chore(imp) add fees auto flag logic

[GAtom22]

Description

Add logic to fulfill the requirements specified on the task.

With the changes included in this PR, when no fees are specified, the requiredFees are used as a fallback instead of throwing an error. This is needed to achieve the desired behavior that --gas='auto' has the same functionality as --fees='auto'

Note: To work as described in the mentioned ticket, this PR on evmos' cosmos-sdk fork must be merged and included on a release. Then, that new cosmos-sdk version should be used on this repo.

---

Closes https://linear.app/evmos/issue/ENG-1474/cli-errors-when-paying-for-gas-fees

[linear]

ENG-1474 CLI errors when paying for gas fees

Context

There are three conditions that need to be satisfied in order to pay for gas:

• gas >= gasWanted
• gasPrice >= minGasPrices (this is a setting in the node configuration of the node that you are sending the Tx to)
• gasPrice >= global min-gas-price

Fees calculation: fees = gas price * gas limit

Current behavior

As a user, you specify two fields in a transaction. Using the --gas=auto flag sometimes breaks one of the rules above. Users are often confused by the error message on the CLI or using a frontend that forwards the error from the protocol.

Expected behavior

There are two types of users interacting with fees: normal users and experts

• Normal users have one standard way of defining fees for any transaction type (i.e. just --fees=auto).
  • gas limit is the gas calculated through simulation
  • gas price is defined by the global min gas price
  • fees are calculated based on gas limit and gas price
• Experts can provide specific values of the fees = gas price * gas limit formula. The different cases are:
  • User provides only --fees=[specific amount] OR --fees=[specific amount] and --gas=auto
    • gas limit is the gas calculated through simulation
    • gas price is calculated by gas limit
  • User provides --fees=[specific amount] and --gas=[specific amount]
    • gas price is calculated by gas limit and fees
  • User provides --fees=[specific amount] and --gas-prices=[specific amount]
    • gas limit is calculated by gas price and fees
  • User provides only --gas=auto
  • same as --fees=auto
  • User provides --gas=[specific amount] and --gas-prices=[specific amount]
    • fees are calculated by gas price and gas limit
• In any case, where the Tx fails because it violates one of the rules mentioned in #Context the error message should tell me exactly how much gas, gasPrice and fees were defined/calculated and which field wasn’t high enough. It also should tell me the minimum amount of fees that I need to provide for that specific Tx.

Tasks:

• add "auto" option for the --fees flag
• when passing only --fees make sure gas is estimated thru simulation (ATM default gas is 20000)
• make --gas=auto behave the same as --fees=auto

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #1386 (f8390b9) into main (e7a8fae) will decrease coverage by 0.01%.
The diff coverage is 65.00%.

❗ Current head f8390b9 differs from pull request most recent head 550a373. Consider uploading reports for the commit 550a373 to get more accurate results

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1386      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   72.32%   72.31%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         260      260              
  Lines       17723    17732       +9     
==========================================
+ Hits        12818    12823       +5     
- Misses       4336     4337       +1     
- Partials      569      572       +3     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
tests/e2e/upgrade/govexec.go	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
app/ante/evm/fees.go	73.19% <62.50%> (-1.53%)	⬇️
app/ante/cosmos/min_price.go	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
app/ante/evm/fee_checker.go	93.93% <100.00%> (-2.80%)	⬇️

[Vvaradinov]

tACK. Good work @GAtom22

[fedekunze]

Thanks @GAtom22, left some comments regarding the UX of using the different combinations. I feel we should create a table with the different options for the 3 flags

[GAtom22]

Thanks @GAtom22, left some comments regarding the UX of using the different combinations. I feel we should create a table with the different options for the 3 flags

@fedekunze Added this comment on the ticket for clarification

[fedekunze]

LGTM

[fedekunze]

@GAtom22 can you fix the Docker linter?

warning: Pin versions in apt get install. Instead of `apt-get install <package>` use `apt-get install <package>=<version>`