-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 439
[rpc] eth_simulateV1 graceful interaction with execute_block_header.
#2565
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
dhil
wants to merge
1
commit into
main
Choose a base branch
from
dhil/simulate-blockhist
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+118
−1
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
[P2] This hardens the block-prologue merge, but the same user-controlled trigger still aborts the process via two sibling asserts on the eth_simulateV1 path:
MONAD_ASSERT(block_state.can_merge(state))inexecute_block.cpp:344(epilogue merge) andexecute_transaction.cpp:490(post-retry transaction merge). The failure mechanism your test exercises —create_contractresets storage, so theState's recorded original diverges from a storage override already sitting inblock_state— is reproducible per-transaction: a simulated call that CREATEs at an address carrying astate_diffoverride failscan_mergeatexecute_transaction.cpp:470, and the retry deterministically re-derives the same mismatch and trips the hard assert at line 490. Consider converting those two sites toMONAD_ASSERT_THROWas well (they're inside the try/catch that mapsMonadExceptiontoEVMC_INTERNAL_ERROR), or noting why they're unreachable from the simulate path.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think the
execute_block.cpp:344is theoretically triggerable via an Ethereum Prague request by overriding an EIP-7002/7251 deploy with code that recreates an overridden account and touches its storage. However, simulated headers leaverequests_hashunset, and block overrides cannot set it. Execution will therefore fail at the earlierrequests_hash.has_value()check. Nonetheless, this configuration is currently unsupported.I will think a bit about
execute_transaction.cpp:470.