Closed
Conversation
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #4300 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 34.84% 32.88% -1.96%
==========================================
Files 488 488
Lines 57870 57946 +76
==========================================
- Hits 20163 19056 -1107
- Misses 34134 35560 +1426
+ Partials 3573 3330 -243 |
Contributor
❌ 13 Tests Failed:
View the top 3 failed tests by shortest run time
📣 Thoughts on this report? Let Codecov know! | Powered by Codecov |
MishkaRogachev
force-pushed
the
tx-filtering-at-the-prechecker
branch
from
9166e24 to
ceb7022
Compare
MishkaRogachev
changed the title
Tristan-Wilson
requested changes
Feb 10, 2026
Member
Tristan-Wilson
left a comment
Tristan-Wilson
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The change largely looks good, great tests, just some "policy" comments about the max gas and fail open.
Make TxPreCheckerMaxAllowedGas configurable instead of a hardcoded constant. Transactions exceeding the configured max gas are now rejected outright (fail closed) rather than partially executed (fail open), since we cannot guarantee full address coverage for transactions we can't fully simulate. The speculative execution is moved after the balance check so that underfunded transactions are rejected cheaply before spinning up EVM simulation. Wire TxPreChecker.SetAddressChecker in production alongside the existing ExecEngine.SetAddressChecker call now that PR #4235 has merged. - Add MaxAllowedGas field to TxPreCheckerConfig (default 50M, hot-reloadable) - Register max-allowed-gas flag and EventFilter flags in TxPreCheckerConfigAddOptions - Reject txs with gas > MaxAllowedGas before speculative execution - Move ApplyTransactionFilter block after balance check - Wire TxPreChecker.SetAddressChecker in ExecutionNode.Start - Replace deleted txfilter.NewStaticAsyncChecker with newHashedChecker in test - Add TestPreCheckerMaxAllowedGas test
Member
|
Fixed my comments, over to @diegoximenes to review. |
Tristan-Wilson
approved these changes
Feb 10, 2026
diegoximenes
approved these changes
Feb 10, 2026
Contributor
diegoximenes
left a comment
diegoximenes
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM, with some nitpicks and doubts
| f.Int64(prefix+".required-state-age", DefaultTxPreCheckerConfig.RequiredStateAge, "how long ago should the storage conditions from eth_SendRawTransactionConditional be true, 0 = don't check old state") | ||
| f.Uint(prefix+".required-state-max-blocks", DefaultTxPreCheckerConfig.RequiredStateMaxBlocks, "maximum number of blocks to look back while looking for the <required-state-age> seconds old state, 0 = don't limit the search") | ||
| f.Bool(prefix+".apply-transaction-filter", DefaultTxPreCheckerConfig.ApplyTransactionFilter, "whether to apply the transaction filter while pre-checking") | ||
| f.Uint64(prefix+".max-allowed-gas", DefaultTxPreCheckerConfig.MaxAllowedGas, "max gas allowed for speculative execution during transaction filtering; txs exceeding this are rejected") |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nitpick: Config name could mentioned that this is only to useful for filtering.
| } | ||
|
|
||
| if tx.Gas() > config.MaxAllowedGas { | ||
| log.Warn("rejecting transaction that exceeds prechecker max gas for filtering", |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nitpick:
Why warn?
How about creating a metric for that, and lowering log level?
Comment on lines
+183
to
+191
| deadlineCtx, cancel := context.WithTimeout(context.Background(), time.Second*5) | ||
| go func() { | ||
| <-deadlineCtx.Done() | ||
| if errors.Is(deadlineCtx.Err(), context.DeadlineExceeded) { | ||
| // Stop evm execution. Note cancellation is not necessarily immediate. | ||
| evm.Cancel() | ||
| } | ||
| }() | ||
| defer cancel() |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why this cancel logic is needed?
Comment on lines
+202
to
+204
| _, err = core.ApplyMessage(evm, message, gasPool) | ||
| // Ignore execution errors, since we care only about touched addresses | ||
| _ = err |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| _, err = core.ApplyMessage(evm, message, gasPool) | |
| // Ignore execution errors, since we care only about touched addresses | |
| _ = err | |
| // Ignore execution errors, since we care only about touched addresses | |
| _, _ = core.ApplyMessage(evm, message, gasPool) |
Tristan-Wilson
requested changes
Feb 11, 2026
Member
Tristan-Wilson
left a comment
Tristan-Wilson
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We likely need a different approach to handle retriable redemptions.
Member
|
Closing this in favor of ProduceBlockAdvanced dryrun approach #4382 |
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 join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 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.
Fixes NIT-4344
Transaction address filtering on pre-checker, mirroring sequencer-side behaviour