all: improve EstimateGas API

[JukLee0ira]

Proposed changes

this PR separate consensus errors and EVM Internal errors

Test

test contract is following:

// SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT
pragma solidity ^0.8.19;

contract TestRevert {
    function revertLogic(address payable recipient)
        external
        payable
        returns (uint256)
    {
        recipient.transfer(msg.value);
        require(msg.value > 10, "Transfer amount must be greater than ten");

        return msg.value;
    }

    // Function to allow contract to send ETH to another account
    function sendXDC(address payable recipient, uint256 amount) external returns (uint256){
        // Transfer the specified amount to the recipient
        recipient.transfer(amount* 1 ether);

        return amount;
        
    }

    receive() external payable {
    }

    fallback() external payable {
    }
}

Gas Consumption Comparison

eth_estimateGas
The curl command I used:

• address with balance : 0x873C36f9Fd02e0C57a393aFE80D14f244fE04378
• address without balance: 0xFb51679CeF4CF53152B531e6E437C727aDfF533e

RPC="http://127.0.0.1:8545"
curl -s -X POST -H "Content-Type: application/json" ${RPC} -d '{
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "id": 2,
  "method": "eth_estimateGas",
  "params": [
    {
      "from": <wallet address>,  
      "to": "0xEb14F05e78bDB995a55aAc7D2b2D26D2215F22Fd",
      "value":"0xc8",
      "data": "0x8a73d3ab000000000000000000000000eb14f05e78bdb995a55aac7d2b2d26d2215f22fd"
    },
    "latest"
  ]}' 

and their response:

Balance	PR are applied	Response
Yes	Yes	{"jsonrpc":"2.0","id":1002,"result":"0x8066"}
Yes	No	{"jsonrpc":"2.0","id":1002,"result":"0x8066"}
No	Yes	{"jsonrpc":"2.0","id":1002,"result":"0x8066"}
No	No	{"jsonrpc":"2.0","id":1002,"result":"0x8066"}

---

eth_call
The curl command I used:

RPC="http://127.0.0.1:8545"
curl -s -X POST -H "Content-Type: application/json" ${RPC} -d '{
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "id": 2,
  "method": "eth_call",
  "params": [
    {
      "from": "0x873C36f9Fd02e0C57a393aFE80D14f244fE04378",  
      "to": "0xEb14F05e78bDB995a55aAc7D2b2D26D2215F22Fd",
      "data": "0x1afd35fe000000000000000000000000885c1e1b9c24758b56b6a36c13a94efdb4e4e3b10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001"
    },
    "latest"
  ]}'

and their response:

PR are applied	Response
Yes	{"jsonrpc":"2.0","id":1002,"result":"0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001"}
No	{"jsonrpc":"2.0","id":1002,"result":"0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001"}

Other cases

Request（The balance is 100, and an internal transaction attempts to transfer 200 to the address0x873C36f9Fd02e0C57a393aFE80D14f244fE04378）

RPC="http://127.0.0.1:8545"
curl -s -X POST -H "Content-Type: application/json" ${RPC} -d '{
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "id": 0,
  "method": "eth_call",
  "params": [
    {            
      "from": "0x873C36f9Fd02e0C57a393aFE80D14f244fE04378",
      "to": "0xEb14F05e78bDB995a55aAc7D2b2D26D2215F22Fd",
      "data": "0x1afd35fe000000000000000000000000885c1e1b9c24758b56b6a36c13a94efdb4e4e3b100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000c8",
    },
  ]}' | jq

Response

{
    "jsonrpc": "2.0",
    "id": 1002,
    "error": {
        "code": -32000,
        "message": "execution reverted"
    }
}

Request（gas exceeds the gasLimit）

RPC="http://127.0.0.1:8545"
curl -s -X POST -H "Content-Type: application/json" ${RPC} -d '{
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "id": 0,
  "method": "eth_call",
  "params": [
    {            
      "from": "0x873C36f9Fd02e0C57a393aFE80D14f244fE04378",
      "to": "0xEb14F05e78bDB995a55aAc7D2b2D26D2215F22Fd",
      "gas": "0x10",
      "data": "0x1afd35fe000000000000000000000000885c1e1b9c24758b56b6a36c13a94efdb4e4e3b10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000008",
    },
  ]}' | jq

Response

{
    "jsonrpc": "2.0",
    "id": 1002,
    "error": {
        "code": -32000,
        "message": "err: intrinsic gas too low: have 16, want 22680 (supplied gas 16)"
    }
}

Request(revert caused by business logic)

RPC="http://127.0.0.1:8545"
curl -s -X POST -H "Content-Type: application/json" ${RPC} -d '{
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "id": 0,
  "method": "eth_estimateGas",
    "params": [
        {
		"from": "0x873C36f9Fd02e0C57a393aFE80D14f244fE04378",
		"to": "0xEb14F05e78bDB995a55aAc7D2b2D26D2215F22Fd",
		"value":"0x3",
		"data": "0x8a73d3ab000000000000000000000000eb14f05e78bdb995a55aac7d2b2d26d2215f22fd"
        }
    ]}' | jq

Response

{
    "jsonrpc": "2.0",
    "id": 1002,
    "error": {
        "code": -32000,
        "message": "always failing transaction (execution reverted) (Transfer amount must be greater than ten)"
    }
}

Types of changes

What types of changes does your code introduce to XDC network?
Put an ✅ in the boxes that apply

• Bugfix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
• Documentation Update (if none of the other choices apply)
• Regular KTLO or any of the maintaince work. e.g code style
• CICD Improvement
• N/A

Impacted Components

Which part of the codebase this PR will touch base on,

Put an ✅ in the boxes that apply

• Consensus
• Account
• Network
• Geth
• Smart Contract
• External components
• Not sure (Please specify below)

Checklist

Put an ✅ in the boxes once you have confirmed below actions (or provide reasons on not doing so) that

• This PR has sufficient test coverage (unit/integration test) OR I have provided reason in the PR description for not having test coverage
• Provide an end-to-end test plan in the PR description on how to manually test it on the devnet/testnet.
• Tested the backwards compatibility.
• Tested with XDC nodes running this version co-exist with those running the previous version.
• Relevant documentation has been updated as part of this PR
• N/A

Types of changes

What types of changes does your code introduce to XDC network?
Put an ✅ in the boxes that apply

• Bugfix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
• Documentation Update (if none of the other choices apply)
• Regular KTLO or any of the maintaince work. e.g code style
• CICD Improvement
• N/A

Impacted Components

Which part of the codebase this PR will touch base on,

Put an ✅ in the boxes that apply

• Consensus
• Account
• Network
• Geth
• Smart Contract
• External components
• Not sure (Please specify below)

Checklist

Put an ✅ in the boxes once you have confirmed below actions (or provide reasons on not doing so) that

• This PR has sufficient test coverage (unit/integration test) OR I have provided reason in the PR description for not having test coverage
• Provide an end-to-end test plan in the PR description on how to manually test it on the devnet/testnet.
• Tested the backwards compatibility.
• Tested with XDC nodes running this version co-exist with those running the previous version.
• Relevant documentation has been updated as part of this PR
• N/A

Types of changes

What types of changes does your code introduce to XDC network?
Put an ✅ in the boxes that apply

• Bugfix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
• Documentation Update (if none of the other choices apply)
• Regular KTLO or any of the maintaince work. e.g code style
• CICD Improvement
• N/A

Impacted Components

Which part of the codebase this PR will touch base on,

Put an ✅ in the boxes that apply

• Consensus
• Account
• Network
• Geth
• Smart Contract
• External components
• Not sure (Please specify below)

Checklist

Put an ✅ in the boxes once you have confirmed below actions (or provide reasons on not doing so) that

• This PR has sufficient test coverage (unit/integration test) OR I have provided reason in the PR description for not having test coverage
• Provide an end-to-end test plan in the PR description on how to manually test it on the devnet/testnet.
• Tested the backwards compatibility.
• Tested with XDC nodes running this version co-exist with those running the previous version.
• Relevant documentation has been updated as part of this PR
• N/A

[JukLee0ira]

Revert Logic Test have been added.

[gzliudan]

The line recipient.transfer(msg.value); in your contract is never reverted. Please modify your test contract.