Blocktest builder

[bshastry]

🗒️ Description

🔗 Related Issues or PRs

N/A.

✅ Checklist

• All: Ran fast tox checks to avoid unnecessary CI fails, see also Code Standards and Enabling Pre-commit Checks:

  uvx --with=tox-uv tox -e lint,typecheck,spellcheck,markdownlint

• All: PR title adheres to the repo standard - it will be used as the squash commit message and should start type(scope):.
• All: Considered adding an entry to CHANGELOG.md.
• All: Considered updating the online docs in the ./docs/ directory.
• All: Set appropriate labels for the changes (only maintainers can apply labels).
• Tests: Ran mkdocs serve locally and verified the auto-generated docs for new tests in the Test Case Reference are correctly formatted.
• Tests: For PRs implementing a missed test case, update the post-mortem document to add an entry the list.
• Ported Tests: All converted JSON/YML tests from ethereum/tests or tests/static have been assigned @ported_from marker.

[danceratopz]

Hey @bshastry, really nice idea to "dynamically" generate blockchain tests from fuzzer output using EEST!

I have a few suggestions below, very happy to help you get this in a form that is more compatible with EEST's libraries and pydantic models. I'll message you on Signal to figure out how we'd like to proceed!

[danceratopz]

Unfortunately, this is called network in blockchain fixtures. I guess we can live with the inconsistency :)

[danceratopz]

production_test.py in missing from this PR.

[marioevz]

Thanks for implementing this.

Some comments primarily related to pydantic models in order to reuse as much code as possible from what we already had.

[marioevz]

Due to this import, I think this function (from_fuzzer) does not belong here as a class method, I think it should be an external function defined in cli.fuzzer_bridge.

[marioevz]

Suggested change

	fuzzer_output: Dict[str, Any],
	fuzzer_output: FuzzerOutput,

And parse when calling.

[marioevz]

This is basically from ethereum_test_types import Environment, so we should just simply reuse that.

[marioevz]

This is basically from ethereum_test_base_types import Account so we can do:

Suggested change

	class FuzzerAccount(BaseModel):
	"""Account definition in fuzzer output."""
	balance: HexNumber
	nonce: HexNumber = HexNumber(0)
	code: Bytes = Bytes(b"")
	storage: Dict[HexNumber, HexNumber] = Field(default_factory=dict)
	privateKey: Optional[Bytes] = Field(None, alias="privateKey")
	@field_validator("storage", mode="before")
	@classmethod
	def validate_storage(cls, v):
	"""Convert storage keys and values to HexNumber."""
	if not v:
	return {}
	return {HexNumber(k): HexNumber(v_) for k, v_ in v.items()}
	class FuzzerAccount(Account):
	"""Account definition in fuzzer output."""
	private_key: Hash | None = None

[marioevz]

We should use | None instead of optional.

[marioevz]

It seems like some example use JSON ints and some others use hexadecimal strings, so we can do:

Suggested change

	chainId: int = Field(1, alias="chainId")
	chain_id: HexNumber = Field(HexNumber(1))

which will accept both.

[marioevz]

This is basically from ethereum_test_types import Transaction, so we can reduce this model to:

Suggested change

	class FuzzerTransaction(BaseModel):
	"""Transaction definition in fuzzer output."""
	from_: Address = Field(..., alias="from")
	to: Optional[Address] = None
	value: HexNumber = HexNumber(0)
	gas: HexNumber
	gasPrice: Optional[HexNumber] = Field(None, alias="gasPrice")
	maxFeePerGas: Optional[HexNumber] = Field(None, alias="maxFeePerGas")
	maxPriorityFeePerGas: Optional[HexNumber] = Field(None, alias="maxPriorityFeePerGas")
	nonce: HexNumber
	data: Bytes = Bytes(b"")
	accessList: Optional[List[Dict[str, Union[str, List[str]]]]] = Field(None, alias="accessList")
	blobVersionedHashes: Optional[List[Hash]] = Field(None, alias="blobVersionedHashes")
	maxFeePerBlobGas: Optional[HexNumber] = Field(None, alias="maxFeePerBlobGas")
	authorizationList: Optional[List[FuzzerAuthorization]] = Field(None, alias="authorizationList")
	class Config:
	"""Pydantic configuration."""
	populate_by_name = True
	class FuzzerTransaction(Transaction):
	"""Transaction definition in fuzzer output."""
	from_: Address = Field(..., alias="from")

[marioevz]

I think this one is automatically done by the model so no need for this validator method.

Suggested change

	@field_validator("accounts", mode="before")
	@classmethod
	def validate_accounts(cls, v):
	"""Convert account addresses to Address type."""
	if not v:
	return {}
	return {
	Address(addr): (FuzzerAccount(**acc_data) if isinstance(acc_data, dict) else acc_data)
	for addr, acc_data in v.items()
	}

[marioevz]

Seems like this method is not used elsewhere.

Suggested change

	def get_sender_private_key(self, sender: Address) -> Bytes:
	"""Get the private key for a sender address."""
	if sender not in self.accounts:
	raise ValueError(f"Sender {sender} not found in accounts")
	private_key = self.accounts[sender].privateKey
	if not private_key:
	raise ValueError(f"No private key for sender {sender}")
	return private_key

[marioevz]

This can be converted to a model_post_init which pydantic can run automatically for verification:

Suggested change

	def validate_private_keys(self) -> None:
	"""Validate that all transaction senders have private keys."""
	senders = {tx.from_ for tx in self.transactions}
	for sender in senders:
	if sender not in self.accounts:
	raise ValueError(f"Sender {sender} not found in accounts")
	if not self.accounts[sender].privateKey:
	raise ValueError(f"No private key for sender {sender}")
	def model_post_init(self, __context):
	"""Ensure all transactions have private keys."""
	super().model_post_init(__context)
	senders: Dict[Address, EOA] = {}
	for addr, account in self.accounts.items():
	if account.private_key is None:
	continue
	sender = EOA(key=account.private_key)
	assert Address(sender) == addr, (
	f"Private key for account {addr} does not match derived address {sender.address}"
	)
	senders[addr] = sender
	for tx in self.transactions:
	assert tx.from_ in senders, f"Sender {tx.from_} not found in accounts"
	tx.sender = senders[tx.from_]

[danceratopz]

Thanks a lot for your review @marioevz. @bshastry I'm unassigning myself as I'll be afk for the next couple of weeks. Thanks for addressing the comments!