[pull] forks/amsterdam from ethereum:forks/amsterdam#145
Merged
pull[bot] merged 2 commits intoLuckQuack:forks/amsterdamfrom Mar 30, 2026
Merged
[pull] forks/amsterdam from ethereum:forks/amsterdam#145pull[bot] merged 2 commits intoLuckQuack:forks/amsterdamfrom
pull[bot] merged 2 commits intoLuckQuack:forks/amsterdamfrom
Conversation
* move files, add helpers * chore: move files to descriptive dirname * chore: make ruff happy * CLAUDE: remove hardcoded gas calculations * CLAUDE: move repeated constant bytecode patterns to helpers * chore: make ruff happy * fix: CLAUDE: use BenchmarkTestFiller * feat: CLAUDE: use benchmark test runner instead of blockchain * feat: CLAUDE: cleanup tests * feat: claude: simplify compute/sload test * feat: CLAUDE: start cursor in slot 0 value 1 * feat: remove simple evariants and lint * feat: relax storage expectations * fix: skip gas calculation * feat: tests: enforce gas benchmark values * fix(benchmark): ensure right order Op.GT * fix(benchmarks): make ruff/mypy happy * feat(benchmarks): bal sload in reverse, one tx sender * fix(test): fixes and refactors for PR #2033 - Refactor contract bytecode into helper chunks. We were previously re-creating the same bytecode jsut to calculate the gas and this already had a bug. This DRYs this up and uses the actual bytecode to get the `gas_cost(fork)` from it. - Some fixes for gas calculation by using the appropriate metadata for SSTORE for `cursor_write` as the slot is warm here (less cost). * fix(benchmark): account for 63/64 gas rule in cross-contract chase The `chain_length` calculation divided available gas flat, ignoring that nested `CALL`s forward only 63/64 at each depth. This deployed unreachable contracts whose BAL expectations failed. Simulate the compounding gas loss to compute the actual reachable depth. * fix: clean up specs; update specref for 7928 * benchmarks: temp remove contract chase to fix in another PR --------- Co-authored-by: Jochem Brouwer <jochembrouwer96@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: fselmo <fselmo2@gmail.com>
* refactor(specs): add `has_access_list` fn for transaction types * refactor: apply suggestions from code review
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
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
2 participants
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.
See Commits and Changes for more details.
Created by
pull[bot] (v2.0.0-alpha.4)
Can you help keep this open source service alive? 💖 Please sponsor : )