Skip to content
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

txpool: add SetCode transactions to legacy pool #30949

Closed

Conversation

colinlyguo
Copy link
Contributor

This PR adds SetCode transactions to the legacy pool.

rationale: although EIP-7702 introduces a new scenario where the EOA nonce can be incremented, it looks like the transaction pool can still handle addresses with updated nonces by monitoring newly added blocks on the node. This ensures that the nonce of transactions in the transaction pool will not be lower than the account's nonce. So, no changes are needed to the transaction pool's logic.

@lightclient
Copy link
Member

lightclient commented Dec 21, 2024

We don't plan on enabling 7702 in the pool until a proper implementation is done. Thanks!

@colinlyguo
Copy link
Contributor Author

We don't plan on enabling 7702 in the pool until a proper implementation is done. Thanks!

oh got it. thanks for the clarification. so the missing pieces are on purpose for version control.

@colinlyguo
Copy link
Contributor Author

colinlyguo commented Jan 2, 2025

We don't plan on enabling 7702 in the pool until a proper implementation is done. Thanks!

oh got it. thanks for the clarification. so the missing pieces are on purpose for version control.

also, as a complement for this pr, I realized enabling SetCode tx without tx pool logic change might not be enough after seeing this: https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-7702#transaction-propagation, quote:

This is due to the fact that once an EOA has delegated to code, that code can be called by anyone at any point in a transaction. It becomes impossible to know if the balance of the account has been sweeped in a static manner.

also added an obvious missing commit in this comment: colinlyguo@09d7184

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants