Stack too deep error on safe-smart-account/contracts/Safe.sol

[bugduino]

Hi,
I'm trying to use the library as specified in the Readme but when I try to compile the script I get a Stack too deep error on
lib/safe-utils/lib/safe-smart-account/contracts/Safe.sol:33:1

Is there anything that should be done maybe not documented?
I'm using solidity v0.8.29 and already using via_ir in foundry.toml.
The safe-smart-account lib is at this commit bf943f80fec5ac647159d26161446ac5d716a294 (HEAD, tag: v1.4.1)

[aviggiano]

Hey

Thanks for trying this out. I'll take a look, but meanwhile, are you using optimization? I have runs = 200 on my project and it's working fine

[aviggiano]

@bugduino can you share your script? I can take a look

[bugduino]

The repo is private unfortunately but I can share the upgrade script alone if that is useful although it does not compile given the issue above so not sure if it's really needed.

Btw in foundry.toml I tried both with no optimization and with 200 runs but I got the same result

This is my foundry.toml default profile

[profile.default]
  auto_detect_solc = false
  block_timestamp = 1_738_368_000 # Feb 1, 2025 at 00:00 GMT
  bytecode_hash = "none"
  evm_version = "shanghai"
  fuzz = { runs = 1_000 }
  gas_reports = ["*"]
  optimizer = true
  optimizer_runs = 10_000
  via_ir = true
  out = "out"
  script = "script"
  solc = "0.8.29"
  src = "src"
  test = "tests"
  ffi = true
  ast = true
  build_info = true
  extra_output = ["storageLayout"]
  fs_permissions = [{ access = "read", path = "./out/"}]

[bugduino]

This is the simplified script I'm using

pragma solidity >=0.8.28 <0.9.0;

import { Contract } from "../src/Contract.sol";
import { Script } from "forge-std/Script.sol";
import { console } from "forge-std/console.sol";
import { Upgrades, Options } from "@openzeppelin/foundry-upgrades/Upgrades.sol";
import { Safe } from "safe-utils/Safe.sol";
import { IProxyAdmin } from "@openzeppelin/foundry-upgrades/internal/interfaces/IProxyAdmin.sol";

contract DeployScript is Script {
  using Safe for *;
  error Invalid();

  string public constant BUILD_INFO_DIR = "old-build-info/";

  // Gnosis Safe instance
  Safe.Client safe;

  // Optimism test contracts
  string public constant network = "optimism";
  address public constant SAFE_ADDRESS = address(2); // CHANGE THIS
  address public constant PROXY = address(1); // CHANGE THIS 

  function run() public {
    vm.createSelectFork(network);
    vm.startBroadcast();
    console.log('Upgrading in', network);
    _upgradeContractMultisig();
    vm.stopBroadcast();
  }

  // Methods to propose an upgrade to the proxy implementation
  function _upgradeContractMultisig() internal {
    _upgradeViaMultisig(PROXY, "Contract");
  }
  
  /// @notice Prepares the upgrade of the proxy implementation to a new version.
  /// @param proxy The address of the proxy contract to upgrade.
  /// @param oldContract The name of the old contract to upgrade.
  function _upgradeViaMultisig(address proxy, string memory oldContract) public {
    if (proxy == address(0) || bytes(oldContract).length == 0) {
      revert Invalid();
    }
    safe.initialize(SAFE_ADDRESS);

    // https://github.com/OpenZeppelin/openzeppelin-foundry-upgrades?tab=readme-ov-file#upgrade-a-proxy-or-beacon
    Options memory opts;
    opts.referenceBuildInfoDir = string(abi.encodePacked(BUILD_INFO_DIR, network));
    opts.referenceContract = string(abi.encodePacked(network, ":", oldContract));
    string memory contractFile = string(abi.encodePacked(oldContract, ".sol"));

    // Validate and deploy new implementation
    address newImpl = Upgrades.prepareUpgrade(contractFile, opts);
    // Propose upgrade tx with multisig
    safe.proposeTransaction(
      Upgrades.getAdminAddress(proxy), 
      abi.encodeCall(IProxyAdmin.upgradeAndCall, (proxy, newImpl, "")), 
      DEPLOYER
    );
  }
}

[bugduino]

btw If I use only via_ir with optimizer = false the stack is only 1 variable too deep instead of 5

[aviggiano]

Thanks. Your script looks perfect, so this might be a bottleneck on the library.

I might need to put all arguments from proposeTransaction into a single struct to avoid these kinds of issues. I'll try to work on that over the following days.

[bugduino]

Thanks! Although the error seems to be referencing the underlying safe-smart-account library rather than safe-utils so not sure the issue is on your side of the code but I may be wrong ofc

[aviggiano]

@bugduino Can you try v0.0.9?

[bugduino]

I quickly tried to compile using the latest version and seems to be working now! I'm in the middle of an audit so I unable to test the full upgrade but will do as soon as possible and let you know if everything goes well. In the meantime thanks for the quick fix!

[bugduino]

@aviggiano when calling the safe.proposeTransaction on the script above using an unlocked ledger (which is one of the signers of the multisig) I get the following error

script failed: vm.sign: operation `sign_hash` is not supported by the signer

[aviggiano]

So you need to pass the derivation path like this

safe-utils/test/Safe.t.sol

Line 37 in deb5a48

safe.getExecTransactionData(weth, abi.encodeCall(IWETH.withdraw, (0)), foundrySigner1, "m/44'/60'/0'/0/0");

This will use cast to sign with EIP712, until vm.signTypedData is supported by foundry foundry-rs/foundry#10330

[aviggiano]

I'll update the README to make it clearer

[bugduino]

Makes sense. I have another problem but I think it's unrelated to the stack too deep error so I will open another issue