-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 387
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
feat: require Sealevel native transfers to cover the rent of the recipient #4936
Conversation
… trevor/fix-sol-transfer-without-rent
… trevor/fix-sol-transfer-without-rent
🦋 Changeset detectedLatest commit: 6e8384c The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump. This PR includes changesets to release 9 packages
Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are. Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR |
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #4936 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 77.44% 77.53% +0.09%
==========================================
Files 103 103
Lines 2110 2110
Branches 195 190 -5
==========================================
+ Hits 1634 1636 +2
+ Misses 455 453 -2
Partials 21 21
|
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.
Nice fix! One optional comment and needs a lint fix
… trevor/fix-sol-transfer-without-rent
Description
ITokenAdapter.getMinimumTransferAmount
, where impls generally return a minimum of 0, but native Sealevel and native Sealevel warp routes have some logic that is aware of required rent exemption balancesa. for the specific issue this is addressing, the destination side is the only one where issues can arise. On the origin, the account that escrows the SOL is always rent exempt
b. checking on the origin for completeness could be done, but would require some extra logic to be aware of where tokens are escrowed on the origin side (i.e. the recipient should be the account that escrows the SOL), which felt unnecessary / confusing
Drive-by changes
Related issues
Backward compatibility
Testing