Spl Extensions Token (2022) is not functioning properly

[hack-wrench]

The spl extensions token parser is not functioning properly; most incoming transaction instructions are not being processed.

This code will have almost no output, such as TokenExtensionProgramIx::MetadataPointer, and others.

impl yellowstone_vixen::Handler<TokenExtensionProgramIx, InstructionUpdate> for State {
    async fn handle(&self, value: &TokenExtensionProgramIx, raw: &InstructionUpdate) -> yellowstone_vixen::HandlerResult<()> {
        if let TokenExtensionProgramIx::TokenProgram(tp) = &value {
            return Ok(());
        }

        log::info!("{value:#?}");

        Ok(())
    }
}

I assume that subinstructions called within the originally called instructions are not processed?

[hack-wrench]

I think I misunderstood how the framework works. To iterate through all instructions, do I need to apply visit_all() on raw?

[kespinola]

@hack-wrench I'm running it right now and don't see any instruction parse errors. If you have an example transaction we can pull it in and write a unit test for it.

[hack-wrench]

I am referring to cross program invocation (spi), where secondary instructions are not processed by handlers. Do i need to unpack the inner primary instructions? And use visit_all to go through all the instructions?

[hack-wrench]

I studied the code and the framework works as I initially expected, visit_all is optional. The problem is in SingleInstructionPipeline::handle, line 113 returns an error when an instruction unpacking error occurs and does not complete the processing cycle, which causes almost all nested instructions to be discarded. After commenting out the return, the code worked as I expected, and all the necessary instructions started coming into the handle. Is this a bug or is it intentional?

[hack-wrench]

I think this is still a bug. I suggest removing the error return from the function and replacing match with:

            if let Err(e) = res {
                let _ = e.handle::<InstructionUpdate>(&pipe.id());
            }

I can do PR

[the-orex]

Hello, thanks for the PR!

Would you have a problematic transaction example so I can reproduce the issue in a test please? 🙏