ac831339cbfa65b1f7576c53b5d9a94841db9868 doc: Fix some misspellings (randymcmillan)
Pull request description:
Here is a more thorough lint-spelling update.
This PR takes care of easy to fix spelling errors to clean up the linting stages.
There are misspellings coded into the functional tests.
That is a whole separate job within itself.
ACKs for top commit:
practicalswift:
ACK ac831339cbfa65b1f7576c53b5d9a94841db9868 -- diff looks correct
Tree-SHA512: d8fad83fed083715655f148263ddeffc6752c8007d568fcf3dc2c418ccd5db70089ce3ccfd3994fcbd78043171402eb9cca5bdd5125287e22c42ea305aaa6e9d
751549b52a9a4cd27389d807ae67f02bbb39cd7f contrib: guix: Additional clarifications re: substitutes (Carl Dong)
cd3e947f50db7cfe05c05b368c25742193729a62 contrib: guix: Various improvements. (Carl Dong)
8dff3e48a9e03299468ed3b342642f01f70da9db contrib: guix: Clarify SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH. (Carl Dong)
3e80ec3ea9691c7c89173de922a113e643fe976b contrib: Add deterministic Guix builds. (Carl Dong)
Pull request description:
~~**This post is kept updated as this project progresses. Use this [latest update link](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15277#issuecomment-497303718) to see what's new.**~~
Please read the `README.md`.
-----
### Guix Introduction
This PR enables building bitcoin in Guix containers. [Guix](https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/manual/en/html_node/Features.html) is a transactional package manager much like Nix, but unlike Nix, it has more of a focus on [bootstrappability](https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/manual/en/html_node/Bootstrapping.html) and [reproducibility](https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/blog/tags/reproducible-builds/) which are attractive for security-sensitive projects like bitcoin.
### Guix Build Walkthrough
Please read the `README.md`.
[Old instructions no. 4](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15277#issuecomment-497303718)
[Old instructions no. 3](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15277#issuecomment-493827011)
[Old instructions no. 2](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15277#issuecomment-471658439)
<details>
<summary>Old instructions no. 1</summary>
In this PR, we define a Guix [manifest](https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/manual/en/html_node/Invoking-guix-package.html#profile_002dmanifest) in `contrib/guix/manifest.scm`, which declares what packages we want in our environment.
We can then invoke
```
guix environment --manifest=contrib/guix/manifest.scm --container --pure --no-grafts --no-substitutes
```
To have Guix:
1. Build an environment containing the packages we defined in our `contrib/guix/manifest.scm` manifest from the Guix bootstrap binaries (see [bootstrappability](https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/manual/en/html_node/Bootstrapping.html) for more details).
2. Start a container with that environment that has no network access, and no access to the host's filesystem except to the `pwd` that it was started in.
3. Drop you into a shell in that container.
> Note: if you don't want to wait hours for Guix to build the entire world from scratch, you can eliminate the `--no-substitutes` option to have Guix download from available binary sources. Note that this convenience doesn't necessarily compromise your security, as you can check that a package was built correctly after the fact using `guix build --check <packagename>`
Therefore, we can perform a build of bitcoin much like in Gitian by invoking the following:
```
make -C depends -j"$(nproc)" download && \
cat contrib/guix/build.sh | guix environment --manifest=contrib/guix/manifest.scm --container --pure --no-grafts --no-substitutes
```
We don't include `make -C depends -j"$(nproc)" download` inside `contrib/guix/build.sh` because `contrib/guix/build.sh` is run inside the container, which has no network access (which is a good thing).
</details>
### Rationale
I believe that this represents a substantial improvement for the "supply chain security" of bitcoin because:
1. We no longer have to rely on Ubuntu for our build environment for our releases ([oh the horror](72bd4ab867/contrib/gitian-descriptors/gitian-linux.yml (L10))), because Guix builds everything about the container, we can perform this on almost any Linux distro/system.
2. It is now much easier to determine what trusted binaries are in our supply chain, and even make a nice visualization! (see [bootstrappability](https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/manual/en/html_node/Bootstrapping.html)).
3. There is active effort among Guix folks to minimize the number of trusted binaries even further. OriansJ's [stage0](https://github.com/oriansj/stage0), and janneke's [Mes](https://www.gnu.org/software/mes/) all aim to achieve [reduced binary boostrap](http://joyofsource.com/reduced-binary-seed-bootstrap.html) for Guix. In fact, I believe if OriansJ gets his way, we will end up some day with only a single trusted binary: hex0 (a ~500 byte self-hosting hex assembler).
### Steps to Completion
- [x] Successfully build bitcoin inside the Guix environment
- [x] Make `check-symbols` pass
- [x] Do the above but without nasty hacks
- [x] Solve some of the more innocuous hacks
- [ ] Make it cross-compile (HELP WANTED HERE)
- [x] Linux
- [x] x86_64-linux-gnu
- [x] i686-linux-gnu
- [x] aarch64-linux-gnu
- [x] arm-linux-gnueabihf
- [x] riscv64-linux-gnu
- [ ] OS X
- [ ] x86_64-apple-darwin14
- [ ] Windows
- [ ] x86_64-w64-mingw32
- [ ] Maybe make importer for depends syntax
- [ ] Document build process for future releases
- [ ] Extra: Pin the revision of Guix that we build with with Guix [inferiors](https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/manual/en/html_node/Inferiors.html)
### Help Wanted
[Old content no. 3](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15277#issuecomment-483318210)
[Old content no. 2](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15277#issuecomment-471658439)
<details>
<summary>Old content no. 1</summary>
As of now, the command described above to perform a build of bitcoin a lot like Gitian works, but fails at the `check-symbols` stage. This is because a few dynamic libraries are linked in that shouldn't be.
Here's what `ldd src/bitcoind` looks like when built in a Guix container:
```
linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007ffcc2d90000)
libdl.so.2 => /gnu/store/h90vnqw0nwd0hhm1l5dgxsdrigddfmq4-glibc-2.28/lib/libdl.so.2 (0x00007fb7eda09000)
librt.so.1 => /gnu/store/h90vnqw0nwd0hhm1l5dgxsdrigddfmq4-glibc-2.28/lib/librt.so.1 (0x00007fb7ed9ff000)
libstdc++.so.6 => /gnu/store/4sqps8dczv3g7rwbdibfz6rf5jlk7w90-gcc-5.5.0-lib/lib/libstdc++.so.6 (0x00007fb7ed87c000)
libpthread.so.0 => /gnu/store/h90vnqw0nwd0hhm1l5dgxsdrigddfmq4-glibc-2.28/lib/libpthread.so.0 (0x00007fb7ed85b000)
libm.so.6 => /gnu/store/h90vnqw0nwd0hhm1l5dgxsdrigddfmq4-glibc-2.28/lib/libm.so.6 (0x00007fb7ed6da000)
libgcc_s.so.1 => /gnu/store/4sqps8dczv3g7rwbdibfz6rf5jlk7w90-gcc-5.5.0-lib/lib/libgcc_s.so.1 (0x00007fb7ed6bf000)
libc.so.6 => /gnu/store/h90vnqw0nwd0hhm1l5dgxsdrigddfmq4-glibc-2.28/lib/libc.so.6 (0x00007fb7ed506000)
/gnu/store/h90vnqw0nwd0hhm1l5dgxsdrigddfmq4-glibc-2.28/lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 => /usr/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00007fb7ee3a0000)
```
And here's what it looks in one of our releases:
```
linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007ffff52cd000)
libpthread.so.0 => /usr/lib/libpthread.so.0 (0x00007f87726b4000)
librt.so.1 => /usr/lib/librt.so.1 (0x00007f87726aa000)
libm.so.6 => /usr/lib/libm.so.6 (0x00007f8772525000)
libgcc_s.so.1 => /usr/lib/libgcc_s.so.1 (0x00007f877250b000)
libc.so.6 => /usr/lib/libc.so.6 (0x00007f8772347000)
/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 => /usr/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00007f8773392000)
```
~~I suspect it is because my script does not apply the gitian-input patches [described in the release process](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/release-process.md#fetch-and-create-inputs-first-time-or-when-dependency-versions-change) but there is no description as to how these patches are applied.~~ It might also be something else entirely.
Edit: It is something else. It appears that the gitian inputs are only used by [`gitian-win-signer.yml`](d6e700e40f/contrib/gitian-descriptors/gitian-win-signer.yml (L14))
</details>
### How to Help
1. Install Guix on your distro either [from source](https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/manual/en/html_node/Requirements.html) or perform a [binary installation](https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/manual/en/html_node/Binary-Installation.html#Binary-Installation)
2. Try out my branch and the command described above!
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
Thanks for the replies. ACK 751549b52a9a4cd27389d807ae67f02bbb39cd7f
laanwj:
ACK 751549b52a9a4cd27389d807ae67f02bbb39cd7f
Tree-SHA512: 50e6ab58c6bda9a67125b6271daf7eff0ca57d0efa8941ed3cd951e5bf78b31552fc5e537b1e1bcf2d3cc918c63adf19d685aa117a0f851024dc67e697890a8d
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Avoid redundant calls to GetLLMQParams
## What was done?
## How Has This Been Tested?
## Breaking Changes
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [x] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [x] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
**For repository code-owners and collaborators only**
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Avoid lots of static_cast's from enums to underlying types. Communicate
intention better
## What was done?
implement c++23 inspired ToUnderlying, then see std::to_underlying and
https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/types/underlying_type; Then, we use
this instead of static_casts for enums -> underlying type
## How Has This Been Tested?
make check
## Breaking Changes
None
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [x] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
**For repository code-owners and collaborators only**
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
---------
Co-authored-by: Konstantin Akimov <knstqq@gmail.com>
Since new BLS scheme introduction, a sporadic crash was appearing from
time to time during functional tests.
The crash was an uncaught exception (std::invalid_argument, what="Relic
library error") thrown from BLS operations.
Affected tests: feature_llmq_is_conflicts.py,
feature_llmq_is_migration.py
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
This PR doesn't solve the actual problem, but it protects the node from
crashing by catching exception thrown from BLS.
All BLS aggregation operations weren't calling BLS impl code within a
try catch block.
Now, all aggregations operations are protected from the uncaught
exception.
## What was done?
## How Has This Been Tested?
## Breaking Changes
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
**For repository code-owners and collaborators only**
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
`develop` can't sync on mainnet and testnet atm because platform quorums
are already active there but we skip non-hpms nodes when calculating
quorums.
## What was done?
Fixed the code to respect `IsV19Active`. Also dropped
`IsLLMQTypeHPMNOnly` cause it's not used anywhere else and it just makes
things more confusing imo.
## How Has This Been Tested?
Can successfully sync on mainnet/testnet
## Breaking Changes
n/a, fixes breaking changes introduced earlier :)
## Checklist:
<!--- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
**For repository code-owners and collaborators only**
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
This refactoring helps to make code more specific and clear.
There's using syntax feature from modern C++ such as 'enum class',
structure bindings in loops, declaration variables inside if/switch
statements, etc.
## What was done?
This PR is based on @PastaPastaPasta 's PR
https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/4472
There excluded changes related to using std::optional. Let's decide
firstly about `Result` class: https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/5109
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run unit/functional tests
## Breaking Changes
No breaking changes
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
---------
Co-authored-by: Pasta <pasta@dashboost.org>
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Migration does too many things when it should really be just deser ->
ser and no extra logic. Implemented changes to take as short migration
path as possible.
## What was done?
Switched from processing diffs and updating mn lists to simply call
deser and ser operations.
Also skipping `AddMN` and filling internal map directly because:
1. we can trust our local db on migration and need no extra checks here;
2. we care about `mnMap` only cause it's the one that is serialized
later, we don't care about ids or unique properties here.
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run the node, migration succeeds.
As a side effect the migration process is ~20% faster on my mac now
(takes ~11 minutes on mainnet instead of ~14 minutes before).
## Breaking Changes
n/a
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
**For repository code-owners and collaborators only**
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
While working on #5213 I noticed that `CDeterministicMNListDiff` deser
is one of the top cpu consuming operations. This can be improved.
## What was done?
Switched from `map` to `unordered_map`.
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run node, everything still works. Applying this patch on top of #5213
gives another ~20% improvement in migration time on my mac: from ~14
minutes originally to ~8 minutes with both patches applied.
## Breaking Changes
Shouldn't be any. In most cases we just `emplace` and loop over
`updatedMNs`. The only place we use `find` is
`CMNAuth::NotifyMasternodeListChanged` and slight potential performance
drop there is acceptable imo given the improvement in deser/migration
time.
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
**For repository code-owners and collaborators only**
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
We use `GetMnType` in some critical parts of code where we process data
from blocks and such. Having `assert` called there makes me nervous 😅
## What was done?
We should simply consider all unknown types invalid instead of crashing
here. Introduced new dummy mn type for which no real mn can ever satisfy
conditions.
## How Has This Been Tested?
run tests
## Breaking Changes
n/a
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
**For repository code-owners and collaborators only**
- [ ] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
## What was done?
1. Increased protocol version of mininode to match v19 changes in
`MNLISTDIFF` P2P message
2. Added verification of MNs and HPMNs (dip4) in `feature_llmq_hpmn.py`
## How Has This Been Tested?
## Breaking Changes
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [x] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
**For repository code-owners and collaborators only**
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Currently, by default in devnet, the LLMQ set for Platform is
`LLMQ_100_67`.
Obviously this is too big for usual devnets, therefore the new
`LLMQ_DEVNET_PLATFORM` is created (size 12, threshold 67%).
`LLMQ_100_67` is still the default one: added possibility to overwrite
it by passing argument `-llmqplatform` (devnets only)
## What was done?
## How Has This Been Tested?
## Breaking Changes
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
**For repository code-owners and collaborators only**
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
## What was done?
As discussed with Platform team, threshold for `llmq_test_platform`
needed to be 67%. Therefore, the size went from 4 members to 3 (while
keeping threshold to 2)
## How Has This Been Tested?
## Breaking Changes
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [x] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
**For repository code-owners and collaborators only**
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
## What was done?
- `masternode status` now returns the type as well
- `masternode count` now returns in addition total and total enabled MNs
per type.
## How Has This Been Tested?
Added functional tests
## Breaking Changes
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [x] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [x] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
**For repository code-owners and collaborators only**
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
fixes an issue mentioned
[here](https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/5177#pullrequestreview-1293957617)
## What was done?
added missing implementation for `pubkeys`, added help text for
`addresses`, implemented some tests
## How Has This Been Tested?
`./src/test/test_dash -t wallet_tests/rpc_getaddressinfo`
## Breaking Changes
n/a
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [x] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
**For repository code-owners and collaborators only**
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
expressions like `nType == MnType::HighPerformance.index` look pretty
confusing in current implementation of 4k HPMN.
Changing `uint8_t` index to `enum class MnType : uint8_t` give pros:
- switch inside GetMnType() and any similar code will show a compiler
warning if any type is missing.
- instead "MnType::HighPerformance.index" you can write
MnType::HighPerformance
- you can remove confusing `.index` from MnType
But also Cons:
- instead `log("%d", nType)` you need to write `log("%d",
static_cast<int>(nType))`;
## What was done?
Introduced new enum class MnType and rewritten generating
Regular/HighPerformance objects with params (description, collateral
amount, etc).
Also were added attributes [[no_discard]] for related code.
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run unit/functional tests
## Breaking Changes
No breaking changes.
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
---------
Co-authored-by: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Added a "Type" column on the masternode tab so it's easy to distinguish
between regular and HPMN
## What was done?
Added column with type
## How Has This Been Tested?
Built locally and tried on devnet with an HPMN registered
## Breaking Changes
<!--- Please describe any breaking changes your code introduces -->
## Checklist:
<!--- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
**For repository code-owners and collaborators only**
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
---------
Co-authored-by: Odysseas Gabrielides <odysseas.gabrielides@gmail.com>
020f0519ec66d9626255b938e1c6c3f7f9aa4017 refactor: CTxMemPool::IsUnbroadcastTx() requires CTxMemPool::cs lock (Hennadii Stepanov)
7c4bd0387a01a0c3e2938d530dba3c882e4d8f2b refactor: CTxMemPool::GetTotalTxSize() requires CTxMemPool::cs lock (Hennadii Stepanov)
fa5fcb032b6ed04c49ee465235288b8059fa805e refactor: CTxMemPool::ClearPrioritisation() requires CTxMemPool::cs lock (Hennadii Stepanov)
7140b31b90cbd84d75eedb3e395d0d55f83b5b95 refactor: CTxMemPool::ApplyDelta() requires CTxMemPool::cs lock (Hennadii Stepanov)
66e47e5e506043fbb9b4e487b44bf992985709c9 refactor: CTxMemPool::UpdateChild() requires CTxMemPool::cs lock (Hennadii Stepanov)
939807768acd508932f2efabee660d56324a73df refactor: CTxMemPool::UpdateParent() requires CTxMemPool::cs lock (Hennadii Stepanov)
Pull request description:
This is another step to transit `CTxMemPool::cs` from `RecursiveMutex` to `Mutex`.
Split out from #19306.
Only trivial thread safety annotations and lock assertions added. No new locks. No behavior change.
Refactoring `const uint256` to `const uint256&` was [requested](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19647#discussion_r468471022) by **promag**.
Please note that now, since #19668 has been merged, it is safe to apply `AssertLockHeld()` macros as they do not swallow compile time Thread Safety Analysis warnings.
ACKs for top commit:
promag:
Core review ACK 020f0519ec66d9626255b938e1c6c3f7f9aa4017.
jnewbery:
Code review ACK 020f0519ec66d9626255b938e1c6c3f7f9aa4017
vasild:
ACK 020f0519e
Tree-SHA512: a31e389142d5a19b25fef0aaf1072a337278564528b5cc9209df88ae548a31440e1b8dd9bae0169fd7aa59ea06e22fe5e0413955386512b83ef1f3e7d941e890
fafb381af8279b2d2ca768df0bf68d7eb036a2f9 Remove mempool global (MarcoFalke)
fa0359c5b30730744aa8a7cd9ffab79ded91041f Remove mempool global from p2p (MarcoFalke)
eeee1104d78eb59a582ee1709ff4ac2c33ee1190 Remove mempool global from init (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
This refactor unlocks some nice potential features, such as, but not limited to:
* Removing the fee estimates global (would avoid slightly fragile workarounds such as #18766)
* Making the mempool optional for a "blocksonly" operation mode
Even absent those features, the new code without the global should be easier to maintain, read and write tests for.
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
utACK fafb381af8279b2d2ca768df0bf68d7eb036a2f9
hebasto:
ACK fafb381af8279b2d2ca768df0bf68d7eb036a2f9, I have reviewed the code and it looks OK, I agree it can be merged.
darosior:
ACK fafb381af8279b2d2ca768df0bf68d7eb036a2f9
Tree-SHA512: a2e696dc377e2e81eaf9c389e6d13dde4a48d81f3538df88f4da502d3012dd61078495140ab5a5854f360a06249fe0e1f6a094c4e006d8b5cc2552a946becf26
fa0572d0f3b083b4c8e2e883a66e2b198c6779f1 Pass mempool reference to chainstate constructor (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Next step toward #19556
Instead of relying on the mempool global, each chainstate is given a reference to a mempool to keep up to date with the tip (block connections, disconnections, reorgs, ...)
ACKs for top commit:
promag:
Code review ACK fa0572d0f3b083b4c8e2e883a66e2b198c6779f1.
darosior:
ACK fa0572d0f3b083b4c8e2e883a66e2b198c6779f1
hebasto:
ACK fa0572d0f3b083b4c8e2e883a66e2b198c6779f1, reviewed and tested on Linux Mint 20 (x86_64).
Tree-SHA512: 12184d33ae5797438d03efd012a07ba3e4ffa0d817c7a0877743f3d7a7656fe279280c751554fc035ccd0058166153b6c6c308a98b2d6b13998922617ad95c4c
e57980b4738c10344baf136de3e050a3cb958ca5 [mempool] Remove NotifyEntryAdded and NotifyEntryRemoved callbacks (John Newbery)
2dd561f36124972d2364f941de9c3417c65f05b6 [validation] Remove pool member from ConnectTrace (John Newbery)
969b65f3f527631ede1a31c7855151e5c5d91f8f [validation] Remove NotifyEntryRemoved callback from ConnectTrace (John Newbery)
5613f9842b4000fed088b8cf7b99674c328d15e1 [validation] Remove conflictedTxs from PerBlockConnectTrace (John Newbery)
cdb893443cc16edf974f099b8485e04b3db1b1d7 [validation interface] Remove vtxConflicted from BlockConnected (John Newbery)
1168394d759b13af68acec6d5bfa04aaa24561f8 [wallet] Notify conflicted transactions in TransactionRemovedFromMempool (John Newbery)
Pull request description:
These boost signals were added in #9371, before we had a `TransactionRemovedFromMempool` method in the validation interface. The `NotifyEntryAdded` callback was used by validation to build a vector of conflicted transactions when connecting a block, which the wallet was notified of in the `BlockConnected` CValidationInterface callback.
Now that we have a `TransactionRemovedFromMempool` callback, we can fire that signal directly from the mempool for conflicted transactions.
Note that #9371 was implemented to ensure `-walletnotify` events were fired for these conflicted transaction. We inadvertently stopped sending these notifications in #16624 (Sep 2019 commit 7e89994). We should probably fix that, but in a different PR.
ACKs for top commit:
jonatack:
Re-ACK e57980b
ryanofsky:
Code review ACK e57980b4738c10344baf136de3e050a3cb958ca5, no code changes since previous review, but helpful new code comments have been added and the PR description is now more clear about where the old code came from
Tree-SHA512: 3bdbaf1ef2731e788462d4756e69c42a1efdcf168691ce1bbfdaa4b7b55ac3c5b1fd4ab7b90bcdec653703600501b4224d252cfc086aef28f9ce0da3b0563a69
e20c72f9f076681def325b5b5fa53bccda2b0eab Fire TransactionRemovedFromMempool from mempool (251)
Pull request description:
This pull request fires TransactionRemovedFromMempool callbacks from the mempool and cleans up a bunch of code.
It also resolves the `txmempool -> validation -> validationinterface -> txmempool` circular dependency.
Ideally, `validationinterface` is a dumb component that doesn't have any knowledge of the sub-systems it sends its notifications to. The commit that aims to resolve this circular dependency by moving `txmempool` specific code out of `validationinterface` to `txmempool` where it belongs.
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
ACK e20c72f9f076681def325b5b5fa53bccda2b0eab
Tree-SHA512: 354c3ff1113b21a0b511d80d604edfe3846dddae3355e43d1387f68906e54bf5dc01e7c029edc0b8e635b500b2ab97ee50362e2486eb4319f7347ee9a9e6cef3
fa9ee52556f493e4a896e2570ca1a3102d777d9a doc: Add doxygen comment to IsRBFOptIn (MarcoFalke)
faef4fc9b4990e563022b6ab595cb02c4060c216 Remove mempool global from interfaces (MarcoFalke)
fa831684e54783f6b40533ca218eb7636bdae667 refactor: Add IsRBFOptInEmptyMempool (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
The chain interface has an `m_node` member, which has a pointer to the mempool global. Use the pointer instead of the global to prepare the removal of the mempool global. See #19556
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
utACK fa9ee52556
darosior:
ACK fa9ee52
hebasto:
re-ACK fa9ee52556f493e4a896e2570ca1a3102d777d9a, since my [previous](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19848#pullrequestreview-482403942) review:
Tree-SHA512: 11b4c1446f0860a743fdaa67f95c52bf0262d0a4f888be0eaf07ee497448965d32be414111bf016bd568f2989cde923430e3a3889e224057b73c499f06de7199
fad691cafe083743a26f434488990f060ae4ac45 rpc: Make verifychain default values static, not depend on global args (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
This fixes several issues:
* The documentation is not compile-time static and depends on run-time arguments, making it impossible to host it on a static resource like a website or pdf. See also a similar change in the wallet rpc code: #18499
* The same call (relying on default values) will run different code on different machines, depending on the command line args that were used to start the server. This might lead to hard-to-debug-remote issues.
This is a small behaviour change, and I will add release notes.
ACKs for top commit:
theStack:
ACK fad691cafe
promag:
Code review ACK fad691cafe083743a26f434488990f060ae4ac45.
Tree-SHA512: 1c7a253ff0ec13a973b10d3777b71c70954ded5805b65a3ab06317327014de4cd0601d71d30c6ce89a581722c150cb5567acc1bd3e0c789cb51bab6ef0dcfc4a
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
## What was done?
Implementation of 4k collateral HPMN.
## How Has This Been Tested?
## Breaking Changes
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [x] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [x] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
**For repository code-owners and collaborators only**
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
---------
Co-authored-by: thephez <thephez@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: pasta <pasta@dashboost.org>
Co-authored-by: PastaPastaPasta <6443210+pastapastapasta@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: UdjinM6 <1935069+Udjinm6@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Konstantin Akimov <545784+knst@users.noreply.github.com>
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
`legacy` param is either ignored (wrong param index) or rejected (can't
use `RPCTypeCheckArgument`/`get_bool()` for params not listed in
`vRPCConvertParams` and we can't add them there either because they have
no exact indexes)
## What was done?
switched to `ParseBoolV`, added unit tests
## How Has This Been Tested?
`./src/test/test_dash -t rpc_tests/rpc_bls`
## Breaking Changes
n/a
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [x] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
**For repository code-owners and collaborators only**
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Currently template for "New pull request" have a lot of instruction that
are formatted as comments by html/markdown tag.
It makes this instruction to append in the final commit message when
pull request is merged because they are invisible for reviewer (marked
as comment).
With new template the messages would be more likely to be cleaned up
before merging.
## What was done?
Replaced commented text in template to cursive test (italic)
## How Has This Been Tested?
By clicking "Preview" on GitHub
## Breaking Changes
No breaking changes, it's trivial change
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
fixing a few trivial issues we missed while reviewing #5072
## What was done?
see code
## How Has This Been Tested?
tests are ✅ locally
## Breaking Changes
n/a
## Checklist:
<!--- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
**For repository code-owners and collaborators only**
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Build on linux with clang produce a lot of warnings.
Some of them are fixed in this PR.
## What was done?
Fixed several types of warnings:
- order of member initialization in constructors
- mixing signed/unsigned wariables
- moved static functions from header to cpp file
- other fixes
## How Has This Been Tested?
Set up clang build on Linux + run build + unit/functional tests.
## Breaking Changes
Should not be breaking changes
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
78e407ad0c26190a22de1bc8ed900164a44a36c3 GetKeyBirthTimes should return key ids, not destinations (Gregory Sanders)
70946e7fee54323ce6a5ea8aeb377e2c7c790bc6 Replace CScriptID and CKeyID in CTxDestination with dedicated types (Gregory Sanders)
Pull request description:
The current usage seems to be an overloading of meanings. `CScriptID` is used in the wallet as a lookup key, as well as a destination, and `CKeyID` likewise. Instead, have all destinations be dedicated types.
New types:
`CScriptID`->`ScriptHash`
`CKeyID`->`PKHash`
ACKs for commit 78e407:
ryanofsky:
utACK 78e407ad0c26190a22de1bc8ed900164a44a36c3. Only changes are removing extra CScriptID()s and fixing the test case.
Sjors:
utACK 78e407a
meshcollider:
utACK 78e407ad0c
Tree-SHA512: 437f59fc3afb83a40540da3351507aef5aed44e3a7f15b01ddad6226854edeee762ff0b0ef336fe3654c4cd99a205cef175211de8b639abe1130c8a6313337b9
fa499b5f027f77c0bf13699852c8c06f78e27bef rpc: bugfix: Properly use iswitness in converttopsbt (MarcoFalke)
fa5c5cd141f0265a5693234690ac757b811157d8 rpc: Switch touched RPCs to IsValidNumArgs (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
When a serialized transaction has inputs, there is no risk in only trying to deserialize it with witness allowed. (This is how all transactions from p2p are deserialized.) In fact, it would avoid a common issue where a transaction with inputs can be deserialized in two ways:
* Fixes#12989
* Fixes#15872
* Fixes#15701
* Fixes#13738
* ...
When a serialized transaction has no inputs, there is no risk in only trying to deserialze it with witness disallowed. (A transaction without inputs can't have corresponding witness data)
ACKs for commit fa499b:
meshcollider:
utACK fa499b5f02
ryanofsky:
utACK fa499b5f027f77c0bf13699852c8c06f78e27bef. Changes since last review: consolidating commits and making iswitness documentation the same across methods.
PastaPastaPasta:
utACK fa499b5f027f77c0bf13699852c8c06f78e27bef
Tree-SHA512: a64423a3131f3f0222a40da557c8b590c9ff01b45bcd40796f77a1a64ae74c6680a6be9d01ece95c492dfbcc7e2810409d2c2b336c2894af00bb213972fc85c6
d5dc66e28046a146b6fdf10ed119dfe4e96af995 doc: fix/improve analyzepsbt in doc/psbt.md (Jon Atack)
Pull request description:
- fix: replace "RPC" with "PSBT"
- output includes the current status of the analyzed psbt's inputs
- apply "if possible" to the fee as well as to the estimated weight and feerate, since the fee is only shown if all utxo slots in the psbt have been filled
- add "final" to the estimated weight and feerate
ACKs for commit d5dc66:
laanwj:
ACK d5dc66e28046a146b6fdf10ed119dfe4e96af995
fanquake:
utACK d5dc66e
Tree-SHA512: 61ff1ef45ec34182613b300d21cc2b17a28d1e955f70848f5be1a40c82009fe3000db3332d2cfca1833d7c881b61cc4ebc9fc779238f76d38e9e3f706cfb3551
00d110463aed12ecdc6e9c2bf47d9ef61d19fa9d Install bitcoin-wallet manpage. (Daniel Kraft)
Pull request description:
This change marks the already-existing `bitcoin-wallet.1` manpage file for installation together with the others. Previously, only `bitcoind.1`, `bitcoin-cli.1`, `bitcoin-tx.1` and `bitcoin-qt.1` would be installed.
ACKs for commit 00d110:
laanwj:
utACK 00d110463aed12ecdc6e9c2bf47d9ef61d19fa9d
practicalswift:
utACK 00d110463aed12ecdc6e9c2bf47d9ef61d19fa9d
Tree-SHA512: ca846e414548f1dc774f460edca2e17d7d619c7e6f0d18db0c58c09e04f9d43c6964fcf2bacb5b1eae94de9c5fdda86abf258ef6b78b0f693715d070dfc10f08
