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

Update block fields check to use current vm's block header #2165

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Apr 4, 2024

Conversation

fselmo
Copy link
Collaborator

@fselmo fselmo commented Apr 3, 2024

What was wrong?

  • This is a minor change that is nice to have but also necessary for full web3.py <-> eth-tester <-> py-evm support in order to update fields that are meant to be coming from the consensus layer.

Bonus: Instead of just copying the messages from the EIP, provider values in the error message when the calculated blob_gas_used doesn't match the block header blob gas used. This kind of helped track this down but also is just a nicety :)

How was it fixed?

  • Use the current vm's header to check fields got vm.pack_block()

Todo:

Cute Animal Picture

Screenshot 2024-04-03 at 17 55 45

fselmo added a commit to fselmo/py-evm that referenced this pull request Apr 3, 2024
@fselmo fselmo marked this pull request as ready for review April 3, 2024 23:56
@fselmo fselmo force-pushed the use-current-vm-header-for-field-check branch from 3394a52 to 3b7259d Compare April 3, 2024 23:58
@fselmo fselmo requested review from pacrob, kclowes and reedsa April 3, 2024 23:58
Copy link
Collaborator

@kclowes kclowes left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

looks good to me!

@fselmo fselmo merged commit fab2d5e into ethereum:main Apr 4, 2024
46 checks passed
@fselmo fselmo deleted the use-current-vm-header-for-field-check branch April 4, 2024 15:38
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