-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.1k
[pallet-revive] evm remove contract storage slot when writing all zero bytes #10309
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
Merged
pgherveou
merged 16 commits into
master
from
rve/216-evm-remove-contract-storage-slot-when-setting-to-0
Nov 25, 2025
Merged
Changes from 7 commits
Commits
Show all changes
16 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
2e73763
added all zero storage refund in storage.rs
0xRVE 63a2db0
added all zero storage refund in EVM sstore host.rs instruction
0xRVE 698283e
added test for messing around with sstore and sload
0xRVE eb6fbb9
Revert "added all zero storage refund in storage.rs"
0xRVE bdc829e
fix typo
0xRVE 8f8dbb7
make evm::host::sstore write None instead of all zero bytes
0xRVE 4a647d1
Update from github-actions[bot] running command 'prdoc --audience run…
github-actions[bot] d183023
format
0xRVE b844838
added text to assertions
0xRVE 42bd24a
format
0xRVE c9d82a0
fixed review omment
0xRVE f34c6e2
added another test
0xRVE fc4ce9e
added another delegatecall test
0xRVE 6401dc7
changed the test so that pvm also refunds on sstore(0)
0xRVE 448de3b
nit
pgherveou 681ebee
Merge branch 'master' into rve/216-evm-remove-contract-storage-slot-w…
pgherveou File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or 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
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,10 @@ | ||
| title: '[pallet-revive] evm remove contract storage slot when writing all zero bytes' | ||
| doc: | ||
| - audience: Runtime Dev | ||
| description: |- | ||
| fixes https://github.com/paritytech/contract-issues/issues/216 | ||
|
|
||
| When writing all zero bytes to a storage item, the item shall be deleted and deposit refunded. | ||
| crates: | ||
| - name: pallet-revive | ||
| bump: patch |
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
again do we need to to a nested call for testing this scenario here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I made it a nested call to make sure the
caller_typedoes not matter. Maybe I was being overzealous, tell me what you thinkThere was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
yeah let's keep it simple please, we can have it aon both Solc and Resolc but we dont need a caller & callee
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We should keep it this way, it is not that complicated. And there is value in testing the delegatecall here because the storage is owned by
Caller.solwhile the code is owned byHost.sol.EDIT.
added the simple test and it turns out that delegatecall and direct call behave differently:
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Now both PVM and EVM refund storage deposit when writing all zeros to a storage item.
This changed since c9d82a0, on this commit PVM did not refund storage deposit.
I did not change the code since then (only added tests).
Unable to reproduce this issue (locally or in CI). Even after making a local checkout of c9d82a0 I cannot reproduce.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
that's expected this will use set_storage_or_clear
you can test it out with
RUST_LOG=runtime::revive=trace cargo test tests::sol::host::storage_item_zero_shall_refund_deposit_simple