bfa9309ad606102f24c9bd3c33dfe78949f09418 Use COINBASE_MATURITY constant in functional tests. (Kiminuo)
525448df9dc2ab6b7e960ff138956ae3e2efdf60 Move COINBASE_MATURITY from `feature_nulldummy` test to `blocktools`. (Kiminuo)
Pull request description:
`COINBASE_MATURITY` constant was added to `feature_nulldummy` test in #21373. This PR moves the constant to `blocktools.py` file and uses the constant in more tests as suggested [here](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21373#discussion_r605418462).
Edit: Goal of this PR is to replace integer constants with `COINBASE_MATURITY` but not necessarily in *all* cases because that would mean to read and fully understand all tests. That's out of my time constraints. Any reports where `COINBASE_MATURITY` should be used are welcome though!
ACKs for top commit:
theStack:
ACK bfa9309ad606102f24c9bd3c33dfe78949f09418 🌇
Tree-SHA512: 01f04645f05a39028681f355cf3d42dd63ea3303f76d93c430e0fdce441934358a2d847a54e6068d61932f1b75e1d406f51859b057b3e4b569f7083915cb317f
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
This is an implementation of DIP0027 "Credit Asset Locks".
It's a mechanism to fluidly exchange between Dash and credits.
## What was done?
This pull request includes:
- Asset Lock transaction
- Asset Unlock transaction (withdrawal)
- Credit Pool in coinbase
- Unit tests for Asset Lock/Unlock tx
- New functional test `feature_asset_locks.py`
RPC: currently locked amount (credit pool) is available through rpc call
`getblock`.
## How Has This Been Tested?
There added new unit tests for basic checks of transaction validity
(asset lock/unlock).
Also added new functional test "feature_asset_locks.py" that cover
typical cases, but not all corner cases yet.
## Breaking Changes
This feature should be activated as hard-fork because:
- It adds 2 new special transaction and one of them [asset unlock tx]
requires update consensus rulels
- It adds new data in coinbase tx (credit pool)
## 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
**To release DIP 0027**
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
---------
Co-authored-by: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
7daffc6a90a797ce7c365a893a31a31b0206985c [test] CScriptNum Decode Check as Unit Tests (Gillian Chu)
Pull request description:
The CScriptNum test (#14816) is a roundtrip test of the test framework. Thus, it would be better suited as a unit test. This is now possible with the introduction of the unit test module for the functional tests. See #18576.
This PR:
1. Refactors the CScriptNum tests into 2 unit tests, one in script.py and one in blocktools.py.
2. Extends the script.py CScriptNum test to trial larger numbers.
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
ACK 7daffc6a90a797ce7c365a893a31a31b0206985c
Tree-SHA512: 17a04a4bfff1b1817bfc167824c679455d9e06e6e0164c00a7e44f8aa5041c5f5080adcc1452fd80ba1a6d8409f976c982bc481d686c434edf97a5893a32a436
cf9ed307e6 qa: blocktools enforce named args for amount (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Since #13669 changed some signatures, I think it might be worthwhile to enforce named args for primitive types such as amounts.
Tree-SHA512: 2733e7b6a20590b54bd54e81a09e3f5e2fadf4390bed594916b70729bcf485b048266012c1203369e0968032a2c6a2719107ac17ee925d8939af3df916eab1a6
fab17e8272f5f70213f186809479ee7a75898b1d test: Add basic test for BIP34 (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
BIP34 was disabled for testing, which explains why it had no test.
Fix that by enabling it and adding a test.
Tree-SHA512: 9cb5702d474117ce6420226eb93ee09d6fb5fc856fabc8b67abe56a088cd727674e0e5462000e1afa83b911374036f90abdbdde56a8c236a75572ed47e10a00f
fa178a6385 [rpc] mining: Omit uninitialized currentblockweight, currentblocktx (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Previously we'd report "0", which could be mistaken for a valid number. E.g. the number of transactions is 0 or the block weight is 0, whatever that means.
Tree-SHA512: ee94ab203a329e272211b726f4c23edec4b09c650ec363b77fd59ad9264165d73064f78ebb9e11b5c2c543b73c157752410a307655560531c7d5444d203aa0ea
59e387705c7e55ec40400301346354fa2d0c613f test: add invalid tx templates for use in functional tests (James O'Beirne)
Pull request description:
This change adds a list of `CTransaction`-generating templates which each correspond to a specific type of invalid transaction. We then use this list to test for a wider variety of invalid tx types in `p2p_invalid_tx.py` and `feature_block.py`.
Consolidating all invalid tx types will allow us to more easily cover all tx reject cases from a variety of tests without repeating ourselves. Validation logic doesn't differ much between mempool and block acceptance, but there *is* a difference and we should be sure we're testing both comprehensively.
Right now, I've only added templates covering the tx reject types listed below but if this approach seems worthwhile I will expand the list to be fully comprehensive.
```
bad-txns-in-belowout
bad-txns-inputs-duplicate
bad-txns-too-many-sigops
bad-txns-vin-empty
bad-txns-vout-empty
bad-txns-vout-negative
```
Tree-SHA512: 05407f4a953fbd7c44c08bb49bb989cefd39a2b05ea00f5b3c92197a3f05e1b302f789e33832445734220e1c333d133aba385740b77b84139b170c583471ce20
fa8489a15511f61a372473927e73c34692bbec23 test: Add test for BIP30 duplicate tx (MarcoFalke)
77770d95e2838d7665fa8f621e9e83d79f9b3196 test: Properly serialize BIP34 coinbase height (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
This adds a test for BIP30 to check that duplicate txs can exist in the blockchain given the first one was completely spent when the second one is added. (Requested by ajtowns in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16333#issuecomment-508604071)
We can not add a test that a later duplicate tx overwrites a previous one, because BIP30 is always enforced on regtest. If someone feels strongly about such a test, some Bitcoin Core code would have to be modified, which can be done in a follow up pull request.
Also, add a commit to fix the BIP34 test failures reported in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14633#issue-227712540
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
Code review ACK fa8489a15511f61a372473927e73c34692bbec23
Tree-SHA512: c707d0bdc93937263876b603425b53322a2a9f9ec3f50716ae2fa9de8ddc644beb22b26c1bfde7f4aab102633e096b354ef380db919176bd2cb44a2828f884aa
* Implement Block Reward Reallocation
* Add integr. test
* drop unused variable
* Sep -> Oct
* Update test/functional/feature_block_reward_reallocation.py
Co-authored-by: PastaPastaPasta <6443210+PastaPastaPasta@users.noreply.github.com>
* Revert to Sep for testnet and devnet
* validation: Refactor reallocation calculations
Makes it much more readable imo and avoids calculating the percentage
each time.
* test: Align reallocation calculation with c++ (GetMasternodePayment)
* test: Make feature_block_reward_allocation.py executable
* Make linter happy
Co-authored-by: PastaPastaPasta <6443210+PastaPastaPasta@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: xdustinface <xdustinfacex@gmail.com>
