• Add generation counter to ReportedProviders to prevent stale reconnect candidates
• Discard stale provider candidates after epoch transitions
• Prevent "Failed to find reported provider in pairing list" errors
• Add comprehensive test reproducing the reconnect race condition

Add generation tracking to discard stale candidates

• Add generation field to ReportedProviders struct to track epoch transitions
• Increment generation counter in Reset() method
• Modify ReconnectCandidates() to return struct containing candidates and generation snapshot
• Add generation validation in ReconnectProviders() before re-reporting stale candidates
• Skip re-reporting if generation has changed since candidate snapshot was captured

protocol/lavasession/reported_providers.go

Add test for reconnect race condition

• Add new test TestGetReportedProviders_ReconnectRace reproducing the race condition
• Test forces interleaving between ReconnectProviders and UpdateAllProviders
• Verify stale providers are not re-added after epoch transition
• Verify GetReportedProviders does not return providers from previous epoch

protocol/lavasession/consumer_session_manager_test.go

Update test for new return type

• Update existing test to access candidates field from new reconnectCandidatesResult struct
• Maintain test coverage for reconnect candidate functionality

protocol/lavasession/reported_providers_test.go

Description

In ReportedProviders.ReconnectProviders, the code checks rp.generation under an RLock but then
releases the lock before calling ReportProvider, allowing Reset() to run between the check and the
mutation and re-add a stale provider after an epoch transition. This defeats the intended
stale-candidate protection and can still lead to "reported provider not in pairing" failures
downstream.

Code

protocol/lavasession/reported_providers.go[R141-146]

+				rp.lock.RLock()
+				currentGen := rp.generation
+				rp.lock.RUnlock()
+				if currentGen == result.generation {
+					rp.ReportProvider(candidate.address, 0, 1, nil, []error{err}) // add a disconnection
+				} else {

Evidence

ReconnectProviders reads generation under rp.lock.RLock, unlocks, then conditionally calls
ReportProvider (which takes a write lock and mutates the map). Because Reset() also takes the write
lock and increments generation, a Reset can occur after the equality check but before ReportProvider
acquires the write lock, allowing a stale candidate to be re-reported into the new (post-Reset) map
despite the generation guard.

protocol/lavasession/reported_providers.go[126-154]
protocol/lavasession/reported_providers.go[32-40]

Agent prompt

The issue below was found during a code review. Follow the provided context and guidance below and implement a solution

### Issue description
`ReconnectProviders()` compares `currentGen` to the snapshot generation, but then releases the lock before mutating state via `ReportProvider()`. A concurrent `Reset()` can happen in that gap, so a stale candidate can still be re-added post-reset.

### Issue Context
You already added a `generation` counter and capture it together with the candidate snapshot. The remaining missing piece is to ensure the **generation verification and the subsequent map mutation happen under the same critical section**.

### Fix Focus Areas
- protocol/lavasession/reported_providers.go[126-154]

### Expected fix approach
- Re-check `rp.generation == result.generation` **under `rp.lock.Lock()`**, and only then mutate the map.
- To avoid deadlocks, either:
 - add a private `reportProviderLocked(...)` helper that assumes the lock is held, and call it from both `ReportProvider()` and `ReconnectProviders()`, or
 - add a `ReportProviderIfGeneration(expectedGen, ...)` method that performs the generation check and mutation under one `Lock()`.
- Do not perform `Lock()` -> call public `ReportProvider()` (it re-locks).

ⓘ Copy this prompt and use it to remediate the issue with your preferred AI generation tools

Description

On successful reconnect, ReconnectProviders always calls RemoveReport without any generation check,
so a stale reconnect attempt finishing after Reset() can delete a newly-added report for the same
provider address in the new epoch. This can silently drop valid reports and make QoS/unavailability
reporting incorrect.

Code

protocol/lavasession/reported_providers.go[R134-136]

			if err == nil {
				rp.RemoveReport(candidate.address)
			} else {
-				rp.ReportProvider(candidate.address, 0, 1, nil, []error{err}) // add a disconnection

Evidence

ReconnectProviders unconditionally removes the report on err == nil. RemoveReport deletes the
entry under a write lock, and Reset clears the map and bumps generation; without a generation guard
on the success path, a reconnect attempt from the previous generation can remove a report that was
created after Reset in the new generation.

protocol/lavasession/reported_providers.go[126-136]
protocol/lavasession/reported_providers.go[79-87]
protocol/lavasession/reported_providers.go[32-40]

Agent prompt

The issue below was found during a code review. Follow the provided context and guidance below and implement a solution

### Issue description
The reconnect **success** path (`err == nil`) removes the report without verifying the candidate is still in the same `generation`. A stale reconnect completion after `Reset()` can therefore delete a newly-created report in the new epoch.

### Issue Context
The error path already attempts to avoid acting on stale candidates using `generation`. The same logic needs to apply to the success path as well.

### Fix Focus Areas
- protocol/lavasession/reported_providers.go[126-154]
- protocol/lavasession/reported_providers.go[79-87]

### Expected fix approach
- Apply the same generation validation to the success path as to the error path.
- Preferably perform `if rp.generation == result.generation { remove }` under a single `Lock()` to avoid TOCTOU gaps (similar to the error-path fix).

ⓘ Copy this prompt and use it to remediate the issue with your preferred AI generation tools

Description

TestGetReportedProviders_ReconnectRace uses a fixed time.Sleep to wait for ReconnectProviders to
enter reconnectCB, which can be flaky under CI load or different scheduling. This can cause spurious
failures or make the test non-deterministic.

Code

protocol/lavasession/consumer_session_manager_test.go[R1636-1638]

+	// Give ReconnectProviders time to call ReconnectCandidates and enter reconnectCB.
+	time.Sleep(100 * time.Millisecond)
+

Evidence

The test relies on time.Sleep(100ms) to enforce an interleaving, rather than synchronizing on an
explicit signal that ReconnectCandidates() has been called and the callback is blocking. Fixed
sleeps are sensitive to machine speed and scheduler variance.

protocol/lavasession/consumer_session_manager_test.go[1628-1642]

Agent prompt

The issue below was found during a code review. Follow the provided context and guidance below and implement a solution

### Issue description
The test currently uses `time.Sleep(100 * time.Millisecond)` to wait for the goroutine to reach a specific point, which is inherently timing-dependent.

### Issue Context
You already have a blocking `reconnectCB`; add a second channel/handshake to deterministically signal that the callback has been entered (or that `ReconnectCandidates()` has completed) before performing the epoch transition.

### Fix Focus Areas
- protocol/lavasession/consumer_session_manager_test.go[1610-1642]

### Expected fix approach
- Add a `started := make(chan struct{})`.
- In `reconnectCB`, `close(started)` immediately before blocking on `epochTransitioned`.
- In the test, replace `time.Sleep(...)` with `<-started` (optionally with a timeout).

ⓘ Copy this prompt and use it to remediate the issue with your preferred AI generation tools

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.