Remove #[rustfmt] from test_peer_storage
What changed, and why it matters
This commit is purely a code-style cleanup. It removes a `#[rustfmt::skip]` annotation from a single test function and reformats the code so that the project's automated formatter can handle it. No behavior of the program or test logic was changed.
No action required. This is a non-functional formatting change.
Security signals we found
No strong security signals were identified.
Evidence from the diff
The diff removes #[rustfmt::skip] from test_peer_storage in lightning/src/ln/channelmanager.rs and applies rustfmt-style wrapping to long lines, match arm trailing commas, and macro/argument formatting. The test assertions, function calls, and expected panic behavior remain identical. There are no functional code changes outside formatting.
Changed components
lightning/src/ln/channelmanager.rsInspect captured patch +46 / −19
diff --git a/lightning/src/ln/channelmanager.rs b/lightning/src/ln/channelmanager.rs
index 16014d2..af82f86 100644
--- a/lightning/src/ln/channelmanager.rs
+++ b/lightning/src/ln/channelmanager.rs
@@ -17543,7 +17543,6 @@ mod tests {
}
#[test]
- #[rustfmt::skip]
#[cfg(peer_storage)]
fn test_peer_storage() {
let chanmon_cfgs = create_chanmon_cfgs(2);
@@ -17564,8 +17563,10 @@ mod tests {
connect_blocks(&nodes[0], 1);
connect_blocks(&nodes[0], 1);
- let peer_storage_msg_events_node0 = nodes[0].chain_monitor.chain_monitor.get_and_clear_pending_msg_events();
- let peer_storage_msg_events_node1 = nodes[1].chain_monitor.chain_monitor.get_and_clear_pending_msg_events();
+ let peer_storage_msg_events_node0 =
+ nodes[0].chain_monitor.chain_monitor.get_and_clear_pending_msg_events();
+ let peer_storage_msg_events_node1 =
+ nodes[1].chain_monitor.chain_monitor.get_and_clear_pending_msg_events();
assert_ne!(peer_storage_msg_events_node0.len(), 0);
assert_ne!(peer_storage_msg_events_node1.len(), 0);
@@ -17574,7 +17575,7 @@ mod tests {
MessageSendEvent::SendPeerStorage { ref node_id, ref msg } => {
assert_eq!(*node_id, nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id());
nodes[1].node.handle_peer_storage(nodes[0].node.get_our_node_id(), msg.clone());
- }
+ },
_ => panic!("Unexpected event"),
}
}
@@ -17584,7 +17585,7 @@ mod tests {
MessageSendEvent::SendPeerStorage { ref node_id, ref msg } => {
assert_eq!(*node_id, nodes[0].node.get_our_node_id());
nodes[0].node.handle_peer_storage(nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id(), msg.clone());
- }
+ },
_ => panic!("Unexpected event"),
}
}
@@ -17594,14 +17595,41 @@ mod tests {
// Reload Node!
// TODO: Handle the case where we've completely forgotten about an active channel.
- reload_node!(nodes[0], test_default_channel_config(), &nodes_0_serialized, &[&old_state_monitor[..]], persister, chain_monitor, nodes_0_deserialized);
+ reload_node!(
+ nodes[0],
+ test_default_channel_config(),
+ &nodes_0_serialized,
+ &[&old_state_monitor[..]],
+ persister,
+ chain_monitor,
+ nodes_0_deserialized
+ );
- nodes[0].node.peer_connected(nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id(), &msgs::Init {
- features: nodes[1].node.init_features(), networks: None, remote_network_address: None
- }, true).unwrap();
- nodes[1].node.peer_connected(nodes[0].node.get_our_node_id(), &msgs::Init {
- features: nodes[0].node.init_features(), networks: None, remote_network_address: None
- }, false).unwrap();
+ nodes[0]
+ .node
+ .peer_connected(
+ nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id(),
+ &msgs::Init {
+ features: nodes[1].node.init_features(),
+ networks: None,
+ remote_network_address: None,
+ },
+ true,
+ )
+ .unwrap();
+
+ nodes[1]
+ .node
+ .peer_connected(
+ nodes[0].node.get_our_node_id(),
+ &msgs::Init {
+ features: nodes[0].node.init_features(),
+ networks: None,
+ remote_network_address: None,
+ },
+ false,
+ )
+ .unwrap();
let node_1_events = nodes[1].node.get_and_clear_pending_msg_events();
assert_eq!(node_1_events.len(), 2);
@@ -17612,19 +17640,18 @@ mod tests {
match node_0_events[0] {
MessageSendEvent::SendChannelReestablish { ref node_id, .. } => {
- assert_eq!(*node_id, nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id());
- // nodes[0] would send a bogus channel reestablish, so there's no need to handle this.
- }
- _ => panic!("Unexpected event"),
+ assert_eq!(*node_id, nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id());
+ // nodes[0] would send a bogus channel reestablish, so there's no need to handle this.
+ },
+ _ => panic!("Unexpected event"),
}
for msg in node_1_events {
if let MessageSendEvent::SendChannelReestablish { ref node_id, ref msg } = msg {
nodes[0].node.handle_channel_reestablish(nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id(), msg);
assert_eq!(*node_id, nodes[0].node.get_our_node_id());
- } else if let MessageSendEvent::SendPeerStorageRetrieval { ref node_id, ref msg } = msg {
- // Should Panic here!
- nodes[0].node.handle_peer_storage_retrieval(nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id(), msg.clone());
+ } else if let MessageSendEvent::SendPeerStorageRetrieval { ref node_id, ref msg } = msg
+ {
assert_eq!(*node_id, nodes[0].node.get_our_node_id());
// Should Panic here!
let res = std::panic::catch_unwind(|| {
Why this scored 15/100
Community notes
Notes can correct, qualify, or add evidence to the AI analysis. Every note shown here has been validated by a human moderator.
The AI analysis stands alone for now. Submit a note if you can add evidence or important context.