Solver solution out amount haircut

[squadgazzz]

Description

Changes

• ...
• ...

How to test

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @squadgazzz, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request introduces a 'quote haircut' mechanism designed to enhance the conservatism of competition bids. By allowing a configurable reduction in solver-reported executed amounts, the system can submit more cautious bids. This adjustment is performed without altering the underlying interaction calldata, ensuring that bids remain within acceptable limits and respect the order's minimum requirements.

Highlights

• New Haircut Logic Module: A new module haircut.rs has been introduced under crates/driver/src/domain/competition/solution/ to encapsulate the logic for calculating 'haircutted' executed amounts. This function applies a configurable basis points reduction to solver-reported economics to make competition bids more conservative.
• Configurable Haircut Parameter: The SolverConfig struct now includes a quote_haircut_bps field, allowing the haircut percentage (in basis points) to be configured via the driver's configuration file. This parameter defaults to 0, meaning no haircut is applied unless explicitly set.
• Integration into Solution Processing: The haircut calculation has been integrated into the solution processing pipeline within crates/driver/src/infra/solver/dto/solution.rs. If quote_haircut_bps is greater than zero, the calculate_executed_amount function is called to adjust the executed amount of an order before the competition solution is finalized.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request introduces a 'quote haircut' feature, applying a configurable basis points reduction to solver-reported economics to make competition bids more conservative. The core logic is implemented in haircut.rs and includes plumbing the quote_haircut_bps configuration. A medium-severity Denial of Service vulnerability has been identified where a misconfiguration of the quote_haircut_bps parameter can cause a panic due to an arithmetic underflow, crashing the driver. It is recommended to use saturating_sub to prevent this. Additionally, a minor redundancy in the code was noted.