-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 881
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
Apply expiration checks in PacketData classes #8186
Open
Matilda-Clerke
wants to merge
6
commits into
hyperledger:main
Choose a base branch
from
Matilda-Clerke:check-expiry-of-several-packet-data-classes
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+313
−108
Open
Changes from 5 commits
Commits
Show all changes
6 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
e32cbe7
Apply expiration checks in PacketData classes
Matilda-Clerke 5febb43
Fix broken unit tests
Matilda-Clerke 853261f
spotless
Matilda-Clerke 6d9183b
Fix failing test
Matilda-Clerke 831388c
Refactor to use clock to validate expiry
Matilda-Clerke 7485106
Merge branch 'main' into check-expiry-of-several-packet-data-classes
Matilda-Clerke File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why do we need to plumb Clock UTC everywhere, is it a testing concern? AFAIK Instant.now().toEpochMilli() is always in UTC.
If it is a testing concern about wanting to use a static clock, couldn't we spy and mock a non-static validateParameters method, or move this as a default method into PacketData for example? and then just directly test the real method in isolation. It should be the same coverage without the need to add clock to constructors
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It is a testing concern, yes. In many tests, we're using old hard-coded packets encoded in RLP, so the only way to ensure they're considered "valid" is to compare them against an appropriate instant, now provided by the supplied clock. Ideally, dependency injection of the clock into a
PacketDataFactory
, would remove this from the method parameters we see here, but that's a refactoring out of scope for this PR.I suppose we could use a spy to mock calls against a non-static validateParameters method, but truthfully, I'd rather refactor the code and maybe utilise dagger. It'll be much easier to maintain moving forward. Since you're the third person to mention it this morning, I'll branch off and work on the refactoring now.