Skip to content

fix: Fix eth_call deployment with 0x0 from#2050

Merged
0xVolosnikov merged 2 commits intomainfrom
vv-deployment-in-eth-call-fix-0-from
Feb 24, 2026
Merged

fix: Fix eth_call deployment with 0x0 from#2050
0xVolosnikov merged 2 commits intomainfrom
vv-deployment-in-eth-call-fix-0-from

Conversation

@0xVolosnikov
Copy link
Contributor

What ❔

From can be 0x0 and in this case it could trigger the wrong behavior related to bumping the nonce

Why ❔

Checklist

  • PR title corresponds to the body of PR (we generate changelog entries from PRs).
  • Tests for the changes have been added / updated.
  • Documentation comments have been added / updated.

@0xVolosnikov 0xVolosnikov force-pushed the vv-deployment-in-eth-call-fix-0-from branch from 54d9f9d to fa00813 Compare February 24, 2026 13:09
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

Coverage after merging vv-deployment-in-eth-call-fix-0-from into main will be

84.47%

Coverage Report
FileStmtsBranchesFuncsLinesUncovered Lines
contracts/bridge
   BridgeHelper.sol85.71%100%100%85%31, 36, 41
   BridgedStandardERC20.sol82.14%100%92.31%80.28%120–121, 126–127, 139–140, 164, 205, 212, 219, 229–230, 63, 91
   L1ERC20Bridge.sol94%100%100%93.02%189, 208, 270
   L1Nullifier.sol83.33%100%86.21%82.89%114, 128–130, 160, 221, 224, 234, 237, 247, 250, 418–420, 424–425, 452, 518, 602, 614, 652, 654, 698, 710, 713, 715, 728, 741–742, 746–747, 767
contracts/bridge/asset-router
   AssetRouterBase.sol95.45%100%100%94.44%59, 87
   L1AssetRouter.sol88.33%100%88.89%88.24%208, 246, 262, 349, 360, 391, 430–431, 445, 476, 548, 60, 637, 648, 662, 667, 76, 84
contracts/bridge/interfaces
   AssetHandlerModifiers.sol75%100%100%66.67%13
contracts/bridge/ntv
   L1NativeTokenVault.sol84.82%100%88.24%84.21%144–150, 152, 220–221, 223, 234, 236, 240, 66
   NativeTokenVault.sol89.50%100%92%89.10%102, 234, 239, 256, 274, 279, 295, 314, 322, 488, 503, 531, 564–565, 569–570, 74
contracts/bridgehub
   Bridgehub.sol83.39%100%84.78%83.15%115, 123, 128–130, 137, 165–166, 182, 227–228, 236, 239, 248, 258, 271, 286, 315, 339, 342, 401, 417, 448, 528, 610, 708, 712, 716–717, 736, 739, 790, 793, 796, 831, 835, 838, 873–874, 878–879, 887–888, 892–893
   CTMDeploymentTracker.sol73.47%100%81.82%71.05%106, 110, 114, 139, 143–144, 32, 40, 65, 78–79
   ChainAssetHandler.sol77.94%100%80%77.59%125, 139, 142, 152, 197, 245–246, 250–251, 55, 62–63, 71
   L2MessageVerification.sol100%100%100%100%
   MessageRoot.sol94.87%100%100%93.85%102, 136, 183, 193
contracts/common
   ReentrancyGuard.sol95%100%100%94.12%79
contracts/common/l2-helpers
   L2ContractHelper.sol94.34%100%100%93.33%102, 108, 112
   SystemContractsCaller.sol0%100%0%0%102, 114, 122–125, 128, 135–139, 141–142, 32–34, 37, 44–45, 47, 49, 51, 53, 66, 69, 72, 75, 78, 83, 89, 91, 93, 96, 98
contracts/common/libraries
   DataEncoding.sol85.11%100%100%81.58%109–110, 117–118, 163, 177, 45
   DynamicIncrementalMerkle.sol73.91%100%80%73.17%66–70, 72–74, 76–78
   FullMerkle.sol100%100%100%100%
   Merkle.sol98.15%100%100%97.96%83
   MessageHashing.sol95.16%100%100%94.64%113, 77, 94
   SemVer.sol100%100%100%100%
   UncheckedMath.sol100%100%100%100%
   UnsafeBytes.sol100%100%100%100%
contracts/governance
   AccessControlRestriction.sol100%100%100%100%
   ChainAdmin.sol97.87%100%100%97.30%39
   ChainAdminOwnable.sol44.83%100%40%45.83%28, 38–40, 46–48, 57, 66, 77–79, 81
   Governance.sol100%100%100%100%
   L2ProxyAdminDeployer.sol0%100%0%0%16–18, 20
   PermanentRestriction.sol88.80%100%100%87.39%103, 110–111, 199–200, 203–204, 207, 209–210, 239, 287, 309, 340
   ServerNotifier.sol93.10%100%100%90.91%55, 65
   TransitionaryOwner.sol0%100%0%0%16–17, 21–23
contracts/governance/restriction
   Restriction.sol100%100%100%100%
   RestrictionValidator.sol100%100%100%100%
contracts/state-transition
   AccessControlEnumerablePerChainAddressUpgradeable.sol98.15%100%100%97.67%179
   ChainTypeManager.sol86.07%100%84.62%86.42%111, 123, 129, 137–138, 248–251, 264–267, 282, 412, 474, 502, 509, 536, 584, 592–593
   ValidatorTimelock.sol89.25%100%77.78%92%120, 140, 163, 273, 292, 97
contracts/state-transition/chain-deps
   DiamondInit.sol92.68%100%100%92.50%50, 54, 58
   DiamondProxy.sol100%100%100%100%
   GatewayCTMDeployer.sol0%100%0%0%166–167, 170, 172–174, 176, 178, 180, 188, 190, 192, 194, 196–197, 203, 215, 223, 226–227, 229, 235, 239–240, 248, 253–255, 262, 267–269, 282–285, 299, 304–309, 313, 326, 332, 334, 336–337, 341, 343–345, 353, 358, 362–363, 369, 375, 381, 388, 398, 404, 406, 416, 424, 438, 443, 448
contracts/state-transition/chain-deps/facets
   Admin.sol81.78%100%88%81%153–154, 171, 174, 178, 185–187, 190, 192, 195, 199–200, 204, 300, 303, 312, 315, 325, 332, 352, 366, 369, 376, 389, 392–393, 395–396, 398–399, 401, 404, 435, 439, 460, 466, 51
   Executor.sol88.22%100%100%87.04%133, 147, 154–156, 183, 221, 270, 279, 284, 287,

@0xVolosnikov 0xVolosnikov merged commit 57dad0b into main Feb 24, 2026
28 of 29 checks passed
@0xVolosnikov 0xVolosnikov deleted the vv-deployment-in-eth-call-fix-0-from branch February 24, 2026 14:40
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.

2 participants