Unnecessary validation in Bera_Module::bera_infrared_stake should follow standard pattern

In Bera_Module::bera_infrared_stake, there is a call to validateToken(vault):

function bera_infrared_stake(address vault, address token, uint256 amount) external
    onlyRole(EXECUTOR_ROLE) nonReentrant {
    validateToken(vault); // @audit unnecessary
    IERC20(token).approve(vault, amount);
    IInfraredVault(vault).stake(amount);
}

This is unusual because the validation is applied to vault rather than token. Additionally, the check is unnecessary since the token must already be present in the contract, and for that to happen, it must be included in allowedTokens.

However, the validateToken(vault) function does serve a purpose: it prevents the trader from using a malicious vault contract. Therefore, the target should still be validated, but using a more appropriate approach. This pattern is already established in other parts of the codebase, where the validation is performed inside the TraderV0::approve function. To maintain consistency, we suggest following the same approach here.

Consider removing both the validateToken(vault) call and the approval altogether:

function bera_infrared_stake(address vault, address token, uint256 amount) external
    onlyRole(EXECUTOR_ROLE) nonReentrant {
-    validateToken(vault);
-    IERC20(token).approve(vault, amount);
    IInfraredVault(vault).stake(amount);
}

D2: Fixed in b0c4c4b.

Cyfrin: Verified.