Skip to content

Conversation

alarso16
Copy link
Contributor

@alarso16 alarso16 commented Oct 13, 2025

Why this should be merged

Roughly syncs ava-labs/coreth#1288 and ava-labs/coreth#1329, just to maintain identical structure throughout the repo.

How this works

Same changes, except for the ACP-176 one. This is NOT a cherry-pick, since every line would have conflicted due to the feeConfig.

How this was tested

Existing UT.

Need to be documented?

No

Need to update RELEASES.md?

No

@alarso16 alarso16 self-assigned this Oct 13, 2025
@alarso16 alarso16 marked this pull request as ready for review October 13, 2025 15:26
@alarso16 alarso16 requested a review from a team as a code owner October 13, 2025 15:26
Copy link
Contributor

@michaelkaplan13 michaelkaplan13 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Confirmed that:

  • all of the changes in the original coreth PR that are relevant to subnet-evm are included.
  • subnet-evm specific changes, particularly in gas_limit.go (due to still using the windower mechanism) appear correct.

Copy link
Collaborator

@ceyonur ceyonur left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

just a small comment, mostly lgtm

@alarso16
Copy link
Contributor Author

upon @ceyonur's recommendation, added EstimateNextBaseFee to this PR

Copy link
Contributor

@michaelkaplan13 michaelkaplan13 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

In the future, I strongly prefer keeping sync PRs 1 to 1 for the sake of reviewers. It may leave some PRs in an intermediate state individually, but they're must easier to compare and ensure all of the intended changes are included properly.

That being said, I was able to review the individual commit and this LGTM, there is just one place I commented that we may have missed in coreth.

@ceyonur
Copy link
Collaborator

ceyonur commented Oct 14, 2025

In the future, I strongly prefer keeping sync PRs 1 to 1 for the sake of reviewers. It may leave some PRs in an intermediate state individually, but they're must easier to compare and ensure all of the intended changes are included properly.

That being said, I was able to review the individual commit and this LGTM, there is just one place I commented that we may have missed in coreth.

I agree, I forgot that those changes were in another PR.

Copy link
Collaborator

@ceyonur ceyonur left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

there is another place to be changed

@ceyonur ceyonur enabled auto-merge October 14, 2025 14:47
@ceyonur ceyonur added this pull request to the merge queue Oct 14, 2025
Merged via the queue into master with commit f9d536e Oct 14, 2025
13 checks passed
@ceyonur ceyonur deleted the alarso16/base-fee-ms branch October 14, 2025 15:20
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants