Repository navigation
Test: Fix flaky token validity fuzz tests - #785
Merged
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Summary
Two fuzz tests fail randomly in CI (seen on #784 and #780):
PP_StreamingV1Test.test__validPaymentTokenandPP_CrossChainBase_v1_Test.testInternalValidPaymentToken_worksGivenReturnsFalseIfAddressDoesNotHaveERC20Interface. Both assert that a random address is not a valid payment token, but the fuzzer sometimes picks the address of an ERC20 mock deployed in the test setup, which is correctly reported as valid.Both tests now assume the fuzzed address has no code. Test-only change.
Deployment Steps
✅ No deployment steps required.
Test Plan
Pre-merge checklist
FOUNDRY_FUZZ_RUNS=20000forge fmt --checkpasses