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

gov: use saturating_sub as a defence-in-depth #4716

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 17, 2024

Conversation

hdevalence
Copy link
Member

Describe your changes

Uses saturating_sub as a defense in depth mechanism

Issue ticket number and link

Checklist before requesting a review

  • If this code contains consensus-breaking changes, I have added the "consensus-breaking" label. Otherwise, I declare my belief that there are not consensus-breaking changes, for the following reason:

    defense in depth in a codepath that has not been executed

@redshiftzero redshiftzero merged commit f9f7028 into release/v0.79.x Jul 17, 2024
11 checks passed
@redshiftzero redshiftzero deleted the gov-saturating-sub branch July 17, 2024 20:44
conorsch pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 26, 2024
## Describe your changes

Uses saturating_sub as a defense in depth mechanism

## Issue ticket number and link

## Checklist before requesting a review

- [x] If this code contains consensus-breaking changes, I have added the
"consensus-breaking" label. Otherwise, I declare my belief that there
are not consensus-breaking changes, for the following reason:

  > defense in depth in a codepath that has not been executed

(cherry picked from commit f9f7028)
conorsch added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 26, 2024
## Describe your changes

The `v0.79.1` release contained two bug fixes:
https://github.com/penumbra-zone/penumbra/releases/tag/v0.79.1 Those
changes were committed directly to the `release/v0.79.x` branch:

* #4716
* #4718

Typically, we prepare fixes for the `main` branch, then backport them
via cherry-pick into the relevant release branch. That process wasn't
adhered to for 0.79.1, so I'm following up to ensure we have all the
relevant changes we need in main.

## Checklist before requesting a review

- [x] If this code contains consensus-breaking changes, I have added the
"consensus-breaking" label. Otherwise, I declare my belief that there
are not consensus-breaking changes, for the following reason:

> These changes have already been released, as part of `v0.79.1` (and
therefore `v0.79.2`), so pulling them into main just ensures we don't
inadvertently unship them.

---------

Co-authored-by: Henry de Valence <[email protected]>
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.

2 participants