feat(test): OOG and success selfdestruct tests

[fselmo]

🗒️ Description

Added comprehensive SELFDESTRUCT tests covering beneficiaries as EOA, contract, precompiles, and self. All tests consolidated in TangerineWhistle with fork-aware parametrization

• is_success (exact_gas / exact_gas_minus_1) - tests success boundary
• warm param uses pytest.param(..., marks=valid_from("Berlin")) so warm tests only run on >=Berlin
• State access boundary tests (consensus check: beneficiary accessed before G_NEW_ACCOUNT evaluated)
• same_tx vs pre-deployed contracts
• originator_balance (0/1) - EIP-161 behavior difference
• beneficiary_initial_balance (0/1) - dead/alive for G_NEW_ACCOUNT

Precompile coverage was sparse - some static tests hit 0x01, others 0x01-0x03. Now using @pytest.mark.with_all_precompiles for full coverage across all fork precompiles.

TangerineWhistle (EIP-150): All tests live here since this is when gas costs for SELFDESTRUCT were introduced. Fork-aware parametrization handles Berlin+ warm/cold distinction.

SpuriousDragon (EIP-161, EIP-155): Tests correctly handle the originator_balance > 0 requirement for G_NEW_ACCOUNT. Also updated old tests to use >= SpuriousDragon for protected transactions since this is when EIP-155 was introduced, not Byzantium as other tests have been using in our codebase. [This was then refactored as fork.supports_protected_txs, returning True beginning at SpuriousDragon].

Berlin (EIP-2929): Warm/cold coverage integrated via warm param with valid_from("Berlin") mark - no separate Berlin test file needed.

🔗 Related Issues or PRs

• Related to a Nethermind bug in BAL devnet 1, relevant PR here

✅ Checklist

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

  uvx tox -e static

• All: PR title adheres to the repo standard - it will be used as the squash commit message and should start type(scope):.
• 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.

Cute Animal Picture

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
⚠️ Please upload report for BASE (eips/amsterdam/eip-7928@c5db5ae). Learn more about missing BASE report.

Additional details and impacted files

@@                    Coverage Diff                     @@
##             eips/amsterdam/eip-7928    #1954   +/-   ##
==========================================================
  Coverage                           ?   86.25%           
==========================================================
  Files                              ?      538           
  Lines                              ?    34561           
  Branches                           ?     3224           
==========================================================
  Hits                               ?    29809           
  Misses                             ?     4165           
  Partials                           ?      587           

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	86.25% <ø> (?)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 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.

[fselmo]

I think we should move these to an earlier fork as it looks like we may not have coverage for this. I see some coverage in the static tests but not for all opcodes. It would be good to have this in python either way and use the pytest.mark.with_all_precompiles to test every added precompile for every fork as they are added.

I'll work on porting this to an earlier fork.

[jochem-brouwer]

Does this initialize the precompiles as empty and does it attempt to create the accounts via SELFDESTRUCT?

This is definitely a case which should be added, but just wanted to note here that due to this bug:

(from the yellow paper) there is this weird behavior with precompiles, creating the account, the precompile going out-of-gas and then the account cleanup either cleaning up the account (or not).

This bug caused that later devnets and all live chains just funded the addresses with 1 wei, such that the account is always there (and not the "0 balance, 0 nonce, no code, no storage", but still in trie case, which now is not possible anymore since it has a balance)

I wanted to share this because this might be the reason why the coverage report is low. I think (although this should be an EIP in that case) that the general consensus is to "just fund the precompiles" with 1 wei at genesis to get rid of this behavior, and that it is thus either unspecified or untested behavior.

[fselmo]

Does this initialize the precompiles as empty and does it attempt to create the accounts via SELFDESTRUCT?

pytest.mark.with_all_precompiles will parametrize for all precompile addresses that are mapped for the fork you are filling for, but it doesn't add anything to the pre. All the EVM knows is that this is the beneficiary for the self-destruct. Is there a missing case? 🤔

[jochem-brouwer]

pytest.mark.with_all_precompiles will parametrize for all precompile addresses that are mapped for the fork you are filling for, but it doesn't add anything to the pre. All the EVM knows is that this is the beneficiary for the self-destruct. Is there a missing case? 🤔

Ah sorry, I think my comment is confusing. The YP case is, IIRC, a case which is only possible if a precompile account is empty (no balance, 0 nonce, no code, no storage). I am not sure but I thought some tests pre-fill precompiles with a balance to make them non-empty, and wanted to explicitly mention this here. But I think this is already the case. So no missing cases found here.

[jochem-brouwer]

Not a review of the tests, just a small point regarding fork names and docs 😄 👍

[fselmo]

@danceratopz this is ready for review now! Note that json_infra and optimized CI runs won't pass until the next bal test release is out and we point to it in the CI (blob params from the last release are at Osaka but the repo is now at BPO2).

[marioevz]

See example in this PR: https://github.com/ethereum/execution-specs/pull/2002/files#diff-095178dc2c6d121067cadab23cb09943682751281a0489a73f90906e26855a6a

Basically we limit the gas passed to the factory contract, taking into account the 63/64 rule.

[fselmo]

Really nice use 😄. I created #2010 to track this 👍🏼

[marioevz]

Approving based on:

• Tracking issue #2010 will fix outstanding comment.
• CI failures require new BAL release.