Skip to content

test: follow-up #6762 and #6763 to remove workaround and fix error message #6790

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
PastaPastaPasta merged 1 commit into from
Jul 31, 2025
Merged

test: follow-up #6762 and #6763 to remove workaround and fix error message #6790

PastaPastaPasta merged 1 commit into from
Jul 31, 2025

Conversation

@knst
Copy link
Collaborator

@knst knst commented Jul 30, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Issue being fixed or feature implemented

Once both #6762 and #6763 are merged, no more need to have a workaround with manual lock / unlock of descriptor wallet before upgradetohd.
I fixes CI failure on develop also due to conflict.

What was done?

Removed this workaround from wallet_upgradetohd.py

How Has This Been Tested?

See CI

Breaking Changes

N/A

Checklist:

  • I have performed a self-review of my own code
  • I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
  • I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests
  • I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
  • I have assigned this pull request to a milestone

@knst knst added this to the 23 milestone Jul 30, 2025
@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jul 30, 2025 •
edited
Loading

✅ No Merge Conflicts Detected

This PR currently has no conflicts with other open PRs.

@coderabbitai
Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Jul 30, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Walkthrough

The changes modify the error handling and wallet unlocking behavior in the test/functional/wallet_upgradetohd.py test case for upgrading to HD wallets with descriptors enabled. The test no longer unlocks and locks the wallet around the upgradetohd RPC call. Instead of expecting an error code -1 with a message about the wallet being locked when calling upgradetohd with a wrong passphrase, it now expects an error code -4 with a message about an incorrect wallet passphrase. The rest of the test logic, including assertions and wallet state checks, remains unchanged.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~3 minutes

Note

⚡️ Unit Test Generation is now available in beta!

Learn more here, or try it out under "Finishing Touches" below.

📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 2c08506c123d433c05edd6c33c7f3189edd00e5e and 4dca765.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • test/functional/wallet_upgradetohd.py (1 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
  • test/functional/wallet_upgradetohd.py
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (10)
  • GitHub Check: linux64_ubsan-build / Build source
  • GitHub Check: linux64_sqlite-build / Build source
  • GitHub Check: linux64_fuzz-build / Build source
  • GitHub Check: linux64-build / Build source
  • GitHub Check: linux64_tsan-build / Build source
  • GitHub Check: win64-build / Build source
  • GitHub Check: linux64_nowallet-build / Build source
  • GitHub Check: arm-linux-build / Build source
  • GitHub Check: x86_64-apple-darwin / Build depends
  • GitHub Check: Lint / Run linters
✨ Finishing Touches
  • 📝 Generate Docstrings
🧪 Generate unit tests
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Post copyable unit tests in a comment

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Explain this complex logic.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai explain this code block.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and explain its main purpose.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Support

Need help? Create a ticket on our support page for assistance with any issues or questions.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate sequence diagram to generate a sequence diagram of the changes in this PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate unit tests to generate unit tests for this PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

@knst knst force-pushed the fix-follow-6762 branch from 2c08506 to 4dca765 Compare July 30, 2025 20:03
@knst knst changed the title test: follow-up #6762 - removed related TODO from functional test test: follow-up #6762 and #6763 to remove workaround and fix error message Jul 30, 2025
@knst knst requested review from PastaPastaPasta and UdjinM6 July 30, 2025 20:06
DashCoreAutoGuix
DashCoreAutoGuix approved these changes Jul 31, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link

@DashCoreAutoGuix DashCoreAutoGuix left a comment •
edited by PastaPastaPasta
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

utACK 4dca765 (used wrong account, disregard)

PastaPastaPasta
PastaPastaPasta approved these changes Jul 31, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@PastaPastaPasta PastaPastaPasta left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

utACK 4dca765

@knst knst requested a review from kwvg July 31, 2025 16:51
kwvg
kwvg approved these changes Jul 31, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Collaborator

@kwvg kwvg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

utACK 4dca765

@PastaPastaPasta PastaPastaPasta merged commit e7f515c into dashpay:develop Jul 31, 2025
35 of 38 checks passed
@knst knst deleted the fix-follow-6762 branch August 11, 2025 12:28
knst pushed a commit to knst/dash that referenced this pull request Sep 17, 2025
@PastaPastaPasta @knst
Merge dashpay#6790: test: follow-up dashpay#6762 and dashpay#6763 to …
7130dd7 
…remove workaround and fix error message

4dca765 test: follow-up dashpay#6762 - removed related TODO from functional test (Konstantin Akimov)

Pull request description:

  ## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
  Once both dashpay#6762 and dashpay#6763 are merged, no more need to have a workaround with manual lock / unlock of descriptor wallet before `upgradetohd`.
  I fixes CI failure on develop also due to conflict.

  ## What was done?
  Removed this workaround from `wallet_upgradetohd.py`

  ## How Has This Been Tested?
  See CI

  ## Breaking Changes
  N/A

  ## Checklist:
  - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
  - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
  - [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests
  - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
  - [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone

ACKs for top commit:
  DashCoreAutoGuix:
    utACK 4dca765 (used wrong account, disregard)
  PastaPastaPasta:
    utACK 4dca765
  kwvg:
    utACK 4dca765

Tree-SHA512: 435359f53f42c29f3e6885ab6fbeabd1a31135fe67a15b894e6f4a92a0aced3e96e0f1bb38598eb74eb251df1f6ae603e033ee41e3bf500bcc4d6c5c1031b800
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@PastaPastaPasta PastaPastaPasta PastaPastaPasta approved these changes

@kwvg kwvg kwvg approved these changes

@UdjinM6 UdjinM6 Awaiting requested review from UdjinM6

+1 more reviewer

@DashCoreAutoGuix DashCoreAutoGuix DashCoreAutoGuix approved these changes

Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

23

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@knst @PastaPastaPasta @kwvg @DashCoreAutoGuix