test: add update_rewards several blocks delegation rewards test

[arad-starkware]

This change is 

---

Note

Adds a flow test verifying staker/delegator rewards accumulate correctly when update_rewards is called multiple times within the same epoch.

• Tests:
  • update_rewards_delegator_rewards_same_epoch_flow_test in src/flow_test/test.cairo:
    • Stakes, delegates, starts consensus rewards, calls update_rewards 4 times within one epoch (separated by quarter-epoch block advances), and asserts staker/delegator rewards equal 4× single-block expectations.
  • Import update: use EpochInfoTrait (alongside NormalizedAmountTrait).
• Docs:
  • Trim a bullet in src/flow_test/flow_ideas.md under update_rewards.

^{Written by Cursor Bugbot for commit 016908f. This will update automatically on new commits. Configure here.}

[arad-starkware]

Warning

This pull request is not mergeable via GitHub because a downstack PR is open. Once all requirements are satisfied, merge this PR as a stack on Graphite.
Learn more

• test: add update_rewards old delegator flow #94
• test: add update_rewards transition with balance change flow #93
• test: add update_rewards several blocks delegation rewards test #92 👈 (View in Graphite)
• test: add disable_rewards intermittently flow #91
• test: add update_rewards epoch length flow #90
• test: add update_rewards same epoch flow #89
• test: add update_rewards staker intent flow #88 : 1 other dependent PR (#95 )
• test: add update_rewards empty pools flow #87
• test: add update_rewards btc pools flow #86
• noa/staking/v3/rs-eic

This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking.

[noa-starkware]

Reviewable status: 0 of 2 files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @arad-starkware)

---

src/flow_test/test.cairo line 3872 at r1 (raw file):

/// Flow:
/// Staker stake.
/// Delegator delegate.

Add btc

[cursor]

Bug: Wrong block_duration calculation causes squared time advancement

The advance_blocks function expects block_duration to be the duration per single block, then multiplies it internally by the blocks count. The test passes AVG_BLOCK_DURATION * quarter_epoch_length as block_duration, but since the function multiplies by quarter_epoch_length again, the time advancement is squared. Other usages in the codebase show the correct pattern: advance_blocks(blocks: 1, block_duration: AVG_BLOCK_DURATION). The block_duration argument should just be AVG_BLOCK_DURATION.

Additional Locations (2)

• src/flow_test/test.cairo#L3833-L3836
• src/flow_test/test.cairo#L3837-L3840