fix: revert ctx amount should be uint256

[skosito]

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Bug Fixes
  • Enhanced the RevertContext struct to allow for a broader range of values by updating the amount field from uint64 to uint256.
• Tests
  • Updated tests to reflect changes in the onRevert function signature, ensuring proper handling of the new uint256 parameter and validating contract functionality under various conditions.

[coderabbitai]

Caution

Review failed

The pull request is closed.

📝 Walkthrough

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The changes in this pull request involve an update to the RevertContext struct in the v2/contracts/Revert.sol file. The data type of the amount field has been modified from uint64 to uint256, allowing for a larger range of values to be stored. Additionally, the GatewayEVM.t.sol test file has been updated to reflect this change, specifically in the onRevert function signature. No other modifications to the logic or functionality of the code have been made.

Changes

File Path	Change Summary
v2/contracts/Revert.sol	Updated amount field in RevertContext struct from uint64 to uint256.
v2/test/GatewayEVM.t.sol	Updated onRevert function signature in GatewayEVMTest from uint64 to uint256.

Possibly related issues

• Use uint256 instead of uint64 for amount in revert context #375: This issue requests the use of uint256 instead of uint64 for the amount in the revert context, which aligns with the changes made in this PR.

Possibly related PRs

• feat: improve revert handling #361: This PR modifies the RevertContext struct in v2/contracts/Revert.sol by adding a new address sender field, which is relevant to the changes made in the main PR that updated the amount field's data type in the same struct.
• fix: cleanup tss updater changes #368: This PR includes changes to the GatewayEVM contract, specifically the executeRevert function, which utilizes the RevertContext. The modifications in the main PR regarding the RevertContext struct are directly related to the changes in how revert scenarios are handled in this PR.

Suggested reviewers

• fadeev
• CharlieMc0
• andresaiello
• brewmaster012
• lumtis
• fbac

---

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

🪧 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.
  • Generate unit testing code for this file.
  • 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 generate unit testing code for this file.
  • @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 generate unit testing code.
  • @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.

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 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.

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.

[lumtis]

LGTM but seems there is an error in unit test

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 84.19%. Comparing base (a80faa8) to head (a3ab893).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #377   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   84.19%   84.19%           
=======================================
  Files           8        8           
  Lines         386      386           
  Branches      126      126           
=======================================
  Hits          325      325           
  Misses         61       61           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.