Skip to content

Conversation

@cloudgray
Copy link
Contributor

@cloudgray cloudgray commented Oct 8, 2025

Description

Closes: #692

Add debug namespace apis below.

  • debug_traceCall
  • debug_traceBlock
  • debug_getRawBlock

Author Checklist

All items are required. Please add a note to the item if the item is not applicable and
please add links to any relevant follow up issues.

I have...

  • tackled an existing issue or discussed with a team member
  • left instructions on how to review the changes
  • targeted the main branch

@cloudgray cloudgray changed the title feat(rpc): add debug_traceCall api imp(rpc): add debug_traceCall api Oct 9, 2025
@cloudgray cloudgray changed the title imp(rpc): add debug_traceCall api feat(rpc): add debug_traceCall api Oct 9, 2025
@cloudgray cloudgray marked this pull request as ready for review October 9, 2025 08:23
@cloudgray cloudgray requested review from aljo242 and vladjdk October 9, 2025 08:23
@djm07073
Copy link

Suggestion:
Add a configuration option for setting the tracing timeout. It would be nice to have, because debug API requests are quite heavier than other requests and can be vulnerable under a large number of requests.
geth code: ref

@cloudgray
Copy link
Contributor Author

cloudgray commented Oct 10, 2025

@djm07073 (cc. @vladjdk )

Suggestion: Add a configuration option for setting the tracing timeout. It would be nice to have, because debug API requests are quite heavier than other requests and can be vulnerable under a large number of requests. geth code: ref

I think timeout config has already been applied in existing code. (https://github.com/cloudgray/evm/blob/feat(rpc)-traceCall/x/vm/keeper/grpc_query.go#L809-L825)

Of course, cosmos/evm just stops tracer. It is little bit different from behaviour of go-ethereum because go-ethereum also Cancel evm. There can be more memory leakage than go-ethereum.
But, to mimic go-ethereum, additional refactoring is needed.
So, currently, I think we'd better not modify this part.

@cloudgray
Copy link
Contributor Author

cloudgray commented Oct 10, 2025

@vladjdk @aljo242
Currently, Protobug/breack-check job fails for moving protobuf files.
Actually, it is change of PR#639.
Do you know how can I correct or ignore this ci failure?

@aljo242
Copy link
Contributor

aljo242 commented Oct 10, 2025

@vladjdk @aljo242 Currently, Protobug/breack-check job fails for moving protobuf files. Actually, it is change of PR#639. Do you know how can I correct or ignore this ci failure?

Safe to ignore this

@cloudgray cloudgray self-assigned this Oct 10, 2025
@cloudgray cloudgray mentioned this pull request Oct 10, 2025
3 tasks
@cloudgray
Copy link
Contributor Author

@vladjdk @aljo242
Close this PR and reopen #711

@cloudgray cloudgray closed this Oct 10, 2025
@cloudgray cloudgray mentioned this pull request Oct 14, 2025
3 tasks
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.

debug_traceCall api is missing

4 participants