feat(benchmarks): fix benchmark for warm SSTORE/SLOAD for Osaka

[jsign]

🗒️ Description

This PR fixes the test_storage_access_warm benchmark to work in Osaka.

For 20M gas benchmark value:

• test_storage.py::test_storage_access_warm[fork_Osaka-blockchain_test-SLOAD]: Osaka 310M cycles. Prague 311M cycles
• test_storage.py::test_storage_access_warm[fork_Osaka-blockchain_test-SSTORE new value]: Osaka 908M cycles. Prague 909M cycles.
• test_storage.py::test_storage_access_warm[fork_Osaka-blockchain_test-SSTORE same value]: Osaka 636M cycles. Prague 637M cycles.

Pretty brutal for only being 20M gas.

🔗 Related Issues or PRs

#1695

✅ Checklist

• All: Ran fast tox checks to avoid unnecessary CI fails, see also Code Standards and Enabling Pre-commit Checks:

  uvx tox -e static

• All: PR title adheres to the repo standard - it will be used as the squash commit message and should start type(scope):.
• All: Set appropriate labels for the changes (only maintainers can apply labels).

[jsign]

cc @jochem-brouwer if you want to take a look

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 82.61%. Comparing base (9e161b6) to head (383427c).
⚠️ Report is 7 commits behind head on forks/amsterdam.

Additional details and impacted files

@@               Coverage Diff                @@
##           forks/amsterdam    #1915   +/-   ##
================================================
  Coverage            82.61%   82.61%           
================================================
  Files                  417      417           
  Lines                26862    26862           
  Branches              2492     2492           
================================================
  Hits                 22193    22193           
  Misses                4230     4230           
  Partials               439      439           

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	82.61% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[LouisTsai-Csie]

Thanks for this PR! Leave some comments about the usage of tx_gas_limit.

execution-specs/tests/benchmark/conftest.py

Lines 90 to 93 in 2a2d0d5

	@pytest.fixture
	def tx_gas_limit(fork: Fork, gas_benchmark_value: int) -> int:
	"""Return the transaction gas limit cap."""
	return fork.transaction_gas_limit_cap() or gas_benchmark_value

One question for this test (test_storage_access_warm), I wonder if we should take care of the OOG issue for this test? It seems these benchmark test transaction would OOG, and my understanding is that the storage would revert due to OOG, will this affect the intention of this test?

Since this test (test_storage_access_cold) do consider this scenario.

[jsign]

Leave some comments about the usage of tx_gas_limit.

Fixed! I'll also do this change in other open PRs.

One question for this test (test_storage_access_warm), I wonder if we should take care of the OOG issue for this test? It seems these benchmark test transaction would OOG, and my understanding is that the storage would revert due to OOG, will this affect the intention of this test?

Since this test (test_storage_access_cold) do consider this scenario.

I think the non-OOG case is of main relevance for this warm flavor.. In this test we exhaust the gas limit in a single storage slot on warm accesses, so the potential post-state-root calculation would only imply a single storage slot. For the cold case, I added OOG and non-OOG since at a minimum non-OOG is quite relevant, since we target as many storage slots as possible, so those are many writes that will triger post-state root calculation.

[LouisTsai-Csie]

We have recently bumped our default branch from forks/osaka to forks/amsterdam, could you please help update your base branch please. Otherwise, i have no other requested changes! Really appreciate the help, thanks a lot

[jsign]

@LouisTsai-Csie, all done.

[LouisTsai-Csie]

Thanks a lot!! i will merge after forks/amsterdam recreated.

[jochem-brouwer]

Minor comments!

[LouisTsai-Csie]

LGTM