EVM: Move CALLACTOR into a precompile
#861
Conversation
| let address_offset = read_u64(input_params.next().unwrap())? as usize; | ||
| let send_data_offset = read_u64(input_params.next().unwrap())? as usize; | ||
|
|
||
| let address_size = read_u64(input_params.next().unwrap())? as usize; | ||
| let send_data_size = read_u64(input_params.next().unwrap())? as usize; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ok, well after talking we are going to go with just specifying the lengths for now, if solidity is having a particularly hard time decoding these then we can add them defined exactly with solidity a ABI, but this could also be implemented easily enough in solidity itself with an SDK
add a chunked parameter reader
…ad u32 for dynamicly sized bytes
| } | ||
|
|
||
| pub fn exhausted(&self) -> bool { | ||
| self.exhausted |
| // will be nicer with https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/74985 | ||
| /// Wrapper around `ChunksExact` that pads instead of overflowing. | ||
| /// Also provides a nice API interface for reading Parameters from input | ||
| struct PaddedChunks<'a, T: Sized + Copy, const CHUNK_SIZE: usize> { |
| let mut input_params = U256Reader::new(input); | ||
|
|
||
| let len = input_params.next_param_padded::<u32>()? as usize; | ||
| let addr = match Address::from_bytes(&read_right_pad(input_params.remaining_slice(), len)) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It looks like reading then padding is common. We might want to provide a method.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
later if we need it, this PR already has a lot of changes
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| struct Parameter<T>(pub T); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
A trait would fit better here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ideally yeah, but it helps a lot to avoid conflicting implementations
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah, I'm just recommending defining your own trait rather than combining a newtype with an existing trait. But we can handle that later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ah yeah that would work
Codecov Report
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## next #861 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 87.32% 87.09% -0.24%
==========================================
Files 125 125
Lines 22784 22953 +169
==========================================
+ Hits 19897 19991 +94
- Misses 2887 2962 +75
|
|
note: the TODO for static call should be fixed after filecoin-project/ref-fvm#1150 merges |
|
@mriise @Stebalien filecoin-project/ref-fvm#1150 has been merged. Should we continue with the TODO that you mentioned above? |
related: filecoin-project/ref-fvm#1018
closes filecoin-project/ref-fvm#1066