Skip to content

Update EIP-2780: Rework as resource-based intrinsic transaction gas#11645

Draft
misilva73 wants to merge 6 commits into
ethereum:masterfrom
misilva73:update-eip-2780
Draft

Update EIP-2780: Rework as resource-based intrinsic transaction gas#11645
misilva73 wants to merge 6 commits into
ethereum:masterfrom
misilva73:update-eip-2780

Conversation

@misilva73

@misilva73 misilva73 commented May 11, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Reworks EIP-2780 from reducing the intrinsic cost into a resource-based decomposition of the 21,000 base. The headline number is unchanged — it's just rebuilt from explicit primitives, each priced to the resource a transaction actually consumes (TX_BASE_COST + COLD_ACCOUNT_ACCESS + TX_VALUE_COST + TRANSFER_LOG_COST = 21,000 for a standard value transfer).

What changed

  • Reframed around preserving 21,000, not reducing it. Title and abstract updated to match.
  • State growth internalized. New-account value transfers and contract-creation transactions now pay STATE_BYTES_PER_NEW_ACCOUNT × CPSB in state gas (EIP-8037).
  • Parameters derived from client runtimes. TX_BASE_COST and TX_VALUE_COST fitted from the EELS ether-transfer benchmark across all major ELs, per EIP-8038's method.
  • Motivation and Rationale written (previously flagged as missing).
  • Reference cases and test cases rewritten to split regular vs. state gas.
  • Dependencies updated: requires 161, 2718, 2929, 2930, 6780, 7702, 7708, 7904, 7928, 8037, 8038.

@github-actions github-actions Bot added c-update Modifies an existing proposal s-draft This EIP is a Draft t-core labels May 11, 2026
@eth-bot

eth-bot commented May 11, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

✅ All reviewers have approved.

@github-actions github-actions Bot added the w-ci Waiting on CI to pass label May 11, 2026
@abc-123-c

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Is it feasible to split the case of updating new balances into cold / warm? That means dividing STATE_UPDATE into COLD_STATE_UPDATE and WARM_STATE_UPDATE. I don't see any significant risks since we already have EIP-2200.

Comment thread EIPS/eip-2780.md Outdated
Comment thread EIPS/eip-2780.md Outdated
Comment thread EIPS/eip-2780.md Outdated
Comment thread EIPS/eip-2780.md
Comment thread EIPS/eip-2780.md
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown

The commit c9a4075 (as a parent of 02f5961) contains errors.
Please inspect the Run Summary for details.

Retitle and restructure around decomposing the flat 21,000 intrinsic
cost into named primitives (TX_BASE_COST, COLD_ACCOUNT_ACCESS,
TX_VALUE_COST, TRANSFER_LOG_COST) priced to actual resource usage,
internalize state growth via STATE_BYTES_PER_NEW_ACCOUNT, and derive
the values from client runtime benchmarks.
@misilva73 misilva73 changed the title Update EIP-2780: Align with 8037 and 8038 Update EIP-2780: Rework as resource-based intrinsic transaction gas Jun 10, 2026
@misilva73

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Tagging @benaadams and @gurukamath for a review

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

Labels

c-update Modifies an existing proposal s-draft This EIP is a Draft t-core

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants