Generalize the stablestake module to accommodate multiple pools

[amityadav0]

Description

• Generalize the stablestake module to accommodate multiple pools
• Extend the generalized stablestake module's capabilities to the leveragelp module, allowing users to borrow tokens from any pool for leverage positions. This involves reviewing and updating data structures, functions, and performing necessary data migration.
• Integrate masterchef module with generalised stablestake module

What has Changed?

What specific problem were you aiming to address, and how did you successfully resolve it? If tests were not uploaded for this pull request or if coverage decreased, please provide an explanation for the change.

---

Author Checklist

All items are required. Please add a note to the item if the item is not applicable and
please add links to any relevant follow up issues.

I have...

• included the correct type prefix in the PR title
• added ! to the type prefix if API or client breaking change
• targeted the correct branch (see PR Targeting)
• provided a link to the relevant issue or specification
• followed the guidelines for building modules
• included the necessary unit and integration tests
• included comments for documenting Go code
• updated the relevant documentation or specification
• reviewed "Files changed" and left comments if necessary
• confirmed all CI checks have passed

Reviewers Checklist

All items are required. Please add a note if the item is not applicable and please add
your handle next to the items reviewed if you only reviewed selected items.

I have...

• confirmed the correct type prefix in the PR title
• confirmed ! in the type prefix if API or client breaking change
• confirmed all author checklist items have been addressed
• reviewed state machine logic
• reviewed API design and naming
• reviewed documentation is accurate
• reviewed tests and test coverage
• manually tested (if applicable)

Deployment Notes

Are there any specific considerations to take into account when deploying these changes? This may include new dependencies, scripts that need to be executed, or any aspects that can only be evaluated in a deployed environment.

Screenshots and Videos

Please provide any relevant before and after screenshots by uploading them here. Additionally, demo videos can be highly beneficial in demonstrating the process.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 73.95264% with 143 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 48.39%. Comparing base (bd617a1) to head (1f7621c).

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1104      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   48.13%   48.39%   +0.26%     
==========================================
  Files         892      897       +5     
  Lines       35069    35404     +335     
==========================================
+ Hits        16880    17134     +254     
- Misses      16931    16990      +59     
- Partials     1258     1280      +22     

Components	Coverage Δ
leveragelp_transactions	75.70% <100.00%> (+0.70%)	⬆️
leveragelp_lifecycle	82.72% <100.00%> (ø)
leveragelp_keeper	85.41% <ø> (ø)
leveragelp_queries	19.94% <50.00%> (ø)
accountedpool_transactions	100.00% <ø> (ø)
accountedpool_lifecycle	∅ <ø> (∅)
accountedpool_queries	81.25% <ø> (ø)
amm_transactions	80.28% <ø> (ø)
amm_lifecycle	90.66% <ø> (ø)
amm_keeper	73.59% <ø> (ø)
amm_queries	82.45% <ø> (ø)
assetprofile_transactions	76.85% <ø> (ø)
assetprofile_lifecycle	∅ <ø> (∅)
assetprofile_keeper	80.00% <ø> (ø)
assetprofile_queries	60.00% <ø> (ø)
burner_transactions	0.00% <ø> (ø)
burner_lifecycle	∅ <ø> (∅)
burner_keeper	100.00% <ø> (ø)
burner_queries	79.06% <ø> (ø)
commitment_transactions	74.63% <ø> (ø)
commitment_lifecycle	∅ <ø> (∅)
commitment_keeper	86.17% <ø> (ø)
commitment_queries	59.04% <ø> (ø)
epochs_transactions	∅ <ø> (∅)
epochs_lifecycle	92.00% <ø> (ø)
epochs_keeper	84.61% <ø> (ø)
epochs_queries	83.33% <ø> (ø)
estaking_transactions	68.93% <ø> (ø)
estaking_lifecycle	82.60% <ø> (ø)
estaking_keeper	72.80% <ø> (ø)
estaking_queries	62.35% <ø> (ø)
incentive_transactions	∅ <ø> (∅)
incentive_lifecycle	∅ <ø> (∅)
incentive_keeper	∅ <ø> (∅)
incentive_queries	∅ <ø> (∅)
masterchef_transactions	86.85% <ø> (ø)
masterchef_lifecycle	71.37% <28.84%> (-4.06%)	⬇️
masterchef_keeper	100.00% <ø> (ø)
masterchef_queries	39.15% <0.00%> (+0.40%)	⬆️
oracle_transactions	27.27% <ø> (ø)
oracle_lifecycle	30.00% <ø> (ø)
oracle_keeper	61.11% <ø> (ø)
oracle_queries	34.53% <ø> (ø)
parameter_transactions	18.86% <ø> (ø)
parameter_lifecycle	∅ <ø> (∅)
parameter_keeper	75.00% <ø> (ø)
parameter_queries	57.14% <ø> (ø)
stablestake_transactions	82.25% <88.00%> (+0.71%)	⬆️
stablestake_lifecycle	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
stablestake_keeper	90.90% <100.00%> (+0.43%)	⬆️
stablestake_queries	90.62% <66.66%> (-9.38%)	⬇️
perpetual_transactions	76.10% <ø> (ø)
perpetual_lifecycle	90.90% <ø> (ø)
perpetual_keeper	61.68% <ø> (ø)
perpetual_queries	64.86% <ø> (ø)
tier_transactions	100.00% <ø> (ø)
tier_lifecycle	100.00% <ø> (ø)
tier_keeper	90.90% <ø> (ø)
tier_queries	79.92% <ø> (ø)
tokenomics_transactions	71.87% <ø> (ø)
tokenomics_lifecycle	∅ <ø> (∅)
tokenomics_keeper	80.00% <ø> (ø)
tokenomics_queries	79.06% <ø> (ø)
transferhook_transactions	∅ <ø> (∅)
transferhook_lifecycle	∅ <ø> (∅)
transferhook_keeper	100.00% <ø> (ø)
transferhook_queries	57.14% <ø> (ø)
tradeshield_transactions	74.29% <ø> (ø)
tradeshield_lifecycle	∅ <ø> (∅)
tradeshield_keeper	90.90% <ø> (ø)
tradeshield_queries	67.56% <ø> (ø)