Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

feature(invariant) - persist and replay failure #7899

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
May 21, 2024

Conversation

grandizzy
Copy link
Collaborator

@grandizzy grandizzy commented May 9, 2024

Motivation

Partially address #2552 - persist and replay shrinked failed invariant sequence CC @mds1

  • when invariant fails, the shrinked sequence is persisted and replayed on subsequent runs. If the sequence still fails then test exists immediately. Replaying failed sequence is done with current configs (for example if the persisted sequence fails in 100 steps but config was altered to run with a depth of 50 then persisted sequence will pass)
  • only the last failed sequence is persisted, the default file is PROJ_ROOT/cache/invariant/failures/{TEST_SUITE_NAME}/{INVARIANT_NAME}, layout of cache dir becoming
    image
  • the default failure dir can be changed in foundry.toml
[invariant]
failure_persist_dir="/path/to/failure/dir"

or by using inline config

/// forge-config: default.invariant.failure-persist-dir = /path/to/failure/dir
[
  {
    "sender": "0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000003",
    "addr": "0x2e234dae75c793f67a35089c9d99245e1c58470b",
    "calldata": "0x6d4354210000000000000000000000007fa9385be102ac3eac297483dd6233d62b3e14960000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000e72",
    "contract_name": "test/Owned.t.sol:Handler",
    "signature": "transferOwnership(address,address)",
    "args": "0x7FA9385bE102ac3EAc297483Dd6233D62b3e1496, 0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000e72"
  },
  {
    "sender": "0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000001",
    "addr": "0x2e234dae75c793f67a35089c9d99245e1c58470b",
    "calldata": "0x51710e450000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000e72",
    "contract_name": "test/Owned.t.sol:Handler",
    "signature": "acceptOwnership(address)",
    "args": "0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000e72"
  }
]

Solution

  • add option of failure dir in invariant config, defaults to cache/invariant
  • remove dir on forge clean
  • run invariant check only once when replaying - checking after each call doesn't add valuable info for passing scenario (invariant call result is always success) nor for failed scenarios (invariant call result is always success until the last call that breaks it)
  • reuse check_sequence shrink utility to check persisted failure
  • store args as String in BaseCounterExample so we can serialize / deserialize it and use in replayed failed counterexample
  • if file with failed scenario exists, load and check sequence, exit if it still fails, continue on success. If fail doesn't exist or data cannot be loaded then file is ignored and test continues. Only last failed scenario is persisted in failure file. If failed scenario fails to pe persisted then error is displayed
  • added tests to check failure replay, move duped code for getting counterexample in get_counterexample macro
  • added test to make sure dir is removed on forge clean

@grandizzy grandizzy marked this pull request as ready for review May 9, 2024 11:01
Copy link
Member

@mattsse mattsse left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

really love the tests!

only have one pedantic nit

Comment on lines 790 to 799
macro_rules! remove_test_cache {
($cache_dir:expr) => {
if let Some(test_cache) = $cache_dir {
let path = project.root().join(test_cache);
if path.exists() {
std::fs::remove_dir_all(&path).map_err(|e| SolcIoError::new(e, path))?;
}
}
};
}
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

can we convert this into either a private function or closure instead?

not a fan of using private macros for this

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

changed in 9b22080 I opted not to throw the SolcIoError anymore (as is not really solc related) and just ignore, can readd it if you think it should be there

Comment on lines 570 to 571
if let Ok(data) = fs::read_to_string(failure_file) {
if let Ok(call_sequence) = serde_json::from_str::<Vec<BaseCounterExample>>(&data) {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I believe there's a foundry common fs function for reading json, perhaps we can use this here and get rid of one scope?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

oh, yes, indeed, I used them for both read and write in 9b22080

- replace test cache rm macro with closure
- use commons for load / persist failure sequence
@grandizzy grandizzy requested a review from mattsse May 17, 2024 11:54
@mds1
Copy link
Collaborator

mds1 commented May 17, 2024

This is great!

(for example if the persisted sequence fails in 100 steps but config was altered to run with a depth of 50 then persisted sequence will pass)

In this case, are we only running the first 50 steps of the sequence which results in it being passed? I think we may still want the full 100 step sequence to run to avoid thinking my test is now passing when it reality it doesn't

PROJ_ROOT/cache/invariant/failures/{TEST_NAME}/{INVARIANT_NAME}

Two small comments on this path:

  1. I think TEST_NAME is a typo and you meant CONTRACT_NAME?
  2. What if two invariants have the same name but different signatures, e.g. invariant1(uint256 x) and invariant1(uint256 x, uint256 y)? The file name probably needs to be the full normalized signature (selector also works, but is harder to less user-friendly)

Copy link
Member

@klkvr klkvr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

I think there can be potential issues with fail_on_revert set to true. If user changes setUp routines, then persisted sequence might become invalid because contract addresses will change and cached calldata might be invalid for a given address.

For example, if persisted sequence is

  1. call foo() on contract A
  2. call bar() on contract B

then adding more deployments to setUp will cause addresses of contract A/B change due to a deployer nonce shift, and sequence above might start calling bar() on A or vice versa.

Not sure how we can address that, perhaps display some kind of warning when persisted sequence is reverting rather than failing an invariant?

@grandizzy
Copy link
Collaborator Author

This is great!

(for example if the persisted sequence fails in 100 steps but config was altered to run with a depth of 50 then persisted sequence will pass)

In this case, are we only running the first 50 steps of the sequence which results in it being passed? I think we may still want the full 100 step sequence to run to avoid thinking my test is now passing when it reality it doesn't

Yes, that's correct, there'll only be first 50 runs resulting in test pass. That was done to avoid situations like the one described here crytic/echidna#1231 where changes in configs are not applied on failure reply. Happy to change it if you think should be.

PROJ_ROOT/cache/invariant/failures/{TEST_NAME}/{INVARIANT_NAME}

Two small comments on this path:

  1. I think TEST_NAME is a typo and you meant CONTRACT_NAME?

Yeah, I meant test suite (that is the test contract)

  1. What if two invariants have the same name but different signatures, e.g. invariant1(uint256 x) and invariant1(uint256 x, uint256 y)? The file name probably needs to be the full normalized signature (selector also works, but is harder to less user-friendly)

Rn we don't support params in invariant functions, is something that was requested in #4834 but no resolution for it yet

@mds1
Copy link
Collaborator

mds1 commented May 17, 2024

Yes, that's correct, there'll only be first 50 runs resulting in test pass. That was done to avoid situations like the one described here crytic/echidna#1231 where changes in configs are not applied on failure reply. Happy to change it if you think should be.

Thanks, I left a comment there to better understand

Rn we don't support params in invariant functions

Oh right, forgot about that 😅

@grandizzy
Copy link
Collaborator Author

LGTM

I think there can be potential issues with fail_on_revert set to true. If user changes setUp routines, then persisted sequence might become invalid because contract addresses will change and cached calldata might be invalid for a given address.

For example, if persisted sequence is

1. call `foo()` on contract `A`

2. call `bar()` on contract `B`

then adding more deployments to setUp will cause addresses of contract A/B change due to a deployer nonce shift, and sequence above might start calling bar() on A or vice versa.

Not sure how we can address that, perhaps display some kind of warning when persisted sequence is reverting rather than failing an invariant?

good point, a simpler scenario would be renaming handler functions, like foo() on contract A to become foo1(). Will display something like replay reverted if such to avoid confusion

@grandizzy
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Not sure how we can address that, perhaps display some kind of warning when persisted sequence is reverting rather than failing an invariant?

@klkvr please check db1b619

let (sender, (addr, bytes)) = &calls[call_index];
let call_result =
executor.call_raw_committing(*sender, *addr, bytes.clone(), U256::ZERO)?;
if call_result.reverted && failed_case.fail_on_revert {
if call_result.reverted && fail_on_revert {
// Candidate sequence fails test.
// We don't have to apply remaining calls to check sequence.
sequence_failed = true;
break;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

can't we just return here instead of managing sequence_failed flag and counting calls for replayed_entirely?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

yep yep, nice cleanup! 7686c03

))
} else {
Some(format!(
"{} persisted failure revert",
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

yep, that should explain what actually happened

@grandizzy
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Yes, that's correct, there'll only be first 50 runs resulting in test pass. That was done to avoid situations like the one described here crytic/echidna#1231 where changes in configs are not applied on failure reply. Happy to change it if you think should be.

Thanks, I left a comment there to better understand

@mds1 I think I am on the same page as Rappie mentioned in crytic/echidna#1231 (comment)
In foundry we have plans to add regression test generation where we capture all the conditions to replicate failure (test driver solidity code, env vars used at the time of test running, etc.). This should avoid the impression that test is passing when it reality it doesn't, wdyt?

@mds1
Copy link
Collaborator

mds1 commented May 20, 2024

@mds1 I think I am on the same page as Rappie mentioned in crytic/echidna#1231 (comment)
In foundry we have plans to add regression test generation where we capture all the conditions to replicate failure (test driver solidity code, env vars used at the time of test running, etc.). This should avoid the impression that test is passing when it reality it doesn't, wdyt?

From rappie in that issue:

the config leads, meaning sequences in the corpus which are illegal according to the current config should be skipped.

That does make sense to me, I'm onboard 👌

@grandizzy grandizzy merged commit c9ae920 into foundry-rs:master May 21, 2024
18 of 19 checks passed
@grandizzy grandizzy deleted the invariant-failure-persistence branch May 21, 2024 05:00
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.

None yet

4 participants