EIP-2315 changes in gascosts and update opcode

[matkt]

• Changes in gascosts (2315: changes in gascosts EIPs#2676)

  • JUMPSUB -> 10 (high tier gas cost)
  • RETURNSUB -> 5 (low tier gas cost)
  • BEGINSUB -> 2 (base tier gas cost)

• Update opcode (EIP2315: update opcodes EIPs#2682)

  • 0x5c BEGINSUB
  • 0x5d RETURNSUB
  • 0x5e JUMPSUB

• Add also a new test to prevent that a JUMPSUB can jump to a JUMPDEST. The new opcode must have its own valid jump table (ref Implement EIP-2315: subroutines ethereumjs/ethereumjs-monorepo#754 (comment))

Generated with Besu : hyperledger/besu#995

[holgerd77]

Just asking - without too much insight: there were substantially more test files on the original subroutine test PR #685, were the ones missing not touched by the gas cost changes?

[matkt]

Just asking - without too much insight: there were substantially more test files on the original subroutine test PR #685, were the ones missing not touched by the gas cost changes?

these are the ones that test failed transactions because when a transaction fails, all of the gas available for that transaction (gas limit) is sent to the miner. So the tests will not change

[winsvega]

please update all stSubroutine tests. the previous PR merged was not refilled.
the HF defenition is updated in travis on tests::develop

[matkt]

please update all stSubroutine tests. the previous PR merged was not refilled.
the HF defenition is updated in travis on tests::develop

I regenerated the tests with the latest opcodes. I may have missed something. What do you mean by update?

[winsvega]

please update all stSubroutine tests. the previous PR merged was not refilled.
the HF defenition is updated in travis on tests::develop

I regenerated the tests with the latest opcodes. I may have missed something. What do you mean by update?

save all the test fillers. rebase on tests develop. paste test fillers back and run filltests command.

[matkt]

please update all stSubroutine tests. the previous PR merged was not refilled.
the HF defenition is updated in travis on tests::develop

I regenerated the tests with the latest opcodes. I may have missed something. What do you mean by update?

save all the test fillers. rebase on tests develop. paste test fillers back and run filltests command.

Thanks, Done

[winsvega]

hm. travis report errors. did you run
-t GeneralStateTests/stSubroutine -- --filltests
-t GeneralStateTests/stSubroutine -- --filltests --fillchain
?

[matkt]

hm. travis report errors. did you run
-t GeneralStateTests/stSubroutine -- --filltests
-t GeneralStateTests/stSubroutine -- --filltests --fillchain
?

Yes I'm doing
./retesteth -t GeneralStateTests/stSubroutine -- --filltests --fillchain
And after
./retesteth -t GeneralStateTests/stSubroutine -- --filltests

[matkt]

hm. travis report errors. did you run
-t GeneralStateTests/stSubroutine -- --filltests
-t GeneralStateTests/stSubroutine -- --filltests --fillchain
?

It's strange because when I compare the value of HashSrcwith the filler content, it's the same 😕

[winsvega]

This HashSrc is what python script reports. To see what retesteth think is the hash run test with --showhash argument. Apparently python can't calculate the hash of your comment.

‘virtual stop’  is parsed as \u2018virtual stop\u2019 by python script.

[matkt]

This HashSrc is what python script reports. To see what retesteth think is the hash run test with --showhash argument. Apparently python can't calculate the hash of your comment.

‘virtual stop’  is parsed as \u2018virtual stop\u2019 by python script.

oh yes 🤦 thanks, I just modified the comment

[sr9000]

@matkt Hi! I'm a new intern.
I implemented subroutine opcodes support for LLLC. Now you can use this pr winsvega/lllc#2 to compile LLLC and write evm code for fillers using opcodes instead bytecode.

[matkt]

@matkt Hi! I'm a new intern.
I implemented subroutine opcodes support for LLLC. Now you can use this pr winsvega/solidity#2 to compile LLLC and write evm code for fillers using opcodes instead bytecode.

I just used your update to use the LLLC code. there are two tests that I have not changed because the compiler adds a STOP at the end automatically and the goal of the test is to test without STOP at the end.

• beginSubAtEndOfCode
• subroutineAtEndOfCode

I also changed the code of the twoLevelsSubroutines test because the generated bytecode became different from the original testcase bytecode (optimization) and it was necessary to update the destination of the jumpsub

• Expected 0x6800000000000000000c5e005c60115e5d5c5d

• After LLC compilation of (asm 0x00000000000000000c JUMPSUB STOP BEGINSUB 0x11 JUMPSUB RETURNSUB BEGINSUB RETURNSUB)" -> 0x600c5e005c60115e5d5c5d00

• The value i'm going to use : (asm 0x04 JUMPSUB STOP BEGINSUB 0x09 JUMPSUB RETURNSUB BEGINSUB RETURNSUB) -> 0x60045e005c60095e5d5c5d00

[winsvega]

Thats are important comments. Worth adding to the filler around lll code. Thanks