Add EIP: Revert creation in case of non-empty storage #8161
Conversation
github-actions
bot
added
c-new
|
✅ All reviewers have approved. |
eth-bot
added
e-consensus
rjl493456442
force-pushed
the
reject-non-empty-storage
branch
from
5e641ed
to
bdfd33b
Compare
|
The commit bdfd33b (as a parent of d7343e9) contains errors. |
| --- | ||
| eip: 7610 | ||
| title: Revert creation in case of non-empty storage | ||
| description: Revert contract creation if address already has the non-empty storage |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Avoid restating the title in the description. Maybe include why this is important to do.
|
|
||
| ## Backwards Compatibility | ||
|
|
||
| This is an execution layer upgrade, and so it requires a hard fork. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does this actually require a hard fork?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-684 uses the same terminology.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Given we are "retroactively activating" this from genesis, it may be worth being a bit more specific here @rjl493456442
Co-authored-by: Guillaume Ballet <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Sam Wilson <[email protected]>
|
@SamWilsn @abcoathup can we merge this retroactive eip? |
|
|
||
| If a contract creation is attempted due to a creation transaction, the `CREATE` opcode, the `CREATE2` opcode, or any other reason, and the destination address already has either a nonzero nonce, a nonzero code length, or non-empty storage, then the creation MUST throw as if the first byte in the init code were an invalid opcode. This change MUST apply retroactively for all existing blocks. | ||
|
|
||
| This EIP amends [EIP-684](./eip-684.md) with one extra condition, requiring empty storage for contract deployment. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
could you explain or write pesudo code of how this check will be done? storageRoot? and how it will be addressed in verkle (i am guessing this check only applies on the merkle structure, but EIP should address the scenario)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I assume you are rite or I don't understand
|
Could we please get the draft of this merged and address the comments in another PR, given we've already "included" this? TY! |
|
@timbeiko Sgtm! |
This EIPs introduce another restriction for contract deployment that the destination must have empty storage; otherwise the contract deployment must be rejected.