Multi suicide #1169
Merged
Multi suicide #1169
Conversation
This file contains 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
winsvega
requested changes
Feb 28, 2023
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Each vector assumes a transaction finalization happens. 1 tx - one vector.
Suc000 is the base. It happens in the beginning of each following vector.
So 1. Call regular suicide. 2. Call again selfdesteuct contract in the same tx. But different call. 3. Tx finishes. 4 . Check the post state.
Then go to the next vector that do the same. But different scenario in step 2.
src/GeneralStateTestsFiller/stSystemOperationsTest/multiSelfdestructFiller.yml
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
winsvega
reviewed
Feb 28, 2023
| # SUC002 | ||
| - indexes: | ||
| data: !!int 1 | ||
| gas: !!int -1 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
gas and value can be omited if it is -1
winsvega
reviewed
Feb 28, 2023
This is for test cases in PR #1162, but it scares me to modify the same file in two PRs at the same time.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
call happens within one transaction to contractA, that has different scenarios around suicide
contractA has balance=3
SUC000 - contractA is called to perform suicide to dest1 (3 must immidiately(check that it is immidiately and not by the end of tx) go to dest1)
contractA is called again in the same tx, but this time
SUC001 - does not suicide, just receive more funds via call. check the balance of contractA (must be 0, the second transfer funds erased)
SUC002 - does another suicide to dest1 (so dest1 now have 3 + x)
SUC003 - does another suicide to dest2 (so both dest1 and dest2 has some balance)
SUC004 - tries to make value transfer but fails because initial suicide 0ed the balance (answering this (check that it is immidiately and not by the end of tx))
SUC005 - receives more funds and try to transder it (same as SUC004, but this time work because it received funds via 2nd call)