Refactor remove fee rate governor from bank by tao-stones · Pull Request #5388 · anza-xyz/agave

tao-stones · 2025-03-20T10:09:39Z

Problem

How bank checks is_zero_fees_for_test, and how bank burns transaction fee have been refactored in previous PRs that contribute to #3303, bank.fee_rate_governor has become obsoleted.

Summary of Changes

remove fee_rate_governor from bank.

Note: this PR does not remove fee_rate_governor from snapshot, which can be done in followup PR

Fixes #

tao-stones · 2025-03-20T10:11:59Z

-        assert_eq!(
-            bank.fee_rate_governor.lamports_per_signature,
-            dbank.fee_rate_governor.lamports_per_signature
-        );


does removing fee_rate_governor as extra modified fields break the test integrity? wdyt @brooksprumo

Looks fine to me.

tao-stones · 2025-03-20T10:12:47Z

    assert_eq!(bank6.non_vote_transaction_count_since_restart(), 1);
 }

-#[test]


this test is obsoleted

tao-stones · 2025-03-20T10:13:14Z

    solana_logger::setup();
    let (genesis_config, mint_keypair) = create_genesis_config(500);
-    let mut bank = Bank::new_for_tests(&genesis_config);
-    bank.fee_rate_governor.lamports_per_signature = 2;


this line was unnecessary at first place

tao-stones · 2025-03-20T10:46:25Z

                ExtraFieldsToSerialize {
-                    lamports_per_signature: bank.fee_rate_governor.lamports_per_signature,
+                    lamports_per_signature: solana_sdk::fee_calculator::FeeRateGovernor::default()
+                        .lamports_per_signature,


bank is created as default_for_tests(), effectively same as FeeRateGovernor::default().

do we not have this constant anywhere else? if we don't maybe we just add it in fee crate instead of continue to use FeeRateGovernor code.

The value doesn't matter for this test, we can just write a constant here too.

lamports_per_signature: 123, // actual value is not important

codecov-commenter · 2025-03-20T23:12:50Z

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 83.3%. Comparing base (d0c88d5) to head (4acf88a).
Report is 3 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #5388   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage    83.3%    83.3%           
=======================================
  Files         818      818           
  Lines      371732   371664   -68     
=======================================
- Hits       309938   309889   -49     
+ Misses      61794    61775   -19

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

brooksprumo · 2025-03-21T13:21:12Z

+            // Bank no longer has fee-rate-governor, it can be removed from snapshot in followup
+            // refactoring.
+            fee_rate_governor: FeeRateGovernor::default(),


This struct, BankFieldsToSerialize, should reflect all the fields in Bank that should be serialized in the snapshot. Since we no longer have a fee rate governor in Bank, we can (and should) remove it here as well.

Note that we can't change the actual snapshot format, so we'll keep writing FeeRateGovernor::default(), but that'll be handled by the actual snapshot code later. This is intended to make it clearer which fields are actually needed or not (from the POV of either the Bank or the Snapshot).

Suggested change

// Bank no longer has fee-rate-governor, it can be removed from snapshot in followup

// refactoring.

fee_rate_governor: FeeRateGovernor::default(),

maybe a dumb question - do we actually need to serialize this specific struct anymore? can we just serialize [0u8; core::mem::size_of<FeeRateGovernor>()]?

maybe we because validators could still be deserializing (checking structure is correct) until all are whatever version this lands in +?

This is a good point. In what version is FeeRateGovernor not needed? If we still need is in v2.2, then we cannot remove it from the snapshot here in v2.3 (master). We must wait until v2.4 instead.

The other point, we cannot remove fields/bytes from the actual snapshot. We can write zeroes and ignore them if the field is not needed anymore.

we have not needed it since before I started working on solana 😆

brooksprumo · 2025-03-21T13:26:35Z

+                    lamports_per_signature: solana_sdk::fee_calculator::FeeRateGovernor::default()
+                        .lamports_per_signature,


Please import FeeRateGovernor at the top of this module.

Suggested change

lamports_per_signature: solana_sdk::fee_calculator::FeeRateGovernor::default()

.lamports_per_signature,

// at the top of the module: use solana_sdk::fee_calculator::FeeRateGovernor

lamports_per_signature: FeeRateGovernor::default().lamports_per_signature,

Or alternatively, use bank.last_blockhash_and_lamports_per_signature() instead. The actual values aren't important for this "test", just the types.

tao-stones · 2025-04-11T23:35:20Z

Convert to draft - can't remove it from bank until #5749 is activated. It is tracked at Issue #3303

github-actions · 2026-02-16T08:21:13Z

This pull request is stale because it has been open 60 days with no activity. Remove stale label or comment or this will be closed in 7 days.

github-actions · 2026-02-23T08:22:18Z

This pull request was closed because it has been stale for 7 days with no activity.

tao-stones marked this pull request as draft March 20, 2025 10:09

tao-stones commented Mar 20, 2025

View reviewed changes

tao-stones force-pushed the refactor-remove-fee-rate-governor-from-bank branch from 1c57657 to 24be257 Compare March 20, 2025 10:45

tao-stones commented Mar 20, 2025

View reviewed changes

tao-stones added 2 commits March 20, 2025 16:50

remove fee-rate-governor from bank

639016d

fix abi test

4acf88a

tao-stones force-pushed the refactor-remove-fee-rate-governor-from-bank branch from 24be257 to 4acf88a Compare March 20, 2025 21:51

tao-stones marked this pull request as ready for review March 20, 2025 21:51

tao-stones requested review from apfitzge and brooksprumo March 20, 2025 21:52

brooksprumo reviewed Mar 21, 2025

View reviewed changes

tao-stones mentioned this pull request Mar 7, 2025

Remove FeeRateGovernor #3303

Open

8 tasks

tao-stones marked this pull request as draft April 11, 2025 23:34

apfitzge removed their request for review July 8, 2025 14:36

github-actions Bot added the stale label Feb 16, 2026

github-actions Bot closed this Feb 23, 2026

	// Bank no longer has fee-rate-governor, it can be removed from snapshot in followup
	// refactoring.
	fee_rate_governor: FeeRateGovernor::default(),

		lamports_per_signature: solana_sdk::fee_calculator::FeeRateGovernor::default()
		.lamports_per_signature,

Conversation

tao-stones commented Mar 20, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Problem

Summary of Changes

Uh oh!

tao-stones Mar 20, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

tao-stones Mar 20, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

codecov-commenter commented Mar 20, 2025

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

apfitzge Mar 21, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

tao-stones commented Apr 11, 2025

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Feb 16, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Feb 23, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

tao-stones commented Mar 20, 2025 •

edited

Loading

tao-stones Mar 20, 2025 •

edited

Loading

tao-stones Mar 20, 2025 •

edited

Loading

apfitzge Mar 21, 2025 •

edited

Loading