feat(supervisor/e2e-test): added L2 reorg acceptance tests

[sadiq1971]

Closes #2663
Closes #2497

[claude]

Claude finished @sadiq1971's task —— View job

---

PR Review: L2 Reorg Acceptance Tests

Reviewing the L2 reorg acceptance tests implementation. Here's my comprehensive feedback:

Review Checklist

• Read and analyze test file structure and organization
• Review init_exec_msg_test.go - execution message initialization tests
• Review invalid_exec_msgs_test.go - invalid execution message handling tests
• Review unsafe_head_test.go - unsafe head reorg tests
• Review init_test.go - test initialization and setup
• Check Go module dependencies (go.mod/go.sum changes)
• Assess code quality, best practices, and potential issues
• Provide comprehensive feedback and recommendations

Overall Assessment

✅ Strong test coverage - The PR adds comprehensive tests for L2 reorg scenarios with good edge case coverage
✅ Clear test structure - Well-organized test files with descriptive names and logical separation
✅ Proper dependency management - Clean dependency updates with appropriate version pinning

---

Code Quality & Best Practices

✅ Strengths

1. Excellent Test Organization: Clear separation of concerns with distinct test files for different reorg scenarios
2. Comprehensive Coverage: Tests cover critical scenarios - init message reorgs, invalid exec messages, and unsafe head reorgs
3. Good Error Handling: Proper use of require.NoError() and descriptive error messages
4. Detailed Logging: Extensive use of structured logging helps with debugging and understanding test flow
5. Proper Cleanup: Tests properly stop/start sequencers and batchers to simulate real conditions

⚠️ Areas for Improvement

1. Hardcoded Values: Several magic numbers could be extracted as constants:

   // init_exec_msg_test.go:65-67
   nTopics := 3
   lenData := 10

   Recommendation: Extract as package-level constants or test configuration

2. Repetitive Setup Code: The three test files have similar setup patterns that could be abstracted:

   // Similar across all tests
   alice := sys.FunderA.NewFundedEOA(eth.OneHundredthEther)
   bob := sys.FunderB.NewFundedEOA(eth.OneHundredthEther)

   Recommendation: Consider creating helper functions for common setup

3. Variable Naming: Some variable names could be more descriptive:

   // init_exec_msg_test.go:37
   cathrine := sys.FunderA.NewFundedEOA(eth.OneHundredthEther)  // typo: should be "catherine"

---

Security Considerations

✅ Good Security Practices

1. Controlled Test Environment: Tests use isolated test environments preventing interference
2. Proper Resource Management: Sequencers and batchers are properly stopped/started
3. Validation of State Changes: Tests verify expected state transitions and reorgs occur

⚠️ Minor Security Notes

1. Randomness Source: Using time-based seed is fine for tests but predictable:

   // init_exec_msg_test.go:65
   rng := rand.New(rand.NewSource(time.Now().UnixNano()))

   Note: This is acceptable for tests but documents the predictable nature

---

Performance Considerations

✅ Good Performance Practices

1. Efficient Waiting: Proper use of Eventually() and wait.For() with reasonable timeouts
2. Controlled Block Production: Tests efficiently control when blocks are produced

⚠️ Performance Notes

1. Sleep Statements: Several time.Sleep() calls could potentially be replaced with more deterministic waiting:

   // invalid_exec_msgs_test.go:188, 206
   time.Sleep(2 * time.Second)

   Recommendation: Consider if these can be replaced with condition-based waiting

---

Test Coverage & Completeness

✅ Excellent Coverage

1. Multiple Reorg Scenarios:

   • Init message reorgs during cross-chain communication
   • Invalid execution message handling
   • Unsafe head reorgs

2. Edge Case Testing: The invalid message tests cover multiple failure modes:

   • Invalid log index (line 31)
   • Invalid block number (line 36)
   • Invalid chain ID (line 42)

3. State Validation: Tests properly verify that supervisor and sequencer states converge after reorgs

---

Potential Issues

🔍 Minor Issues Found

1. Typo in Variable Name:

   // init_exec_msg_test.go:37
   cathrine := sys.FunderA.NewFundedEOA(eth.OneHundredthEther)

   Fix: Should be catherine

2. Timeout Hardcoding: Some timeouts are hardcoded and could benefit from configuration:

   // Multiple files
   60*time.Second, 3*time.Second  // in Eventually()
   5*time.Second                   // in wait.For()

3. Error Message Consistency: Some error messages could be more descriptive:

   // invalid_exec_msgs_test.go:202
   if err == nil || err.Error() != "not found" { // want to get "not found" error

   Recommendation: Use more specific error checking patterns

---

Dependencies Review

✅ Clean Dependency Management

The go.mod changes are minimal and appropriate:

• Single line change to update the optimism dependency to include latest devstack changes
• Corresponding go.sum updates are clean
• No unnecessary or concerning dependencies added

---

Final Recommendations

1. Extract Constants: Move magic numbers to package-level constants
2. Fix Typo: Correct "cathrine" → "catherine"
3. Consider Helper Functions: Extract common setup patterns to reduce duplication
4. Add Comments: Consider adding more detailed comments explaining the test scenarios
5. Timeout Configuration: Consider making timeouts configurable or documenting why specific values are chosen

Verdict

This is a high-quality test implementation that significantly improves the test coverage for L2 reorg scenarios. The tests are well-structured, comprehensive, and follow Go testing best practices. The identified issues are minor and don't affect the core functionality or safety of the tests.

Recommendation: ✅ Approve with minor suggestions - This PR adds valuable test coverage with only minor improvements needed.

---

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 85.2%. Comparing base (ed54ce2) to head (d750c4a).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[dhyaniarun1993]

Awesome.