feat: (PRO-413) Enhance fee payer outflow calculation to include SPL …

[dev-jodee]

…token transfers

• Updated calculate_fee_payer_outflow to account for SPL token transfers, improving accuracy in fee estimation.
• Added comprehensive tests for SPL token transfer scenarios to ensure correct fee calculations.
• Adjusted transaction validation to utilize updated outflow calculations, ensuring consistency across transaction processing.

---

Important

Enhance fee payer outflow calculation to include SPL token transfers for accurate fee estimation and update related transaction validation and tests.

• Behavior:
  • Update calculate_fee_payer_outflow in fee.rs to include SPL token transfers for accurate fee estimation.
  • Adjust transaction validation in transaction_validator.rs to use updated outflow calculations.
• Testing:
  • Add tests in fee.rs for SPL token transfer scenarios to ensure correct fee calculations.
  • Add integration tests in jupiter_integration.rs for unknown tokens.
• Misc:
  • Minor error handling improvements in oracle.rs and auth.rs.
  • Update encode_versioned_transaction in transaction.rs to return Result.

^{This description was created by for 22d4f92. You can customize this summary. It will automatically update as commits are pushed.}

---

📊 Unit Test Coverage

Unit Test Coverage: 83.7%

View Detailed Coverage Report

[linear]

PRO-413 SPL token transfers from the Node Operator signer should count in the "fee payer outflow" and be charged to the requesting user

[ellipsis-dev]

Important

Looks good to me! 👍

Reviewed everything up to d0bbb12 in 2 minutes and 8 seconds. Click for details.

• Reviewed 1497 lines of code in 9 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 2 draft comments. View those below.
• Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.

1. tests/rpc/fee_estimation.rs:157

• Draft comment:
  The assert_eq error message says 'Fee in lamports should be 10000', but the expected value is 10050. Update the message to reflect the correct expected fee of 10050 lamports.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.

2. tests/rpc/fee_estimation.rs:330

• Draft comment:
  Consider avoiding hard-coded magic numbers for expected fees (e.g. rent exemption values). Computing these using get_minimum_balance_for_rent_exemption would make the test more robust.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.

Workflow ID: wflow_007IVroKc1AZZZZ7

^{You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.}

[ellipsis-dev]

Important

Looks good to me! 👍

Reviewed 22d4f92 in 58 seconds. Click for details.

• Reviewed 415 lines of code in 15 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 2 draft comments. View those below.
• Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.

1. tests/rpc/fee_estimation.rs:155

• Draft comment:
  The assert message shows 'Fee in lamports should be 10000' but the expected value is 10050. Update the error message to avoid confusion.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment was not on a location in the diff, so it can't be submitted as a review comment.

2. tests/rpc/fee_estimation.rs:430

• Draft comment:
  Consider replacing the debug println (line 430) with a logging macro or removing it, to keep test output clean.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 50% <= threshold 50% None

Workflow ID: wflow_cMieET9FdlmxP7p4

^{You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.}