feat: integrate convex finance

[niklr]

Issue

@samitannir @dhruvinparikh

OpenDeFi/Hackathon#5

Name

OptyFi Bounty #1: Convex Finance Adapter

Description

Build an integration with Convex Finance’s liquidity pools using OptyFi's DeFi Adapter interface. With this integration, OptyFi users should be able to deposit CRV, CVX and Curve LP tokens into OptyFi vaults which will in turn deploy them into Convex to earn yield boosted by CRV and CVX rewards. The OptyFi Protocol should also be able to deposit CRV and Curve LP tokens acquired from other strategies involving our direct Curve integration.

The overall goal is to maximize the liquidity, utility and profitability of CRV and other Curve assets in DeFi.

Video walkthrough

https://youtu.be/1iNkQ_7gzNg

Deployment address on Rinkeby

0x72F4165890E4A1d3f7C1f7771c24B6442DcE0a00

[niklr]

Would love to get some feedback as early as possible in the development process. Let me know which pools offered by Convex Finance should be prioritized or if you would like to support them all. The integration should be otherwise complete, just missing the pool addresses.

[dhruvinparikh]

Would love to get some feedback as early as possible in the development process. Let me know which pools offered by Convex Finance should be prioritized or if you would like to support them all. The integration should be otherwise complete, just missing the pool addresses.

I did skimmed the code.

• Please cover remaining functions in the test suite to make it ~ 100% covered.
• I found that there are 41 liquidity pools as I am replying. Please fill up the json with the same.
• Let us run the test suite against all of them to neutralize edge cases if any.

Over all, it looks good. Thank you for contributing.

[niklr]

I did skimmed the code.

* Please cover remaining functions in the test suite to make it ~ 100% covered.

* I found that there are 41 liquidity pools as I am replying. Please fill up the json with the same.

* Let us run the test suite against all of them to neutralize edge cases if any.

Over all, it looks good. Thank you for contributing.

@dhruvinparikh Thanks for the fast reply! I just realized that all pools are using the same deposit contract address. This makes it impossible to map from deposit pool to staking vault. Maybe you know a workaround to solve this dilemma?

What about extending the interface, so that an optional pool identifier is passed in combination with the _liquidityPool address?

[dhruvinparikh]

I did skimmed the code.

* Please cover remaining functions in the test suite to make it ~ 100% covered.

* I found that there are 41 liquidity pools as I am replying. Please fill up the json with the same.

* Let us run the test suite against all of them to neutralize edge cases if any.

Over all, it looks good. Thank you for contributing.

@dhruvinparikh Thanks for the fast reply! I just realized that all pools are using the same deposit contract address. This makes it impossible to map from deposit pool to staking vault. Maybe you know a workaround to solve this dilemma?

What about extending the interface, so that an optional pool identifier is passed in combination with the _liquidityPool address?

Possible work around could be to :

• hardcode booster contract.
• Map underlying token to the staking pool instead of mapping booster to staking pool.
• You might want to keep _liquidityPool and _liquidityPoolToken args with same addresses.(This hack is fine provided you make similar changes in the pool data .json)
• Also the feeToken() is not the underlyingToken. You can get the underlyingToken by accessing PoolInfo.lpToken(). And the lpToken would be PoolInfo.token() and staking vault would be PoolInfo.crvRewards() aka BaseRewardPool in terms of Convex Finance

[niklr]

Sounds good @dhruvinparikh However, not all interface functions provide the underlying token as parameter e.g.

IAdapterHarvestReward.sol

• getClaimRewardTokenCode

IAdapterStaking.sol

• getStakeSomeCodes
• getUnstakeSomeCodes
• getUnstakeAllCodes
• getLiquidityPoolTokenBalanceStake

IAdapter.sol

• getRewardToken
• canStake

Not exactly sure what you mean with:

You might want to keep _liquidityPool and _liquidityPoolToken args with same addresses.(This hack is fine provided you make similar changes in the pool data .json)

I assume the getUnderlyingTokens(address _liquidityPool, address _liquidityPoolToken) would just return the _liquidityPoolToken which has the value of PoolInfo.lpToken()?

[dhruvinparikh]

I assume the getUnderlyingTokens(address _liquidityPool, address _liquidityPoolToken) would just return the _liquidityPoolToken which has the value of PoolInfo.lpToken()?

My understanding is depicted here in terms of IAdapter

[niklr]

As part of the Gitcoin submission requirements, these are the links to the video and the deployed contract:

Video walkthrough: https://youtu.be/1iNkQ_7gzNg

Deployment address on Rinkeby: 0x72F4165890E4A1d3f7C1f7771c24B6442DcE0a00

[dhruvinparikh]

Closing this PR in favour of #14