feat: upgrade to Cosmos SDK v0.50.x #141

julienrbrt · 2025-06-03T16:02:42Z

Bump Atom One to Cosmos SDK v0.50.x.

Some tests still need to be fixed. However, this is ready for a preliminary review.
Relevant documentation: https://github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk/blob/v0.50.13/UPGRADING.md

app/app.go

+	for _, m := range app.mm.Modules {
+		if moduleWithName, ok := m.(module.HasName); ok {
+			moduleName := moduleWithName.Name()
+			if appModule, ok := moduleWithName.(appmodule.AppModule); ok {
+				modules[moduleName] = appModule
+			}
+		}
+	}


tbruyelle

This is my first round of review for this PR, I left a couple of comments.
Awesome work Julien!

ante/gov_vote_ante.go

app/keepers/keepers.go

cmd/atomoned/cmd/testnet.go

tbruyelle · 2025-06-12T12:13:10Z

go.mod

+replace (
+	cosmossdk.io/x/feegrant => cosmossdk.io/x/feegrant v0.1.1
+	github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk => github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk v0.50.13-0.20250409215204-371eb7e0de11
+	github.com/cosmos/ibc-go/v10 => github.com/cosmos/ibc-go/v10 v10.2.0


Why is it required ?

because they tagged ibc v10 with a Cosmos SDK v0.53 dependency... meaning go get bumps the SDK to v0.50.
Additionally they haven't tagged a new version of v0.50 while the latest client/v2 requires it (waiting for a v0.50.14 f.e.)

This PR will have to wait for v0.50.14 to be released.

right, i think your suggestion of directly using our fork is best tbh.

Note that we'll have to wait for the release of v3 to merge this PR.

x/feemarket/ante/expected_keepers_mocks_test.go

x/gov/keeper/msg_server.go

x/gov/testutil/expected_keepers_mocks.go

x/gov/types/errors.go

x/gov/types/v1/codec.go

julienrbrt · 2025-06-13T12:32:21Z

looks like most of the issues is due to wrong bech32 conversion. i'll add the address codec when it is needed instead of using Stringer

tbruyelle · 2025-06-26T16:52:55Z

Looking at the test failures, one is about command line execution for the gov module:

=== RUN   TestIntegrationTestSuite/TestGov/software_upgrade
    e2e_gov_test.go:330: Submitting Gov Proposal: SoftwareUpgrade
    e2e_exec_test.go:426: Executing atomoned tx gov submit-legacy-proposal on chain chain-Aa2HIr
    e2e_exec_test.go:708: 
        	Error Trace:	/home/runner/work/atomone/atomone/tests/e2e/e2e_exec_test.go:708
        	            				/home/runner/work/atomone/atomone/tests/e2e/e2e_exec_test.go:427
        	            				/home/runner/work/atomone/atomone/tests/e2e/e2e_gov_test.go:400
        	            				/home/runner/work/atomone/atomone/tests/e2e/e2e_gov_test.go:336
        	            				/home/runner/work/atomone/atomone/tests/e2e/e2e_gov_test.go:55
        	            				/home/runner/go/pkg/mod/github.com/stretchr/[email protected]/suite/suite.go:115
        	Error:      	Exec validation failed
        	Test:       	TestIntegrationTestSuite/TestGov/software_upgrade
        	Messages:   	stdout: , stderr: Error: unknown flag: --no-validate
        	            	Usage:
        	            	  atomoned tx gov submit-legacy-proposal [flags]

The underlying command is atomoned tx gov submit-legacy-proposal software-upgrade where software-upgrade is a subcommand added in the gov AppModuleBasic.GetTxCmd(), thanks to the AppModuleBasic.legacyProposalHandlers field populated by the constructor NewAppModuleBasic.

What I don't understand is why this field is empty when GetTxCmd() is invoked, while it contains 3 commands when NewAppModuleBasic is invoked before. I notice that gov.NewAppModule creates an AppModuleBasic without the legacyProposalHandlers, maybe this is why. But this was already the case before and it was not a problem.

Any idea?

julienrbrt · 2025-06-26T20:01:23Z

What I don't understand is why this field is empty when GetTxCmd() is invoked, while it contains 3 commands when NewAppModuleBasic is invoked before. I notice that gov.NewAppModule creates an AppModuleBasic without the legacyProposalHandlers, maybe this is why. But this was already the case before and it was not a problem.

Actually they are still populated in the basic manager:

atomone/app/app.go

Line 220 in b20bdbb

govtypes.ModuleName: gov.NewAppModuleBasic(

.
The reason may indeed be because they are empty in the app module itself. And from v0.50, the commands are enriched using autocli, which uses the AppModule.

tbruyelle · 2025-06-27T09:20:07Z

What I don't understand is why this field is empty when GetTxCmd() is invoked, while it contains 3 commands when NewAppModuleBasic is invoked before. I notice that gov.NewAppModule creates an AppModuleBasic without the legacyProposalHandlers, maybe this is why. But this was already the case before and it was not a problem.

Actually they are still populated in the basic manager:

atomone/app/app.go

Line 220 in b20bdbb

govtypes.ModuleName: gov.NewAppModuleBasic(

.
The reason may indeed be because they are empty in the app module itself. And from v0.50, the commands are enriched using autocli, which uses the AppModule.

Thanks, your last commit fixed that one. I'm looking at the others.

Add missing PreBlocker declaration in baseapp

More gas required

An error in the genesis file was causing the feemarket price change test to fail, because the set of the max block gas was ignored. The default value of -1 was causing a max block gas being equal to maxUint64 in the feemarket module, making the target block gas also very high and so the required amount of gas to see an increase of the gas price was not possible. The error was caused by the usage of cometbft/libs/json to marshal the genesis in the e2e tests, bc since 0.50, the genesis file is read using the legacy encoding/json, and those libs does not treat integer the same way (cometbft/libs/json marshals integers into string). So the fix is to replace cometbft/libs/json with the legacy encoding/json in the e2e setup. Also had to increase the max block gas in the e2e tests from 50,000,000 to 60,000,000 because the previous max was reached in the `testFeemarketGasPriceChange` test.

tbruyelle · 2025-07-08T19:01:23Z

All tests are passing now, lint fixes are addressed in #151

tbruyelle · 2025-07-10T13:34:49Z

ante/gov_vote_ante.go

-					return true // break the iteration
-				}
+			validator, err := g.stakingKeeper.GetValidator(ctx, validatorAddr)
+			if err != nil {


Now that I'm looking at this version of the diff, maybe we should handle the case when err is of type stakingtypes.ErrNoValidatorFound and not panic-ing in that case, just skip.

tbruyelle · 2025-07-11T12:16:43Z

app/upgrades/v4/upgrades.go

+	keepers *keepers.AppKeepers,
+) upgradetypes.UpgradeHandler {
+	return func(ctx context.Context, plan upgradetypes.Plan, vm module.VersionMap) (module.VersionMap, error) {
+		return vm, nil


Aren't we supposed to call RunMigrations here to trigger imported module migrations if any?

julienrbrt added 15 commits May 27, 2025 08:51

wip

0403778

updates

3efafc8

updates

b14cca9

updates

a36abe9

updates

3b1092d

updates

fd2d417

updates

d7bdaae

updates

f745c2d

updates

93f0206

updates

ee5d9a9

updates

6a5d886

blocks

bdb4488

cleanup

b2260c2

rename to v4

9c5a26d

Merge branch 'main' into julien/050 + fix conflicts

4dd341d

github-advanced-security bot found potential problems Jun 10, 2025

View reviewed changes

updates

aa44f80

julienrbrt changed the title ~~[WIP] feat: upgrade to Cosmos SDK v0.50.x~~ feat: upgrade to Cosmos SDK v0.50.x Jun 10, 2025

fix part of linting

1160132

julienrbrt marked this pull request as ready for review June 10, 2025 10:09

julienrbrt requested review from giunatale, tbruyelle, jaekwon and giuliostramondo as code owners June 10, 2025 10:09

julienrbrt marked this pull request as draft June 10, 2025 10:10

tbruyelle reviewed Jun 12, 2025

View reviewed changes

feedback and improvements

18aebf0

julienrbrt added 2 commits June 18, 2025 18:17

Merge branch 'main' into julien/050

6049565

build

131fcc7

julienrbrt added 2 commits June 20, 2025 17:49

fix tests

ec4d983

fix e2e

46b985f

julienrbrt marked this pull request as ready for review June 20, 2025 16:10

julienrbrt added 2 commits June 20, 2025 23:11

fixes

792c493

fix ibc wiring

5586311

tbruyelle mentioned this pull request Jun 24, 2025

chore: golangci-lint upgrade to latest #151

Open

julienrbrt added 2 commits June 24, 2025 15:08

fix sims

b2b643f

fix(tests/e2e): pass around codecs

b20bdbb

updates

7cd75b0

tbruyelle and others added 5 commits June 27, 2025 14:38

test(e2e): fix rest interface

0bf9d94

test(e2e): fix gov

612d10a

Add missing PreBlocker declaration in baseapp

test(e2e): fix staking

342b4de

More gas required

chore: remove useless gov upgrade handlers

4308120

attempt fix tx fee query

ba25e8a

Pantani mentioned this pull request Jul 3, 2025

feat: ADR-004 (Nakamoto Bonus) #153

Closed

julienrbrt added 3 commits July 9, 2025 15:18

swap error check

589a5e0

use fork

0e9dbf5

use upgrade from fork

01111d0

tbruyelle reviewed Jul 10, 2025

View reviewed changes

tbruyelle reviewed Jul 11, 2025

View reviewed changes

feat: upgrade to Cosmos SDK v0.50.x #141

Are you sure you want to change the base?

feat: upgrade to Cosmos SDK v0.50.x #141

Uh oh!

Conversation

julienrbrt commented Jun 3, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Check warning

tbruyelle left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

tbruyelle Jun 12, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

julienrbrt Jun 13, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

tbruyelle Jul 2, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

julienrbrt Jul 9, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

tbruyelle Jul 9, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

julienrbrt commented Jun 13, 2025

Uh oh!

tbruyelle commented Jun 26, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

julienrbrt commented Jun 26, 2025

Uh oh!

tbruyelle commented Jun 27, 2025

Uh oh!

tbruyelle commented Jul 8, 2025

Uh oh!

tbruyelle Jul 10, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

tbruyelle Jul 11, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

julienrbrt commented Jun 3, 2025 •

edited

Loading

tbruyelle Jul 9, 2025 •

edited

Loading

tbruyelle commented Jun 26, 2025 •

edited

Loading