Skip to content

Conversation

thomas-nguy
Copy link

Closes: #XXX

Description


For contributor use:

  • Targeted PR against correct branch (see CONTRIBUTING.md)
  • Linked to Github issue with discussion and accepted design OR link to spec that describes this work.
  • Code follows the module structure standards.
  • Wrote unit and integration tests
  • Updated relevant documentation (docs/) or specification (x/<module>/spec/)
  • Added relevant godoc comments.
  • Added a relevant changelog entry to the Unreleased section in CHANGELOG.md
  • Re-reviewed Files changed in the Github PR explorer

For admin use:

  • Added appropriate labels to PR (ex. WIP, R4R, docs, etc)
  • Reviewers assigned
  • Squashed all commits, uses message "Merge pull request #XYZ: [title]" (coding standards)

Copy link

codecov bot commented Jun 10, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 46.10%. Comparing base (56b3129) to head (92e005b).
Report is 1 commits behind head on release/v1.4.x-2.

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@                 Coverage Diff                  @@
##           release/v1.4.x-2     #586      +/-   ##
====================================================
- Coverage             46.11%   46.10%   -0.01%     
====================================================
  Files                   181      181              
  Lines                 18229    18227       -2     
====================================================
- Hits                   8406     8404       -2     
  Misses                 9097     9097              
  Partials                726      726              
Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
x/evm/types/tx_args.go 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

@calvinaco
Copy link

Are we sure this is non-breaking if we change it at ToMessage() level?

Copy link

@XinyuCRO XinyuCRO left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, seems only used in query related simulation operations, will also affect eth_estimateGas debug_traceCall

@thomas-nguy thomas-nguy force-pushed the thomas/max-gas-eth-call branch from 19380d9 to 50df3af Compare June 11, 2025 11:22
@thomas-nguy thomas-nguy force-pushed the thomas/max-gas-eth-call branch from 50df3af to bf350e8 Compare June 11, 2025 11:22
@thomas-nguy thomas-nguy merged commit 6103138 into crypto-org-chain:release/v1.4.x-2 Jul 11, 2025
29 of 30 checks passed
thomas-nguy added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 14, 2025
* Problem: no max gas cap for grpc eth_call (#586)

* add max gas cap in eth_call

* move logic

* add changelog
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.

4 participants