litesvm does not enforce rent minimum balance for non-payer accounts

[OliverNChalk]

Checking the source, it looks like only the payer account has its post TX rent balance checked. So the question is:

• Do we want to build out the feature to check all accounts post execution.
• Should this feature be optional or just hard-coded.
• If optional, should it be on by default?

I imagine this was avoided for simplicity/dev experience. However, I've had a snag in that tests that should fail are now passing (i.e. im not properly pre-funding the accounts im allocating and litesvm isnt catching this for me).

I'd be down to take a first swing at such a PR if it's of interest.

[Aursen]

Hi, do you have a code snippet that normally wouldn't work?

[OliverNChalk]

The opposite, I am able to intialize accounts without paying sufficient rent. This is usually fine but it makes testing deployment scripts impossible (because behavior is not 1to1 with mainnet).

[kevinheavey]

Hmm, I think this should be optional and on by default. When it's on, we should also make it impossible to add an account that has insufficient rent

[Aursen]

The opposite, I am able to intialize accounts without paying sufficient rent. This is usually fine but it makes testing deployment scripts impossible (because behavior is not 1to1 with mainnet).

How did you do? I cannot reproduce the behavior

[OliverNChalk]

#[test]
fn repro() {
    let mut svm: Svm<HashMap<Pubkey, Account>> = Svm::new(HashMap::default());

    let payer = Keypair::new();
    svm.set(payer.pubkey(), Account { lamports: 10u64.pow(9), ..Default::default() });

    let target = Keypair::new();
    let allocate = system_instruction::allocate(&target.pubkey(), 100);

    assert!(svm
        .simulate_transaction(Transaction::new_signed_with_payer(
            &[allocate],
            Some(&payer.pubkey()),
            &[&payer, &target],
            svm.blockhash(),
        ))
        .is_err());
}

The Svm type is my wrapper around LiteSVM - if you can copy this into your workspace and just adjust the API slightly you should also see this assertion fail

[Aursen]

I will fix it in the 0.4.1 version of LiteSVM