Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

"runtime code cannot have an abstract length" #585

Closed
charles-cooper opened this issue Oct 7, 2024 · 3 comments
Closed

"runtime code cannot have an abstract length" #585

charles-cooper opened this issue Oct 7, 2024 · 3 comments

Comments

@charles-cooper
Copy link

hevm raises the following warning when running hevm equivalence:

WARNING: hevm was only able to partially explore the given contract due to the following issues:

  - Unexpected Symbolic Arguments to Opcode
    msg: "runtime code cannot have an abstract length"
    program counter: 1328
    arguments: 

command:

time hevm equivalence --code-a "$(<legacy.txt)" --code-b "$(<venom.txt)"

legacy.txt
venom.txt

@msooseth
Copy link
Collaborator

msooseth commented Oct 7, 2024

With newer hevm, we get a bit more info:

WARNING: hevm was only able to partially explore the given contract due to the following issue(s):
  - Unexpected Symbolic Arguments to Opcode
    msg: "runtime code cannot have an abstract length"
    opcode: RETURN
    program counter: 1328
    arguments:
      (CopySlice
        srcOffset: 64
        dstOffset: 0
        size:      (Add
          32
          (And
            115792089237316195423570985008687907853269984665640564039457584007913129639904
            (Add
              31
              (Add
                32
                (ReadWord
                  idx:
                    0
                  buf:
                    (WriteWord
                      idx:
                        0
                      val:
                        (ReadWord
                          idx:

So it's triggering on Return. Looking into it...

@msooseth
Copy link
Collaborator

msooseth commented Oct 7, 2024

I have a feeling this may need a similar solution as in #581 In other words, it'd need to use an SMT solver and get out all possible solutions. Maybe that'd work. I can try to make the solution to #581 a bit more generic and then it may be reusable here.

@msooseth
Copy link
Collaborator

msooseth commented Oct 9, 2024

Ah, this was fixed by @d-xo via #588 yay! Closing.

@msooseth msooseth closed this as completed Oct 9, 2024
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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants