feat/native-sync-vault-composer #1747

shankars99 · 2025-10-03T23:37:16Z

This PR introduces composers for StargateAssets:

StargatePool - USDC or USDT (no new composer just tests for equivalence)
StargatePoolNative - ETH

VaultComposerSync

A refactor of VaultComposerSync was made (and also required) to improve the code that would be created for these assets since they break several assumptions:

OFT.token == vault.asset() breaks with PoolNative
OFT.approvalRequired() returns True when approval is not required - StargatePoolNative

Updating certain functions to also being virtual and splitting _send() into _sendLocal() and _sendRemote() are non-functional changes that let us override _sendRemote() in the StargateAssetComposers.

The constructor now calls an internal function _initializeAssetToken(assetOFT,vault) and this is overridable which helps us work around (1) and (2)

VaultComposerSyncPoolNative

Stargate's nativepool asset's inner token is ETH - address(0) while the vault.asset() is WETH. This means that we need to change the functionality to wrap ETH that we receive from the NativePool when talking to the Vault. On refunds due to failed deposits (Pool gives us ETH) we want to have identical behavior against a redemption (vault gives us WETH). We override receive() to wrap ETH to WETH when the sender is the Pool. This only happens on lzReceive().

Stargate's NativePools also has approvalRequired() set to True which is incorrect.

These are addressed by overriding _initializeAssetToken() to validate the token and approve WETH.

packages/ovault-evm/contracts/VaultComposerSync.sol

… override Signed-off-by: shankar <[email protected]>

…d sendRemote Signed-off-by: shankar <[email protected]>

Signed-off-by: shankar <[email protected]>

Co-authored-by: Tino Martínez Molina <[email protected]>

Signed-off-by: shankar <[email protected]>

…ous operations (#1778) Signed-off-by: shankar <[email protected]>

packages/ovault-evm/contracts/VaultComposerSyncNative.sol

tinom9 · 2025-11-04T19:08:51Z

packages/ovault-evm/README.md

+If you are staking in Stargate's native pools you will need a slightly different setup. As the asset is the native token there is not
+really an OFT or an ERC20 address. So for the asset OFT and ERC20 address you need to supply the Native Pool and `0x0`(or some other 0 value hex string).
+The Native Pool implements the OFT interface, and the `0x0` address will let the library know that it should handle it as a native pool. Other than that
+it is the same. If you are using wETH, you can supply arguments normally. This is just for ETH or other native tokens specifically.


@arekLZ can you help with this?

This is so it is compatible with more editors. Many don't wrap markdown and single line breaks like this will show as a single line when rendering markdown.

Example:

tinom9 · 2025-11-04T19:09:17Z

packages/ovault-evm/README.md

Run prettier on this file?

cc: @arekLZ

What styling is off?

tinom9 · 2025-11-04T19:10:38Z

packages/ovault-evm/test/sdk/transfer.test.ts

-    it.skip('Redeem A->B->B', async () => {
-        const srcChain = chainInputs['arbitrum']!
-        const dstChain = chainInputs[hubChain]!
+    describe.skip('OFT Vaulting', () => {


Why are those tests skipped? Should we be adding a comment?

i believe its cuz these are vape tests that actually send transactions. @arekLZ can confirm

These are not tests that regularly run. They are more for verification and regression and should be run manually. They actually send transactions as Shankar mentioned.

packages/ovault-evm/src/types.ts

tinom9 · 2025-11-04T19:31:54Z

packages/ovault-evm/src/oVaultSync/transfer.ts

+        if (hexToBigInt(tokenAddress) === 0n) {
+            // If sending native tokens, we need to account for slippage
+            const amountDst = await this.getOutputAmount(input)
+            const slippageAmount = (amountDst * BigInt(Number(slippage.toFixed(3)) * 1000)) / 1000n
+            minAmountLD = amountDst - slippageAmount
+        }


Why do we only account for slippage here for native tokens?

cc: @arekLZ

Only native tokens should have slippage. If we are sending OFTs, there should be 0 slippage.

Signed-off-by: shankar <[email protected]>

Co-authored-by: Tino Martínez Molina <[email protected]>

shankars99 changed the title ~~Feat/ovault stargate assets~~ feat/ovault stargate assets Oct 3, 2025

TRileySchwarz reviewed Oct 6, 2025

View reviewed changes

packages/ovault-evm/contracts/VaultComposerSync.sol Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

shankars99 and others added 11 commits October 12, 2025 19:04

refactor: initializeAssetToken and receive are virtual for nativePool…

fc23701

… override Signed-off-by: shankar <[email protected]>

refactor: _send() and _refund() to use virtual functions sendLocal an…

60ee7d1

…d sendRemote Signed-off-by: shankar <[email protected]>

docs: cleanup to under 120 characters

e84f500

Signed-off-by: shankar <[email protected]>

chore: interfaces for ComposerNative and WETH

5dfefcd

Signed-off-by: shankar <[email protected]>

feat: PoolNative (ETH) compatible vault composer

abe2807

Signed-off-by: shankar <[email protected]>

test: mock contracts and interfaces

6bd8ae6

Signed-off-by: shankar <[email protected]>

test: testing against poolERC20 and poolNative with new base

6aa8a3b

Signed-off-by: shankar <[email protected]>

chore: update fuzz runs

0dc45bb

Signed-off-by: shankar <[email protected]>

docs: comment _sendRemote custom behavior

a87ff95

Signed-off-by: shankar <[email protected]>

Refactor msg value to be passed down vs. direct reference (#1749)

cd43b60

Co-authored-by: Tino Martínez Molina <[email protected]>

chore: test ovault sync native composer and apply small nits (#1752)

f5e888a

shankars99 force-pushed the feat/ovault-stargate-assets branch from 9c5ec72 to f5e888a Compare October 12, 2025 19:04

shankars99 added the pending_audit label Oct 16, 2025

shankars99 self-assigned this Oct 17, 2025

shankars99 and others added 3 commits October 17, 2025 16:01

fix - wrap ETH in lzCompose (#1764)

5608ee0

Signed-off-by: shankar <[email protected]>

Integrate Stargate Native asset pools into OVault SDK (#1769)

903c135

ovault/native-asset-audit (#1766)

ad6e0b3

Signed-off-by: shankar <[email protected]>

shankars99 changed the title ~~feat/ovault stargate assets~~ feat/native-sync-vault-composer Oct 26, 2025

shankars99 added 2 commits October 27, 2025 16:20

vault - fixes 2 (#1775)

1cb1735

Signed-off-by: shankar <[email protected]>

ovault: wrap deposit and redeem with balance checks to force synchron…

f6292dd

…ous operations (#1778) Signed-off-by: shankar <[email protected]>

shankars99 added ready to review in a state where CI passes and the PR is quite upto date with main and you need reviews and removed pending_audit labels Oct 30, 2025

shankars99 marked this pull request as ready for review October 30, 2025 16:33

shankars99 requested review from St0rmBr3w, TRileySchwarz, ravinagill15 and tinom9 November 3, 2025 21:14

tinom9 reviewed Nov 4, 2025

View reviewed changes

Merge branch 'main' into feat/ovault-stargate-assets

199e864

shankars99 mentioned this pull request Nov 4, 2025

native-pool-review #1788

Merged

shankars99 and others added 3 commits November 4, 2025 13:19

native-pool-review (#1788)

24a3c77

Signed-off-by: shankar <[email protected]>

chore: artifacts

9702caa

Signed-off-by: shankar <[email protected]>

Update packages/ovault-evm/src/types.ts

d437dd1

Co-authored-by: Tino Martínez Molina <[email protected]>

feat/native-sync-vault-composer #1747

Are you sure you want to change the base?

feat/native-sync-vault-composer #1747

Uh oh!

Conversation

shankars99 commented Oct 3, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

VaultComposerSync

VaultComposerSyncPoolNative

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

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!

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!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

shankars99 commented Oct 3, 2025 •

edited

Loading