fix: fix solana inbounds

[skosito]

Description

Solana inbounds were working in e2e tests because tests were setting up deposits with []bytes array instead of [20]byte and it was serialized and deserialized the same way. When deposit is sent outside e2e tests it fails.

Also, observing call variants of deposits was missing. E2E test calling contract was not checking if message is passed correctly, and depositAndCall was actually called, but with empty message.

How Has This Been Tested?

• Tested CCTX in localnet
• Tested in development environment
• Go unit tests
• Go integration tests
• Tested via GitHub Actions

[coderabbitai]

Important

Review skipped

Auto reviews are disabled on base/target branches other than the default branch.

🗂️ Base branches to auto review (1)

• develop

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

---

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]

This looks legit to me but curious that we were missing this change

[skosito]

This looks legit to me but curious that we were missing this change

it was combination of these 2 things that contributed to this oversight:

• missing check in e2e test that contract is called with message, making deposit and call e2e test to be false positive (this is fixed in this PR)
• writing types and serialize/deserialize on our own instead of using auto generated types, which also made borsch serialization falsely positive in e2e tests and observing worked in zetaclient for that wrong serialization (it will be improvement for next release: Generate or produce Go binding on this repository protocol-contracts-solana#43)

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 91.54930% with 6 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 62.72%. Comparing base (314db22) to head (9a0c51d).
Report is 1 commits behind head on release/v23.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
pkg/contracts/solana/inbound.go	91.54%	4 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@               Coverage Diff               @@
##           release/v23    #3255      +/-   ##
===============================================
+ Coverage        62.66%   62.72%   +0.05%     
===============================================
  Files              424      424              
  Lines            30236    30298      +62     
===============================================
+ Hits             18948    19004      +56     
- Misses           10448    10452       +4     
- Partials           840      842       +2     

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
pkg/contracts/solana/gateway.go	0.00% <ø> (ø)
pkg/contracts/solana/instruction.go	18.57% <ø> (ø)
pkg/contracts/solana/inbound.go	87.23% <91.54%> (+2.42%)	⬆️

[ws4charlie]

minor comment. PR looks good