used to refer to message reception, IMO `Reception` is the correct word here, but I left it as it is.~~ ~~**Note:** In some places the term `Overlayed` is used instead of the more acceptable version `Overlaid` but I also left it as it is.~~ ~~**Note:** In some places the term `Applyable` is used instead of the correct version `Applicable` but I also left it as it is.~~ **Note:** Some usage of British vs American english e.g. `judgement` vs `judgment`, `initialise` vs `initialize`, `optimise` vs `optimize` etc. are both present in different places, but I suppose that's understandable given the number of contributors. ~~**Note:** There is a spelling mistake in `.github/CODEOWNERS` but it triggers errors in CI when I make changes to it, so I left it as it is.~~ |
||
|
Gonçalo Pestana
|
606664e1bd |
Staking ledger bonding fixes (#3639)
Currently, the staking logic does not prevent a controller from becoming a stash of *another* ledger (introduced by [removing this check](https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/pull/1484/files#diff-3aa6ceab5aa4e0ab2ed73a7245e0f5b42e0832d8ca5b1ed85d7b2a52fb196524L850)). Given that the remaining of the code expects that never happens, bonding a ledger with a stash that is a controller of another ledger may lead to data inconsistencies and data losses in bonded ledgers. For more detailed explanation of this issue: https://hackmd.io/@gpestana/HJoBm2tqo/%2FTPdi28H7Qc2mNUqLSMn15w In a nutshell, when fetching a ledger with a given controller, we may be end up getting the wrong ledger which can lead to unexpected ledger states. This PR also ensures that `set_controller` does not lead to data inconsistencies in the staking ledger and bonded storage in the case when a controller of a stash is a stash of *another* ledger. and improves the staking `try-runtime` checks to catch potential issues with the storage preemptively. In summary, there are two important cases here: 1. **"Sane" double bonded ledger** When a controller of a ledger is a stash of *another* ledger. In this case, we have: ``` > Bonded(stash, controller) (A, B) // stash A with controller B (B, C) // B is also a stash of another ledger (C, D) > Ledger(controller) Ledger(B) = L_a (stash = A) Ledger(C) = L_b (stash = B) Ledger(D) = L_c (stash = C) ``` In this case, the ledgers can be mutated and all operations are OK. However, we should not allow `set_controller` to be called if it means it results in a "corrupt" double bonded ledger (see below). 3. **"Corrupt" double bonded ledger** ``` > Bonded(stash, controller) (A, B) // stash A with controller B (B, B) (C, D) ``` In this case, B is a stash and controller AND is corrupted, since B is responsible for 2 ledgers which is not correct and will lead to inconsistent states. Thus, in this case, in this PR we are preventing these ledgers from mutating (i.e. operations like bonding extra etc) until the ledger is brought back to a consistent state. --- **Changes**: - Checks if stash is already a controller when calling `Call::bond` (fixes the regression introduced by [removing this check](https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/pull/1484/files#diff-3aa6ceab5aa4e0ab2ed73a7245e0f5b42e0832d8ca5b1ed85d7b2a52fb196524L850)); - Ensures that all fetching ledgers from storage are done through the `StakingLedger` API; - Ensures that -- when fetching a ledger from storage using the `StakingLedger` API --, a `Error::BadState` is returned if the ledger bonding is in a bad state. This prevents bad ledgers from mutating (e.g. `bond_extra`, `set_controller`, etc) its state and avoid further data inconsistencies. - Prevents stashes which are controllers or another ledger from calling `set_controller`, since that may lead to a bad state. - Adds further try-state runtime checks that check if there are ledgers in a bad state based on their bonded metadata. Related to https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/issues/3245 --------- Co-authored-by: Kian Paimani <5588131+kianenigma@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: kianenigma <kian@parity.io> |
||
|
Gonçalo Pestana
|
a9992dbb31 |
Removes the Default implementation for RewardDestination (#2402)
This PR removes current default for `RewardDestination`, which may cause confusion since a ledger should not have a default reward destination: either it has a reward destination, or something is wrong. It also changes the `Payee`'s reward destination in storage from `ValueQuery` to `OptionQuery`. In addition, it adds a `try_state` check to make sure each bonded ledger have a valid reward destination. Closes https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/issues/2063 --------- Co-authored-by: command-bot <> Co-authored-by: Ross Bulat <ross@parity.io> |
||
|
Ankan
|
00b85c51df |
[NPoS] Paging reward payouts in order to scale rewardable nominators (#1189)
helps https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/issues/439. closes https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/issues/473. PR link in the older substrate repository: https://github.com/paritytech/substrate/pull/13498. # Context Rewards payout is processed today in a single block and limited to `MaxNominatorRewardedPerValidator`. This number is currently 512 on both Kusama and Polkadot. This PR tries to scale the nominators payout to an unlimited count in a multi-block fashion. Exposures are stored in pages, with each page capped to a certain number (`MaxExposurePageSize`). Starting out, this number would be the same as `MaxNominatorRewardedPerValidator`, but eventually, this number can be lowered through new runtime upgrades to limit the rewardeable nominators per dispatched call instruction. The changes in the PR are backward compatible. ## How payouts would work like after this change Staking exposes two calls, 1) the existing `payout_stakers` and 2) `payout_stakers_by_page`. ### payout_stakers This remains backward compatible with no signature change. If for a given era a validator has multiple pages, they can call `payout_stakers` multiple times. The pages are executed in an ascending sequence and the runtime takes care of preventing double claims. ### payout_stakers_by_page Very similar to `payout_stakers` but also accepts an extra param `page_index`. An account can choose to payout rewards only for an explicitly passed `page_index`. **Lets look at an example scenario** Given an active validator on Kusama had 1100 nominators, `MaxExposurePageSize` set to 512 for Era e. In order to pay out rewards to all nominators, the caller would need to call `payout_stakers` 3 times. - `payout_stakers(origin, stash, e)` => will pay the first 512 nominators. - `payout_stakers(origin, stash, e)` => will pay the second set of 512 nominators. - `payout_stakers(origin, stash, e)` => will pay the last set of 76 nominators. ... - `payout_stakers(origin, stash, e)` => calling it the 4th time would return an error `InvalidPage`. The above calls can also be replaced by `payout_stakers_by_page` and passing a `page_index` explicitly. ## Commission note Validator commission is paid out in chunks across all the pages where each commission chunk is proportional to the total stake of the current page. This implies higher the total stake of a page, higher will be the commission. If all the pages of a validator's single era are paid out, the sum of commission paid to the validator across all pages should be equal to what the commission would have been if we had a non-paged exposure. ### Migration Note Strictly speaking, we did not need to bump our storage version since there is no migration of storage in this PR. But it is still useful to mark a storage upgrade for the following reasons: - New storage items are introduced in this PR while some older storage items are deprecated. - For the next `HistoryDepth` eras, the exposure would be incrementally migrated to its corresponding paged storage item. - Runtimes using staking pallet would strictly need to wait at least `HistoryDepth` eras with current upgraded version (14) for the migration to complete. At some era `E` such that `E > era_at_which_V14_gets_into_effect + HistoryDepth`, we will upgrade to version X which will remove the deprecated storage items. In other words, it is a strict requirement that E<sub>x</sub> - E<sub>14</sub> > `HistoryDepth`, where E<sub>x</sub> = Era at which deprecated storages are removed from runtime, E<sub>14</sub> = Era at which runtime is upgraded to version 14. - For Polkadot and Kusama, there is a [tracker ticket](https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/issues/433) to clean up the deprecated storage items. ### Storage Changes #### Added - ErasStakersOverview - ClaimedRewards - ErasStakersPaged #### Deprecated The following can be cleaned up after 84 eras which is tracked [here](https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/issues/433). - ErasStakers. - ErasStakersClipped. - StakingLedger.claimed_rewards, renamed to StakingLedger.legacy_claimed_rewards. ### Config Changes - Renamed MaxNominatorRewardedPerValidator to MaxExposurePageSize. ### TODO - [x] Tracker ticket for cleaning up the old code after 84 eras. - [x] Add companion. - [x] Redo benchmarks before merge. - [x] Add Changelog for pallet_staking. - [x] Pallet should be configurable to enable/disable paged rewards. - [x] Commission payouts are distributed across pages. - [x] Review documentation thoroughly. - [x] Rename `MaxNominatorRewardedPerValidator` -> `MaxExposurePageSize`. - [x] NMap for `ErasStakersPaged`. - [x] Deprecate ErasStakers. - [x] Integrity tests. ### Followup issues [Runtime api for deprecated ErasStakers storage item](https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/issues/426) --------- Co-authored-by: Javier Viola <javier@parity.io> Co-authored-by: Ross Bulat <ross@parity.io> Co-authored-by: command-bot <> |
||
|
Gonçalo Pestana
|
8ee4042c3b |
Refactor staking ledger (#1484)
This PR refactors the staking ledger logic to encapsulate all reads and mutations of `Ledger`, `Bonded`, `Payee` and stake locks within the `StakingLedger` struct implementation. With these changes, all the reads and mutations to the `Ledger`, `Payee` and `Bonded` storage map should be done through the methods exposed by StakingLedger to ensure the data and lock consistency of the operations. The new introduced methods that mutate and read Ledger are: - `ledger.update()`: inserts/updates a staking ledger in storage; updates staking locks accordingly (and ledger.bond(), which is synthatic sugar for ledger.update()) - `ledger.kill()`: removes all Bonded and StakingLedger related data for a given ledger; updates staking locks accordingly; `StakingLedger::get(account)`: queries both the `Bonded` and `Ledger` storages and returns a `Option<StakingLedger>`. The pallet impl exposes fn ledger(account) as synthatic sugar for `StakingLedger::get(account)`. Retrieving a ledger with `StakingLedger::get()` can be done by providing either a stash or controller account. The input must be wrapped in a `StakingAccount` variant (Stash or Controller) which is treated accordingly. This simplifies the caller API but will eventually be deprecated once we completely get rid of the controller account in staking. However, this refactor will help with the work necessary when completely removing the controller. Other goals: - No logical changes have been introduced in this PR; - No breaking changes or updates in wallets required; - No new storage items or need to perform storage migrations; - Centralise the changes to bonds and ledger updates to simplify the OnStakingUpdate updates to the target list (related to https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/issues/443) Note: it would be great to prevent or at least raise a warning if `Ledger<T>`, `Payee<T>` and `Bonded<T>` storage types are accessed outside the `StakingLedger` implementation. This PR should not get blocked by that feature, but there's a tracking issue here https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/issues/149 Related and step towards https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/issues/443 |