itests: Test EAM interactions from accounts

[magik6k]

Related Issues

Part of filecoin-project/ref-fvm#1491
On top of #10039

Proposed Changes

Additional Info

Checklist

Before you mark the PR ready for review, please make sure that:

• Commits have a clear commit message.
• PR title is in the form of of <PR type>: <area>: <change being made>
  • example: fix: mempool: Introduce a cache for valid signatures
  • PR type: fix, feat, build, chore, ci, docs, perf, refactor, revert, style, test
  • area, e.g. api, chain, state, market, mempool, multisig, networking, paych, proving, sealing, wallet, deps
• New features have usage guidelines and / or documentation updates in
  • Lotus Documentation
  • Discussion Tutorials
• Tests exist for new functionality or change in behavior
• CI is green

[magik6k]

    node_full.go:158: 
        	Error Trace:	/home/circleci/project/itests/node_full.go:158
        	            				/home/circleci/project/itests/eth_account_abstraction_test.go:364
        	Error:      	Received unexpected error:
        	            	implicit message failed with exit code: 18 and error: message failed with backtrace:
        	            	00: f010 (method 4) -- disallowed caller type placeholder (18)
        	            	 (RetCode=18)
        	Test:       	TestEthAccountManagerPermissions

is a valid fail

[arajasek]

    node_full.go:158: 
        	Error Trace:	/home/circleci/project/itests/node_full.go:158
        	            				/home/circleci/project/itests/eth_account_abstraction_test.go:364
        	Error:      	Received unexpected error:
        	            	implicit message failed with exit code: 18 and error: message failed with backtrace:
        	            	00: f010 (method 4) -- disallowed caller type placeholder (18)
        	            	 (RetCode=18)
        	Test:       	TestEthAccountManagerPermissions

is a valid fail

Okay, this isn't a bug, but it is an annoying issue. What should be happening is that the placeholder should get upgraded to an ethaccount, and the call should succeed.

That does happen when we actually send this message. But the StateCall fails, because that applies an implicit message, and the FVM doesn't run the placeholder -> ethaccount logic on implicit calls (it basically doesn't look at the sender at all).

We could just do the placeholder -> ethaccount transformation on Implicit messages as well, it wouldn't break anything. I don't really want too, though. Lotus is kiiiinda misusing the concept of implicit messages the way we StateCall.

[magik6k]

That.. makes a lot of sense.

Swapped StateCall to GasEstimateMessageGas, and now it works