feat(tests): EIP-2780 warm/cold-aware top-frame delegation

[chfast]

🗒️ Description

Assert that an EIP-7702 delegation target already made warm via the access list is resolved at the WARM_ACCESS rate at the top transaction frame, per the EIP-2780 Interactions note (the EIP-2929 accessed_addresses model).

EIP-2780 is internally inconsistent here: its normative top-level gas-cost bullet and reference-cases table charge an unconditional COLD_ACCOUNT_ACCESS, whereas the Interactions note specifies warm/cold-aware accounting. This probe pins the Interactions-note reading; test_warmth_invariants.py pins the unconditional-cold one.

Marked xfail(strict=True): the implementation currently charges cold unconditionally, so the probe is CI-green today and a strict XPASS forces the marker's removal once the spec is disambiguated in favor of warm/cold-aware accounting and EELS adopts it.

🔗 Related Issues or PRs

N/A.

✅ Checklist

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

  just static

• All: PR title adheres to the repo standard - it will be used as the squash commit message and should start type(scope):.
• All: Considered updating the online docs in the ./docs/ directory.
• All: Set appropriate labels for the changes (only maintainers can apply labels).
• Tests: Ran mkdocs serve locally and verified the auto-generated docs for new tests in the Test Case Reference are correctly formatted.
• Tests: For PRs implementing a missed test case, update the post-mortem document to add an entry the list.
• Ported Tests: All converted JSON/YML tests from ethereum/tests or tests/static have been assigned @ported_from marker.

Cute Animal Picture

[gurukamath]

The scenario is already covered in this test. If we decide to update the spec and the implementation, could we just adapt that test?

[chfast]

The scenario is already covered in this test. If we decide to update the spec and the implementation, could we just adapt that test?

Yes, we can.