From 3f956db9d076da9201b01a9c4bfc8bc464536bb6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Alex Beregszaszi <alex@rtfs.hu>
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2025 16:13:59 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] Mark EIP-7830 review

---
 EIPS/eip-7830.md | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/EIPS/eip-7830.md b/EIPS/eip-7830.md
index 9d045195953a84..bb69dffac41435 100644
--- a/EIPS/eip-7830.md
+++ b/EIPS/eip-7830.md
@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ title: Contract size limit increase for EOF
 description: Raise the limit for only EOF contracts to 64 KiB
 author: Alex Beregszaszi (@axic), Danno Ferrin (@shemnon)
 discussions-to: https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/eip-7830-contract-size-limit-increase-for-eof/21927
-status: Draft
+status: Review
 type: Standards Track
 category: Core
 created: 2024-11-29

From 9ceec8a5d12df8945ac6e436a2e4365e517ae4fb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Alex Beregszaszi <alex@rtfs.hu>
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2025 16:22:37 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] Remove TODOs

---
 EIPS/eip-7830.md | 6 ------
 1 file changed, 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/EIPS/eip-7830.md b/EIPS/eip-7830.md
index bb69dffac41435..b1f91ca99cd1f4 100644
--- a/EIPS/eip-7830.md
+++ b/EIPS/eip-7830.md
@@ -29,8 +29,6 @@ Storage cost is already paid per contract byte.
 
 [EIP-170](./eip-170.md) specifies `MAX_CODE_SIZE` as 24576 bytes, and [EIP-3860](./eip-3860.md) specifies `MAX_INITCODE_SIZE` as `2 * MAX_CODE_SIZE` (49152 bytes).
 
-<!-- TODO: if profiling analysis shows we need to charge more for EOF analysis, this is where we can specify it.  Either globally or for 0xef00 contracs -->
-
 Starting `FORK_BLOCK`, for EOF initcode/code (code starting with the `0xEF 0x00` bytes) the limit is changed:`MAX_CODE_SIZE` is set to 65536 bytes (64 KiB). This means `MAX_INITCODE_SIZE` becomes 131072 bytes (128 KiB).
 
 ## Rationale
@@ -60,16 +58,12 @@ A simple analysis shows contract deployements for 64 KiB contracts to be between
 
 Note that the Max 30M gas contract size of 135 KiB is outside the limits of what is proposed in this EIP and is included to show what it would take to exceed current gas limits.
 
-<!-- https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1C2dd5sVnZNKXOpRknHhxt6MnTTN50c3b9d6ZU2rvqDQ/edit?usp=sharing -->
-
 ## Backwards Compatibility
 
 This is a backwards compatible change. Existing contracts are unaffected, and only new deployments see the effect.
 
 ## Security Considerations
 
-<!-- TODO -->
-
 Given the analysis cost is paid as part of deployment, the size of contract should have no effect on the runtime.
 
 A more thorough analysis may be needed to detemine whether the proposed limit poses any risk because of client storage architectures.