feat(gnodev): cache path and notify conflict path

[0xhoanvarmeta]

feat(gnodev) cache path and notify conflict path
It resolves issue #4197
I continue to work #4285 in here
Cache a list of added AddPkg messages from state node.
Don't reload conflicting paths and log error

[Gno2D2]

🛠 PR Checks Summary

🔴 Maintainers must be able to edit this pull request (more info)

Manual Checks (for Reviewers):

• IGNORE the bot requirements for this PR (force green CI check)
• The pull request description provides enough details

Read More

🤖 This bot helps streamline PR reviews by verifying automated checks and providing guidance for contributors and reviewers.

✅ Automated Checks (for Contributors):

🔴 Maintainers must be able to edit this pull request (more info)
🟢 Pending initial approval by a review team member, or review from tech-staff

☑️ Contributor Actions:

1. Fix any issues flagged by automated checks.
2. Follow the Contributor Checklist to ensure your PR is ready for review.
   • Add new tests, or document why they are unnecessary.
   • Provide clear examples/screenshots, if necessary.
   • Update documentation, if required.
   • Ensure no breaking changes, or include BREAKING CHANGE notes.
   • Link related issues/PRs, where applicable.

☑️ Reviewer Actions:

1. Complete manual checks for the PR, including the guidelines and additional checks if applicable.

📚 Resources:

• Report a bug with the bot.
• View the bot’s configuration file.

Debug

Automated Checks

Maintainers must be able to edit this pull request (more info)

If

🟢 Condition met
└── 🟢 And
    ├── 🟢 The base branch matches this pattern: ^master$
    └── 🟢 The pull request was created from a fork (head branch repo: VAR-META-Tech/gno)

Then

🔴 Requirement not satisfied
└── 🔴 Maintainer can modify this pull request

Pending initial approval by a review team member, or review from tech-staff

If

🟢 Condition met
└── 🟢 And
    ├── 🟢 The base branch matches this pattern: ^master$
    └── 🟢 Not (🔴 Pull request author is a member of the team: tech-staff)

Then

🟢 Requirement satisfied
└── 🟢 If
    ├── 🟢 Condition
    │   └── 🟢 Or
    │       ├── 🟢 At least 1 user(s) of the organization reviewed the pull request (with state "APPROVED")
    │       ├── 🟢 At least 1 user(s) of the team tech-staff reviewed pull request
    │       └── 🔴 This pull request is a draft
    └── 🟢 Then
        └── 🟢 And
            ├── 🟢 Not (🔴 This label is applied to pull request: review/triage-pending)
            └── 🟢 At least 1 user(s) of the team tech-staff reviewed pull request

Manual Checks

**IGNORE** the bot requirements for this PR (force green CI check)

If

🟢 Condition met
└── 🟢 On every pull request

Can be checked by

• Any user with comment edit permission

The pull request description provides enough details

If

🟢 Condition met
└── 🟢 And
    ├── 🟢 Not (🔴 Pull request author is a member of the team: core-contributors)
    └── 🟢 Not (🔴 Pull request author is user: dependabot[bot])

Can be checked by

• team core-contributors

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 75.00000% with 6 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
contribs/gnodev/pkg/dev/node.go	50.00%	4 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️

📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know!

[notJoon]

Hi, could you please resolve the CI errors (except merge requirements) to proceed the review? thank you

[notJoon]

Is a cache clearing function unnecessary? it doesn't seem like there's any part that handles cache invalidation.

[0xhoanvarmeta]

I think the cache clearing function is unnecessary, because once a package is added using gnokey addpkg, it cannot be reloaded. Moreover, the cache is reset whenever gnodev is restarted

[notJoon]

sounds resonable 👍

[notJoon]

LGTM

remove: review/triage-pending flag

[gfanton]

see comments

[gfanton]

please remove this package; a simple sync map in this scenario doesn't deserve its own package as it's not shared among other packages or even other structs. This cache map should exist inside the dev.Node struct.

[gfanton]

Can you add some pertinent tests in node_test?

[gfanton]

no need to allocate another array here, you should filter this directly in generateTx