Support deterministic deployment of contracts #353
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
anishnaik
commented
May 1, 2024
fuzzing/fuzzer.go
Outdated
Comment on lines
328
to
356
| // Identify which contracts need to be predeployed to a deterministic address by iterating across the mapping | ||
| contractAddressOverrides := make(map[common.Hash]common.Address, 0) | ||
| for contractName, addrStr := range f.config.Fuzzing.PredeployedContracts { | ||
| found := false | ||
| // Try to find the associated compilation artifact | ||
| for _, contract := range f.contractDefinitions { | ||
| if contract.Name() == contractName { | ||
| // Hash the init bytecode (so that it can be easily identified in the EVM) and map it to the | ||
| // requested address | ||
| initBytecodeHash := crypto.Keccak256Hash(contract.CompiledContract().InitBytecode) | ||
| contractAddr, err := utils.HexStringToAddress(addrStr) | ||
| if err != nil { | ||
| return nil, fmt.Errorf("invalid address provided for a predeployed contract: %v", contract.Name()) | ||
| } | ||
| contractAddressOverrides[initBytecodeHash] = contractAddr | ||
| found = true | ||
| break | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // Throw an error if the contract specified in the config is not found | ||
| if !found { | ||
| return nil, fmt.Errorf("%v was specified in the predeployed contracts but was not found in the compilation artifacts", contractName) | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // Update the test chain config with the contract address overrides | ||
| f.config.Fuzzing.TestChainConfig.ContractAddressOverrides = contractAddressOverrides | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I really really hate that I had to sort of replicate this logic again but I couldn't think of another way of translating contract name -> compilation artifact before passing the information to the test chain.
I can add a TODO to make this a refactor when we merge the logic for deployments, corpus replays, and call sequence executions.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Feedback on maybe placing this elsewhere is also greatly appreciated.
anishnaik
commented
May 1, 2024
0xalpharush
reviewed
May 1, 2024
0xalpharush
reviewed
May 1, 2024
0xalpharush
reviewed
May 1, 2024
0xalpharush
reviewed
Jun 4, 2024
|
Is there any reason we can't insert into the stateDB directly? |
# Conflicts: # fuzzing/fuzzer.go
# Conflicts: # chain/test_chain.go # chain/vendored/apply_transaction.go # fuzzing/fuzzer.go # go.mod # go.sum
0xalpharush
reviewed
Jul 18, 2024
0xalpharush
reviewed
Jul 18, 2024
0xalpharush
approved these changes
Jul 18, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
closes #333