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)

@thomas-nguy thomas-nguy requested a review from a team as a code owner December 16, 2025 12:03
@thomas-nguy thomas-nguy requested review from JayT106 and randy-cro and removed request for a team December 16, 2025 12:03
@github-actions github-actions bot added the evm label Dec 16, 2025
@github-actions

This comment has been minimized.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Dec 16, 2025

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 0% with 4 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 39.68%. Comparing base (66dfca3) to head (9105830).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on develop.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
x/evm/keeper/keeper.go 0.00% 4 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop     #809      +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage    39.68%   39.68%   -0.01%     
===========================================
  Files          189      189              
  Lines        15580    15582       +2     
===========================================
  Hits          6183     6183              
- Misses        8761     8763       +2     
  Partials       636      636              
Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
x/evm/keeper/keeper.go 72.91% <0.00%> (-0.77%) ⬇️
🚀 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.

return errorsmod.Wrapf(types.ErrInvalidPreinstall,
"preinstall %s, address %s already has an account in account keeper", preinstall.Name, preinstall.Address)
if ethAcct, ok := acct.(ethermint.EthAccountI); ok {
if types.IsEmptyCodeHash(ethAcct.GetCodeHash().Bytes()) {

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
if types.IsEmptyCodeHash(ethAcct.GetCodeHash().Bytes()) {
if !types.IsEmptyCodeHash(ethAcct.GetCodeHash().Bytes()) {


}
// create account with the account keeper and set code hash
acct = k.accountKeeper.NewAccountWithAddress(ctx, accAddress)

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

with the logic, should only create new account when acct is nil, or use the acct fetched from keeper instead

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants