Test Epoch3.4 and Clarity5 by BowTiedRadone · Pull Request #6912 · stacks-network/stacks-core

BowTiedRadone · 2026-02-17T13:07:42Z

This PR applies stateless and stateful property-based testing techniques for Epoch 3.4 / Clarity 5 changes.

Stateless (proptest-rs)

secp256r1-verify: digest roundtrip, tamper/wrong-key/malformed-key cases, and version-governance checks
from-consensus-buff?: roundtrip, error/none boundary behavior across epochs, and fuzz stability
Relay depth filter and epoch gating invariants

Stateful (madhouse-rs)

Relay filter and depth-chain acceptance/rejection at each epoch
Cross-version Clarity 4/5 call semantics
SIP-040 Originator/Deny/MaybeSent post-condition sequences

Infrastructure

scenario! macro with deterministic default order + MADHOUSE=1 randomized mode
Run: cargo test -p stackslib --lib chainstate::tests::madhouse
Randomized: MADHOUSE=1 PROPTEST_CASES=50 cargo test -p stackslib --lib chainstate::tests::madhouse

codecov · 2026-02-17T13:50:40Z

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 61.00%. Comparing base (58545bc) to head (28c62ff).

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##           develop    #6912       +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage    77.73%   61.00%   -16.74%     
============================================
  Files          412      412               
  Lines       218667   218667               
  Branches       338      338               
============================================
- Hits        169981   133387    -36594     
- Misses       48686    85280    +36594

see 295 files with indirect coverage changes

Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 58545bc...28c62ff. Read the comment docs.

🚀 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.

Eight proptests covering the version-dependent hashing change. Validates primitive/VM agreement on accept and reject paths, confirms ClarityVersion governs hashing (not epoch), and fuzzes arbitrary inputs for crash resistance.

…proptests Three new property-based tests for Clarity5 consensus deserialization: - Round-trip: serialize then from-consensus-buff? recovers original value - Type mismatch: wrong top-level constructors always returns none - Truncation: slicing a valid encoding at any interior byte returns none

federico-stacks · 2026-04-08T07:03:25Z

+    #[test]
+    fn prop_from_consensus_buff_empty_buffer_returns_none(


It would be nice to include test tagging for all the proptest tests can be easily discovered by CI automations.

Suggested change

#[test]

fn prop_from_consensus_buff_empty_buffer_returns_none(

#[tag(t_prop)]

#[test]

fn prop_from_consensus_buff_empty_buffer_returns_none(

federico-stacks · 2026-04-08T07:13:35Z

 tempfile = "3.3"
 pinny = { workspace = true }
 proptest = { version = "1.6.0", default-features = false, features = ["std"] }
+madhouse = { git = "https://github.com/stacks-network/madhouse-rs.git", tag = "0.2.1" }


Minor: we are currently referencing two versions of madhouse-rs:

0.2.1 in stackslib

0.2.0 in stacks-node

if the two versions are compatibles, It might be worth adding madhouse-rs as a workspace dependency and referencing it from the crates that use it, to ensure version consistency.

federico-stacks · 2026-04-08T07:15:34Z

+name = "madhouse"
+version = "0.2.0"
+source = "git+https://github.com/stacks-network/madhouse-rs.git?tag=0.2.1#5d4d51bedf2d56c8ef0643d891fb085df1615c91"
+dependencies = [


nit: version reported in madhouse-rs/Cargo.tml is not aligned with tag.

Thanks! PR opened upstream: stacks-network/madhouse-rs#33.

federico-stacks · 2026-04-08T07:19:33Z

+/// Expected return value from a successful ping call: `(ok true)`.
+fn ok_true() -> Value {
+    Value::Response(ResponseData {
+        committed: true,
+        data: Box::new(Value::Bool(true)),
+    })
+}


nit: this helper is repeated over 3 modules. Maybe it can be moved under commands/mod.rs

federico-stacks · 2026-04-08T07:46:35Z

+        let call_stack_limit = if state.chain_epoch() >= StacksEpochId::Epoch34 {
+            128
+        } else {
+            64
+        };
+        let parser_limit = call_stack_limit + AST_DEPTH_BUFFER;


Could we leverage StackDepthLimits::for_epoch here? Then we could drop all the constants: 64, 128 and AST_DEPTH_BUFFER.

Or is the goal to replicate the stack depth computation to guard against changes in the underlying implementation? (and in this case we could just write some unit tests specifics for StackDepthLimits)

It's the latter: the goal is to replicate the computation and guard against silent changes in the underlying implementation. If max_call_stack_depth_for_epoch or AST_CALL_STACK_DEPTH_BUFFER were accidentally modified, tests that delegate to StackDepthLimits::for_epoch would be tautological (testing the implementation against itself). The hardcoded values act as independent witnesses of the expected behavior.

Adding dedicated unit tests for StackDepthLimits would just duplicate what these commands already cover with the same hardcoded assertions, so I'd rather not add them unless you feel strongly.

federico-stacks · 2026-04-08T07:55:03Z

+        let chain_epoch = state.chain_epoch();
+        assert_eq!(
+            state.current_epoch, chain_epoch,
+            "CallRestrictWithStxCombinedExceeds: model epoch {:?} disagrees with chain {:?}",
+            state.current_epoch, chain_epoch,
+        );


sanity-check: I noticed that CallRestrictWithStxCombinedExceeds and CallAsContractWithStxCombinedExceeds have epoch check, while CallRestrictWithStxSafe and CallAsContractWithStxSafe haven't. Should they have it?

It is intentional. The safe variants expect (ok true) regardless of epoch, so there's no epoch-dependent branch that a model/chain mismatch could silently mislead. The exceeds variants branch on is_epoch34() (block rejection vs (err u0)), so the epoch check is a precondition to ensure the branch is evaluating the right case.

federico-stacks · 2026-04-08T08:06:06Z

+            TransactionPostConditionMode::Originator,
+            vec![],
+        );
+        state.nft_next_id += 1;


nit: this feels a bit inconsistent with other commands. Should the NFT ID be incremented before the transaction is created, as done elsewhere?

federico-stacks · 2026-04-08T08:11:59Z

+pub fn consensus_buff_type_strategy() -> BoxedStrategy<String> {
+    let len_range = 1u32..=128;
+
+    prop_oneof![
+        Just("int".to_string()),
+        Just("uint".to_string()),
+        Just("bool".to_string()),
+        Just("principal".to_string()),
+        len_range.clone().prop_map(|n| format!("(buff {n})")),
+        len_range
+            .clone()
+            .prop_map(|n| format!("(string-ascii {n})")),
+        len_range.clone().prop_map(|n| format!("(string-utf8 {n})")),
+        Just("(optional int)".to_string()),
+        len_range.prop_map(|n| format!("(list {n} int)")),
+        Just("(response int int)".to_string()),
+    ]
+    .boxed()


sanity-check: should tuple also be considered here?

federico-stacks · 2026-04-08T08:16:34Z

+#[test]
+fn test_default_for_epoch_is_monotonic() {
+    // No Clarity in Epoch10.
+    let clarity_epochs = &StacksEpochId::ALL[1..];


nit: readability could be improved using StacksEpochId::since()

Suggested change

let clarity_epochs = &StacksEpochId::ALL[1..];

let clarity_epochs = StacksEpochId::since(StacksEpochId::Epoch20);

CLAassistant · 2026-04-09T18:35:30Z

All committers have signed the CLA.

coveralls · 2026-04-09T19:21:45Z

Coverage Report for CI Build 24504371565

Coverage increased (+0.02%) to 85.734%

Details

Coverage increased (+0.02%) from the base build.
Patch coverage: No coverable lines changed in this PR.
3004 coverage regressions across 76 files.

Uncovered Changes

No uncovered changes found.

Coverage Regressions

3004 previously-covered lines in 76 files lost coverage.

Top 10 Files by Coverage Loss	Lines Losing Coverage	Coverage
stackslib/src/net/inv/epoch2x.rs	222	79.44%
stackslib/src/net/chat.rs	202	92.95%
stackslib/src/chainstate/stacks/miner.rs	190	83.5%
stacks-node/src/nakamoto_node/miner.rs	149	87.34%
stackslib/src/chainstate/stacks/db/mod.rs	135	86.21%
clarity/src/vm/costs/mod.rs	125	83.57%
stackslib/src/net/api/postblock_proposal.rs	120	80.99%
stacks-node/src/nakamoto_node/relayer.rs	106	86.71%
stackslib/src/config/mod.rs	101	68.84%
stackslib/src/clarity_vm/database/marf.rs	99	60.67%

Coverage Stats


Relevant Lines:	218251
Covered Lines:	187116
Line Coverage:	85.73%
Coverage Strength:	17352011.39 hits per line

💛 - Coveralls

BowTiedRadone force-pushed the test/epoch34-clarity5 branch 2 times, most recently from ec722ea to 7b53b4f Compare February 22, 2026 23:00

BowTiedRadone added 5 commits February 23, 2026 01:03

Add secp256r1-verify property tests for Clarity5 hashing

07d56d6

Eight proptests covering the version-dependent hashing change. Validates primitive/VM agreement on accept and reject paths, confirms ClarityVersion governs hashing (not epoch), and fuzzes arbitrary inputs for crash resistance.

Add from-consensus-buff? proptests for Epoch34 serialization handling

63c9519

Add relayer static depth check proptest at Epoch34 boundary

cd64b97

Add 2 exhaustive epoch-gating tests

bdd2013

BowTiedRadone force-pushed the test/epoch34-clarity5 branch from 7b53b4f to ccc98ca Compare February 22, 2026 23:03

Add madhouse stateful scenario tests for Epoch33 to Epoch34 transition

a02f406

BowTiedRadone force-pushed the test/epoch34-clarity5 branch from ccc98ca to a02f406 Compare February 23, 2026 09:24

BowTiedRadone and others added 2 commits March 2, 2026 17:19

Add trait self-reference proptests with randomized trait shapes

d13f7a2

Merge branch 'develop' into test/epoch34-clarity5

2c24755

BowTiedRadone force-pushed the test/epoch34-clarity5 branch from b51347c to 2c24755 Compare March 2, 2026 15:30

BowTiedRadone and others added 7 commits March 2, 2026 17:40

Update Cargo.lock

28c62ff

Merge branch 'develop' into test/epoch34-clarity5

906570e

Add Originator and MaySend madhouse-rs commands and scenario tests

401b69d

Merge branch 'develop' into test/epoch34-clarity5

1db02dd

Randomize madhouse-rs command recipients and use any over num

e8238fd

Address clippy errors

292ff05

Merge branch 'develop' into test/epoch34-clarity5

b3e8fcf

wileyj added the no changelog label Mar 17, 2026

Merge branch 'develop' into test/epoch34-clarity5

e1b809b

BowTiedRadone changed the title ~~[DRAFT] Test Epoch3.4 and Clarity5~~ Test Epoch3.4 and Clarity5 Mar 19, 2026

Merge branch 'develop' into test/epoch34-clarity5

591034e

BowTiedRadone marked this pull request as ready for review March 19, 2026 21:42

BowTiedRadone mentioned this pull request Mar 25, 2026

ci: proptest nightly #7023

Merged

5 tasks

brice-stacks requested review from brice-stacks and federico-stacks April 7, 2026 20:50

federico-stacks reviewed Apr 8, 2026

View reviewed changes

federico-stacks assigned radu-stacks Apr 8, 2026

brice-stacks reviewed Apr 9, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread stackslib/src/chainstate/tests/madhouse/commands/postcond.rs Outdated

Merge branch 'develop' into test/epoch34-clarity5

fa98a15

radu-stacks added 2 commits April 15, 2026 21:56

Merge branch 'develop' into test/epoch34-clarity5

e466244

Tag from-consensus-buff proptests with t_tag

80dd989

radu-stacks force-pushed the test/epoch34-clarity5 branch from dfd390f to 80dd989 Compare April 15, 2026 21:18

radu-stacks added 9 commits April 16, 2026 00:19

Tag secp256r1 proptests with t_tag

c9ed6df

Tag trait self-reference proptests with t_tag

f72a658

Use try_from for ContractName/ClarityName in test code

7123366

Tag epoch34 madhouse scenario tests with t_tag

0baf34b

Tag relay depth filter removal proptest with t_tag

a04e206

Turn madhouse-rs into a workspace dependency

b00f957

Move ok_true helper to mod

3e9d08a

Fix nft_next_id incremental inconsistency

114b1d8

Improve test_default_for_epoch_is_monotonic readability

77dcd07

		#[test]
		fn prop_from_consensus_buff_empty_buffer_returns_none(

	let clarity_epochs = &StacksEpochId::ALL[1..];
	let clarity_epochs = StacksEpochId::since(StacksEpochId::Epoch20);

Conversation

BowTiedRadone commented Feb 17, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Feb 17, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

radu-stacks Apr 15, 2026 • 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!

radu-stacks Apr 15, 2026 • 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!

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!

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!

Uh oh!

CLAassistant commented Apr 9, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

coveralls commented Apr 9, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Coverage Report for CI Build 24504371565

Coverage increased (+0.02%) to 85.734%

Details

Uncovered Changes

Coverage Regressions

Coverage Stats

💛 - Coveralls

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

7 participants

BowTiedRadone commented Feb 17, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Feb 17, 2026 •

edited

Loading

radu-stacks Apr 15, 2026 •

edited

Loading

radu-stacks Apr 15, 2026 •

edited

Loading

CLAassistant commented Apr 9, 2026 •

edited

Loading

coveralls commented Apr 9, 2026 •

edited

Loading