Fix actual fee for l1 handler: it equals the L2 cost.

[noaov1]

This change is 

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Attention: 1 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (d50a7db) 70.39% compared to head (9d0711d) 70.51%.
Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Files	Patch %	Lines
crates/blockifier/src/fee/actual_cost.rs	50.00%	0 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1210      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   70.39%   70.51%   +0.11%     
==========================================
  Files          58       58              
  Lines        7131     7159      +28     
  Branches     7131     7159      +28     
==========================================
+ Hits         5020     5048      +28     
  Misses       1692     1692              
  Partials      419      419              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[dorimedini-starkware]

Reviewed 1 of 2 files at r1, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: 1 of 2 files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @noaov1 and @Yoni-Starkware)

---

crates/blockifier/src/transaction/transactions_test.rs line 1402 at r1 (raw file):

        TransactionExecutionError::TransactionFeeError(
            TransactionFeeError::InsufficientL1Fee { paid_fee, actual_fee, })
            if paid_fee == Fee(0) && actual_fee == Fee(1732700000000000)

isn't this misleading...? the max_fee is 1

Code quote:

1732700000000000

[noaov1]

Reviewable status: 1 of 2 files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @dorimedini-starkware and @Yoni-Starkware)

---

crates/blockifier/src/transaction/transactions_test.rs line 1402 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, dorimedini-starkware wrote…

isn't this misleading...? the max_fee is 1

Where do you see that max_fee = 1?

[dorimedini-starkware]

Reviewable status: 1 of 2 files reviewed, 2 unresolved discussions (waiting on @noaov1 and @Yoni-Starkware)

---

crates/blockifier/src/transaction/transactions_test.rs line 1330 at r1 (raw file):

    let value = StarkFelt::from_u128(0x44);
    let calldata = calldata![from_address, key, value];
    let tx = l1_handler_tx(&calldata, Fee(1));

@noaov1
If max_fee=1 and actual_fee>1 I would expect an error... no?

Code quote:

let tx = l1_handler_tx(&calldata, Fee(1));

[dorimedini-starkware]

Reviewable status: 1 of 2 files reviewed, 2 unresolved discussions (waiting on @noaov1 and @Yoni-Starkware)

---

crates/blockifier/src/transaction/transactions_test.rs line 1402 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, noaov1 (Noa Oved) wrote…

Where do you see that max_fee = 1?

tagged you

[dorimedini-starkware]

Reviewable status: 1 of 2 files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @noaov1 and @Yoni-Starkware)

---

crates/blockifier/src/transaction/transactions_test.rs line 1403 at r1 (raw file):

            TransactionFeeError::InsufficientL1Fee { paid_fee, actual_fee, })
            if paid_fee == Fee(0) && actual_fee == Fee(1732700000000000)
    );

I don't follow the logic.
If paid_fee is 1, the tx is successful; but if it's zero, we get this error, which seems to indicate only a minimum of paid_fee=1732700000000000 would allow the tx to pass.
Is this just future-preparation for when the error is more meaningful?

Code quote:

        TransactionExecutionError::TransactionFeeError(
            TransactionFeeError::InsufficientL1Fee { paid_fee, actual_fee, })
            if paid_fee == Fee(0) && actual_fee == Fee(1732700000000000)
    );

[noaov1]

Reviewable status: 1 of 2 files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @dorimedini-starkware and @Yoni-Starkware)

---

crates/blockifier/src/transaction/transactions_test.rs line 1330 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, dorimedini-starkware wrote…

@noaov1
If max_fee=1 and actual_fee>1 I would expect an error... no?

Fee(1) is the fee paid on l1. Currently, we only verify it is positive. L1 handlers do not have a max_fee field. We set it to 0 (in the account_tx_context for our own use.
In the future: we will verify paid_fee_on_l1 >= required_fee_on_l2.

---

crates/blockifier/src/transaction/transactions_test.rs line 1403 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, dorimedini-starkware wrote…

I don't follow the logic.
If paid_fee is 1, the tx is successful; but if it's zero, we get this error, which seems to indicate only a minimum of paid_fee=1732700000000000 would allow the tx to pass.
Is this just future-preparation for when the error is more meaningful?

Yes

[dorimedini-starkware]

Reviewed 1 of 2 files at r1.
Reviewable status: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @Yoni-Starkware)