Correctly handle "unresolvable" to/from addresses in top-level messages in the Ethereum API. Specifically:
1. Fail if we can't resolve the from address. As far as I can tell, this should be impossible (the message statically couldn't have been included in the block if the sender didn't exist).
2. If we can't resolve the "to" address to an ID, use "max uint64" as the ID (`0xff0000000000000000000000ffffffffffffffff`). This will only happen if the transaction was reverted. It'll be a little confusing, but the alternative is to (a) use an empty address (will look like a contract creation, which is definitely wrong) or (b) use a random/hashed address which will likely be more confusing as it won't be "obviously weird".
When translating "native" messages to Ethereum transactions, correctly handle parameters:
1. If the message looks like a valid "create external", treat it as a contract creation.
2. If it looks like a valid EVM invocation, decode it as such.
3. Otherwise, ABI-encode the parameters to make them look like a "handle_filecoin_method" call. This
will help chain explorers recognize these messages.
Part of #11355
Fixes: #10814
This PR updates the following RPC methods according to EIP-1898
specs.
The following RPC methods are affected:
- eth_getBalance
- eth_getStorageAt
- eth_getTransactionCount
- eth_getCode
- eth_call
Note that eth_getBlockByNumber was not included in this list in
the spec although it seems it should be affected also?
Currently these methods all accept a blkParam string which can be
one of "latest", "earliest", "pending", or a block number (decimal
or hex). The spec enables caller to additionally specify a json
hash which can include the following fields:
- blockNumber EthUint64: A block number (decimal or hex) which is
similar to the original use of the blkParam string
- blockHash EthHash: The block hash
- requireCanonical bool) If true we should make sure the block is
in the canonical chain
Since the blkParam needs to support both being a number/string and
a json hash then this to properly work we need to introduce a new
struct with pointer fields to check if they exist. This is done
in the EthBlockParamByNumberOrHash struct which first tries to
unmarshal as a json hash (according to eip-1898) and then fallback
to unmarshal as string/number.
