search

code-423n4 / 2022-05-opensea-seaport-findings

1 stars 0 forks source link

Gas Optimizations #204

Open code423n4 opened 2 years ago

code423n4 commented 2 years ago

Gas Report for OpenSea by Perito Flores

[G-00] Unnecessary initialization of integers to zero

In for loops

conduit\Conduit.sol:        for (uint256 i = 0; i < totalStandardTransfers; ) {
conduit\Conduit.sol:        for (uint256 i = 0; i < totalStandardTransfers; ) {
lib\BasicOrderFulfiller.sol:        for (uint256 i = 0; i < totalAdditionalRecipients; ) {
lib\BasicOrderFulfiller.sol:        for (uint256 i = 0; i < totalAdditionalRecipients; ) {
lib\CriteriaResolution.sol:            for (uint256 i = 0; i < totalCriteriaResolvers; ++i) {
lib\CriteriaResolution.sol:            for (uint256 i = 0; i < totalAdvancedOrders; ++i) {
lib\OrderCombiner.sol:            for (uint256 i = 0; i < totalOrders; ++i) {
lib\OrderCombiner.sol:            for (uint256 i = 0; i < totalOrders; ++i) {
lib\OrderCombiner.sol:            for (uint256 i = 0; i < totalOfferFulfillments; ++i) {
lib\OrderCombiner.sol:            for (uint256 i = 0; i < totalConsiderationFulfillments; ++i) {
lib\OrderCombiner.sol:            for (uint256 i = 0; i < totalOrders; ++i) {
lib\OrderCombiner.sol:        for (uint256 i = 0; i < executions.length; ) {
lib\OrderCombiner.sol:            for (uint256 i = 0; i < totalFulfillments; ++i) {
lib\OrderFulfiller.sol:            for (uint256 i = 0; i < orderParameters.offer.length; ) {
lib\OrderFulfiller.sol:            for (uint256 i = 0; i < orderParameters.consideration.length; ) {
lib\OrderFulfiller.sol:            for (uint256 i = 0; i < totalOrders; ++i) {
lib\OrderValidator.sol:            for (uint256 i = 0; i < totalOrders; ) {
lib\OrderValidator.sol:            for (uint256 i = 0; i < totalOrders; ) {

lib\CriteriaResolution.sol:                for (uint256 j = 0; j < totalItems; ++j) {
lib\CriteriaResolution.sol:                for (uint256 j = 0; j < totalItems; ++j) {
lib\OrderCombiner.sol:                for (uint256 j = 0; j < offer.length; ++j) {
lib\OrderCombiner.sol:                for (uint256 j = 0; j < consideration.length; ++j) {
lib\OrderCombiner.sol:                for (uint256 j = 0; j < consideration.length; ++j) {

Variable extraCeling

lib\AmountDeriver.sol:            uint256 extraCeiling = 0;

[G-01] ++i and (++j) costs less gas compared to i++ (j++)

At many parts of your code (especially for loops) you are using i++. I suggest change all for ++i.

HardlyDifficult commented 2 years ago

Unnecessary initialization of integers to zero

This should be optimized by the compiler automatically. I tested this and confirmed it's not beneficial - some functions save a tiny amount, others got a bit worse.

++i and (++j) costs less gas compared to i++ (j++)

True, small savings here.