Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fix: checking if the eip1559 gas fields are not set on eip2930 check #635

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Apr 27, 2024

Conversation

loocapro
Copy link
Contributor

Motivation

Fixes the bug documented in: #634

Solution

Added EIP1559 gas checks on the EIP2930 check.

PR Checklist

  • Added Tests
  • Added Documentation
  • Breaking changes

@prestwich
Copy link
Member

oh I forgot that 1559 includes access_list in its props. this will actually need more work because it means that 2930 should essentially never be the preferred type, as users will always expect 1559 😮‍💨

Copy link
Member

@mattsse mattsse left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

the only other check that makes sense for 2930 is gas_price.is_some && access_list.is_some

his way we'd also fallback to 1559 if only accesslist is set

@prestwich prestwich force-pushed the fix/eip1559-tx-request branch from e3ee3d2 to 6357361 Compare April 27, 2024 16:39
@prestwich
Copy link
Member

@loocapro I made a couple quick touchups, including fixing the trim_conflicting_keys function

@prestwich prestwich merged commit db202af into alloy-rs:main Apr 27, 2024
18 checks passed
ben186 pushed a commit to ben186/alloy that referenced this pull request Jul 27, 2024
…lloy-rs#635)

* fix: checking if the eip1559 gas fields are not set on eip2930 check

* fix: some touchup to trim_conflicting

---------

Co-authored-by: James <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants