Lombard v2 pool backward compatibility #1440

0xsuryansh · 2025-12-03T16:54:26Z

Backward compatibility based on

https://github.com/lombard-finance/evm-smart-contracts/blob/main/contracts/bridge/providers/LombardTokenPoolV2.sol

and

https://github.com/lombard-finance/evm-smart-contracts/blob/main/contracts/bridge/providers/BridgeTokenPool.sol

kylesmartin · 2025-12-04T11:02:42Z

chains/evm/contracts/pools/Lombard/LombardTokenPool.sol


-  event LombardVerifierSet(address indexed verifier);
+  /// @param remoteChainSelector CCIP selector of destination chain.
+  /// @param lChainId The chain id of destination chain by Lombard Multi Chain Id conversion.


Alternatives:

The Lombard-specific chain ID.

The chain ID according to Lombard Multi Chain ID convention.

kylesmartin · 2025-12-04T11:04:39Z

chains/evm/contracts/pools/Lombard/LombardTokenPool.sol

+  /// @param remoteChainSelector CCIP selector of destination chain.
+  /// @param lChainId The chain id of destination chain by Lombard Multi Chain Id conversion.
+  /// @param allowedCaller The address of TokenPool on destination chain allowed to handle GMP message.
+  event PathSet(uint64 indexed remoteChainSelector, bytes32 indexed lChainId, bytes32 allowedCaller);


For PathSet & PathRemoved, we should specify if Lombard depends on them & how they are used given that they are named this way for a reason.

kylesmartin · 2025-12-04T11:05:25Z

chains/evm/contracts/pools/Lombard/LombardTokenPool.sol

    uint8 fallbackDecimals
  ) TokenPool(token, _getTokenDecimals(token, fallbackDecimals), advancedPoolHooks, rmnProxy, router) {
+    if (address(bridge) == address(0)) {
+      revert ZeroBridge();


Suggested change

revert ZeroBridge();

revert ZeroBridgeNotAllowed();

WIll fix later after confirmation from Lombard, this is from the old code

kylesmartin · 2025-12-04T11:10:27Z

chains/evm/contracts/pools/Lombard/LombardTokenPool.sol

+
+    Path memory path = s_chainSelectorToPath[lockOrBurnIn.remoteChainSelector];
+    if (path.allowedCaller == bytes32(0)) {
+      revert PathNotExist(lockOrBurnIn.remoteChainSelector);


Suggested change

revert PathNotExist(lockOrBurnIn.remoteChainSelector);

revert PathDoesNotExist(lockOrBurnIn.remoteChainSelector);

kylesmartin · 2025-12-04T11:26:33Z

chains/evm/contracts/pools/Lombard/LombardTokenPool.sol

    return super.lockOrBurn(lockOrBurnIn, blockConfirmationRequested, tokenArgs);
  }

+  /// @notice Backwards compatible lockOrBurn for lanes using the V1 flow.


So the invariant here is that there will always be a pre 1.7.0 OffRamp available to process any in-flight or failed V1 Lombard messages? This is why we don't need any proxy?

kylesmartin · 2025-12-04T11:36:05Z

chains/evm/contracts/pools/Lombard/LombardTokenPool.sol

+  /// @param remoteChainSelector CCIP chain selector of remote chain.
+  /// @param lChainId Lombard chain id of remote chain.
+  /// @param allowedCaller The address of TokenPool on destination chain.
+  function setPath(uint64 remoteChainSelector, bytes32 lChainId, bytes calldata allowedCaller) external onlyOwner {


Better to just accept bytes32 for allowedCaller & abi.encode it for the isRemotePool check? Then we can remove the allowedCaller length check right?

old Lombard function will discuss with them and change

kylesmartin · 2025-12-04T11:38:39Z

chains/evm/contracts/pools/Lombard/interfaces/IBridgeV2.sol

+pragma solidity ^0.8.24;
+
+/// @custom:security-contact legal@lombard.finance
+interface IBridgeV2 {


There is a source control issue here where some files exist in both pools/Lombard and pools/lombard

removed the pools/lombard folder

RensR · 2025-12-04T12:50:36Z

chains/evm/contracts/pools/Lombard/LombardTokenPool.sol

    address verifier,
+    IBridgeV2 bridge,
+    address adapter,
    address advancedPoolHooks,


Let's remove the hooks from this pool including adding

/// @notice No-op override to purge the unused code path from the contract. function _postFlightCheck(Pool.ReleaseOrMintInV1 calldata, uint256, uint16) internal pure virtual override {} /// @notice No-op override to purge the unused code path from the contract. function _preFlightCheck(Pool.LockOrBurnInV1 calldata, uint16, bytes memory) internal pure virtual override {}

will do later, after discussion with Lombard

RensR · 2025-12-04T12:51:23Z

chains/evm/contracts/pools/Lombard/LombardTokenPool.sol

+  /// @notice Mapping of CCIP chain selector to chain specific config.
+  mapping(uint64 chainSelector => Path path) internal s_chainSelectorToPath;

  constructor(


Let's at least add comments for the lombard params, what an adapter is and that it's optional

04d79fb#diff-85224aedce420bded797f21495e1f8246e2d934a6334bbf3c3cb883d832894e0R72-R77

github-actions · 2025-12-04T14:08:26Z

Metric	`lombard-v2-pool-backward-compat`	`develop`
Coverage	69.4%	68.8%

0xsuryansh changed the base branch from main to develop December 3, 2025 16:54

0xsuryansh marked this pull request as ready for review December 4, 2025 08:50

0xsuryansh requested a review from a team as a code owner December 4, 2025 08:50

0xsuryansh and others added 8 commits December 4, 2025 15:40

implement backward compatability

97dca81

fix existing tests

f304f2e

minor fixes + add comments

b630d8f

add mock contracts

b53101d

update tests

6e4ea50

update wrappers

c78fa14

Lombard Token Pool v2 flow (#1437)

c700ee6

comments fix

4d79408

0xsuryansh force-pushed the lombard-v2-pool-backward-compat branch from 69a6ca2 to 4d79408 Compare December 4, 2025 10:10

snapshot fix

6f0223c

kylesmartin reviewed Dec 4, 2025

View reviewed changes

RensR reviewed Dec 4, 2025

View reviewed changes

minor comment + test fixes

04d79fb

0xsuryansh requested review from RensR and kylesmartin December 4, 2025 13:59

kylesmartin approved these changes Dec 4, 2025

View reviewed changes

	revert PathNotExist(lockOrBurnIn.remoteChainSelector);
	revert PathDoesNotExist(lockOrBurnIn.remoteChainSelector);

Lombard v2 pool backward compatibility #1440

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Lombard v2 pool backward compatibility #1440

Uh oh!

Conversation

0xsuryansh commented Dec 3, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

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!

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!

github-actions bot commented Dec 4, 2025

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

0xsuryansh commented Dec 3, 2025 •

edited

Loading