that's a result of:
contrib/devtools/copyright_header.py update ./
it is not scripted diff, because it works differentlly on my localhost and in CI:
CI doesn't want to use git commit date which is mocked to 30th Dec of 2023
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
On my local kubuntu linters have way too much spam
## What was done?
See each commit
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run locally. Amount of warnings decreased from thousands to fewer
amount. Excluding typos, they are:
```
src/coinjoin/client.cpp:1420:5: warning: Consider using std::any_of algorithm instead of a raw loop. [useStlAlgorithm]
src/coinjoin/client.cpp:1426:5: warning: Consider using std::any_of algorithm instead of a raw loop. [useStlAlgorithm]
src/coinjoin/client.cpp:655:26: warning: Consider using std::copy_if algorithm instead of a raw loop. [useStlAlgorithm]
src/coinjoin/server.cpp:593:33: warning: Consider using std::any_of algorithm instead of a raw loop. [useStlAlgorithm]
src/coinjoin/server.cpp:630:106: warning: Consider using std::any_of algorithm instead of a raw loop. [useStlAlgorithm]
src/governance/governance.cpp:1057:9: warning: C-style pointer casting [cstyleCast]
src/governance/governance.cpp:1068:9: warning: C-style pointer casting [cstyleCast]
src/governance/governance.cpp:1079:13: warning: C-style pointer casting [cstyleCast]
src/governance/governance.cpp:1086:9: warning: C-style pointer casting [cstyleCast]
src/governance/governance.cpp:1094:9: warning: C-style pointer casting [cstyleCast]
src/governance/governance.cpp:1099:5: warning: C-style pointer casting [cstyleCast]
src/governance/governance.cpp:1486:34: warning: Consider using std::copy_if algorithm instead of a raw loop. [useStlAlgorithm]
src/llmq/commitment.cpp:102:5: warning: Consider using std::all_of or std::none_of algorithm instead of a raw loop. [useStlAlgorithm]
src/llmq/instantsend.cpp:820:38: warning: Consider using std::any_of algorithm instead of a raw loop. [useStlAlgorithm]
src/llmq/quorums.cpp:831:102: warning: Consider using std::any_of algorithm instead of a raw loop. [useStlAlgorithm]
src/llmq/quorums.h:300:17: warning: C-style pointer casting [cstyleCast]
src/llmq/quorums.h:301:17: warning: C-style pointer casting [cstyleCast]
src/llmq/quorums.h:302:17: warning: C-style pointer casting [cstyleCast]
src/llmq/quorums.h:303:17: warning: C-style pointer casting [cstyleCast]
src/spork.cpp:119:58: warning: Consider using std::any_of algorithm instead of a raw loop. [useStlAlgorithm]
src/statsd_client.cpp:234:63: warning: C-style pointer casting [cstyleCast]
Advice not applicable in this specific case? Add an exception by updating
IGNORED_WARNINGS in test/lint/lint-cppcheck-dash.sh
^---- failure generated from test/lint/lint-cppcheck-dash.sh
Consider install flake8-cached for cached flake8 results.
test/functional/data/invalid_txs.py: error: Source file found twice under different module names: "invalid_txs" and "data.invalid_txs"
test/functional/data/invalid_txs.py: note: See https://mypy.readthedocs.io/en/stable/running_mypy.html#mapping-file-paths-to-modules for more info
test/functional/data/invalid_txs.py: note: Common resolutions include: a) adding `__init__.py` somewhere, b) using `--explicit-package-bases` or adjusting MYPYPATH
Found 1 error in 1 file (errors prevented further checking)
^---- failure generated from test/lint/lint-python.s
```
## 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
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
ddefb5c0b759950942ac03f28c43b548af7b4033 p2p: Use the greatest common version in peer logic (Hennadii Stepanov)
e084d45562b94827b3a7873895882fcaae9f4d48 p2p: Remove SetCommonVersion() from VERACK handler (Hennadii Stepanov)
8d2026796a6f7add0c2cda9806e759817d1eae6f refactor: Rename local variable nSendVersion (Hennadii Stepanov)
e9a6d8b13b0558b17cdafbd32fd2663b4138ff11 p2p: Unify Send and Receive protocol versions (Hennadii Stepanov)
Pull request description:
On master (6fef85bfa3cd7f76e83b8b57f9e4acd63eb664ec) `CNode` has two members to keep protocol version:
- `nRecvVersion` for received messages
- `nSendVersion` for messages to send
After exchanging with `VERSION` and `VERACK` messages via protocol version `INIT_PROTO_VERSION`, both nodes set `nRecvVersion` _and_ `nSendVersion` to _the same_ value which is the greatest common protocol version.
This PR:
- replaces two `CNode` members, `nRecvVersion` `nSendVersion`, with `m_greatest_common_version`
- removes duplicated getter and setter
There is no change in behavior on the P2P network.
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
ACK ddefb5c0b759950942ac03f28c43b548af7b4033
naumenkogs:
ACK ddefb5c0b759950942ac03f28c43b548af7b4033
fjahr:
Code review ACK ddefb5c0b759950942ac03f28c43b548af7b4033
amitiuttarwar:
code review but untested ACK ddefb5c0b7
benthecarman:
utACK `ddefb5c`
Tree-SHA512: 5305538dbaa5426b923b0afd20bdef4f248d310855d1d78427210c00716c67b7cb691515c421716b6157913e453076e293b10ff5fd2cd26a8e5375d42da7809d
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
`llmq/utils` has simple util code that used all over code base and also
have too heavy code for calculation quorums such as:
`GetAllQuorumMembers`, `EnsureQuorumConnections` and other.
These helpers for calculation quorums are used only by
evo/deterministicmns, evo/simplifiedmns and llmq/* modules, but
llmq/utils is included in many other modules for various trivial
helpers.
## What was done?
Prior work:
- https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/5753
- #5486
See also #4798
This PR remove all non-quorum calculation code from llmq/utils.
Eventually it happens that easier to take everything out rather than
move Quorum Calculation to new place atm:
- new module llmq/options have a code related to various params, command
line options, spork-related etc
- llmq/utils is not included in various files which do not use any
llmq/utils code
- helper `BuildCommitmentHash` goes to llmq/commitment
- helper `BuildSignHash` goes to llmq/signing
- helper `GetLLMQParam` inlined since it's trivial (it has not been
trivial when introduced ages ago)
- removed dependency of `IsQuorumEnabled` on CQuorumManager which means
`quorumManager` deglobalization is done for 90%
## How Has This Been Tested?
- Run unit functional tests
- updated circular dependencies
`test/lint/lint-circular-dependencies.sh`
- check that llmq/utils is not included without needs to calculate
Quorums Members
```
$ grep -r include src/ 2> /dev/null | grep -v .Po: | grep -vE 'llmq/utils.(h|cpp)': | grep llmq/utils
src/evo/mnauth.cpp:#include <llmq/utils.h>
src/evo/deterministicmns.cpp:#include <llmq/utils.h>
src/llmq/quorums.cpp:#include <llmq/utils.h>
src/llmq/blockprocessor.cpp:#include <llmq/utils.h>
src/llmq/commitment.cpp:#include <llmq/utils.h>
src/llmq/debug.cpp:#include <llmq/utils.h>
src/llmq/dkgsessionhandler.cpp:#include <llmq/utils.h>
src/llmq/dkgsession.cpp:#include <llmq/utils.h>
src/llmq/dkgsessionmgr.cpp:#include <llmq/utils.h>
src/rpc/quorums.cpp:#include <llmq/utils.h>
```
## 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
- [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
We should avoid return by reference; especially return by reference with
a bool flag indicating validity.
## What was done?
Instead we use a std::optional
## How Has This Been Tested?
Unit tests pass
## Breaking Changes
Should be none
## Checklist:
_Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes that
apply._
- [ ] 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
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository
code-owners and collaborators only)_
---------
Co-authored-by: Konstantin Akimov <knstqq@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
faca73000fa8975c28f6be8be01957c1ae94ea62 ci: Install fixed version of clang-format for linters (MarcoFalke)
fa4695da4c69646b58a8fa0b6b30146bb234deb8 build: Sort Makefile.am after renaming file (MarcoFalke)
cccc2784a3bb10fa8e43be7e68207cafb12bd915 scripted-diff: Move ui_interface to the node lib (MarcoFalke)
fa72ca6a9d90d66012765b0043fd819698b94ba8 qt: Remove unused includes (MarcoFalke)
fac96e6450d595fe67168cb7afa7692da6cc9973 wallet: Do not include server symbols (MarcoFalke)
fa0f6c58c1c6d10f04c4e65a424cc51ebca50a8c Revert "Fix link error with --enable-debug" (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
This reverts a hacky workaround from commit b83cc0f, which only happens to work due to compiler optimizations. Then, it actually fixes the linker error.
The underlying problem is that the wallet includes symbols from the server (ui_interface), which usually results in linker failures. Though, in this specific case the linker failures have not been observed (unless `-O0`) because our compilers were smart enough to strip unused symbols.
Fix the underlying problem by creating a new header-only with the needed symbol and move ui_interface to node to clarify that this is part of libbitcoin_server.
ACKs for top commit:
Sjors:
ACK faca730
laanwj:
ACK faca73000fa8975c28f6be8be01957c1ae94ea62
hebasto:
re-ACK faca73000fa8975c28f6be8be01957c1ae94ea62, since the [previous](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19331#pullrequestreview-434420539) review:
Tree-SHA512: e9731f249425aaea50b6db5fc7622e10078cf006721bb87989cac190a2ff224412f6f8a7dd83efd018835302337611f5839e29e15bef366047ed591cef58dfb4
01e283068b9e6214f2d77a2f772a4244ebfe2274 [net] Remove unnecessary default args on CNode constructor (Amiti Uttarwar)
bc5d65b3ca41eebb1738fdda4451d1466e77772e [refactor] Remove IsOutboundDisconnectionCandidate (Amiti Uttarwar)
2f2e13b6c2c8741ca9d825eaaef736ede484bc85 [net/refactor] Simplify multiple-connection checks (Amiti Uttarwar)
7f7b83deb2427599c129f4ff581d4d045461e459 [net/refactor] Rework ThreadOpenConnections logic (Amiti Uttarwar)
35839e963bf61d2da0d12f5b8cea74ac0e0fbd7b [net] Fix bug where AddrFetch connections would be counted as outbound full relay (Amiti Uttarwar)
4972c21b671ff73f13a1b5053338b6abbdb471b5 [net/refactor] Clarify logic for selecting connections in ThreadOpenConnections (Amiti Uttarwar)
60156f5fc40d56bb532278f16ce632c5a8b8035e [net/refactor] Remove fInbound flag from CNode (Amiti Uttarwar)
7b322df6296609570e368e5f326979279041c11f [net/refactor] Remove m_addr_fetch member var from CNode (Amiti Uttarwar)
14923422b08ac4b21b35c426bf0e1b9e7c97983b [net/refactor] Remove fFeeler flag from CNode (Amiti Uttarwar)
49efac5cae7333c6700d9b737d09fae0f3f4d7fa [net/refactor] Remove m_manual_connection flag from CNode (Amiti Uttarwar)
d3698b5ee309cf0f0cdfb286d6b30a256d7deae5 [net/refactor] Add connection type as a member var to CNode (Amiti Uttarwar)
46578c03e92a55925308363ccdad04dcfc820d96 [doc] Describe different connection types (Amiti Uttarwar)
442abae2bac7bff85886143df01e14215532b974 [net/refactor] Add AddrFetch connections to ConnectionType enum (Amiti Uttarwar)
af59feb05235ecb85ec9d75b09c66e71268c9889 [net/refactor] Extract m_addr_known logic from initializer list (Amiti Uttarwar)
e1bc29812ddf1d946bc5acca406a7ed2dca064a6 [net/refactor] Add block relay only connections to ConnectionType enum (Amiti Uttarwar)
0e52a659a2de915fc3dce37fc8fac39be1c8b6fa [net/refactor] Add feeler connections to ConnectionType enum (Amiti Uttarwar)
1521c47438537e192230486dffcec0228a53878d [net/refactor] Add manual connections to ConnectionType enum (Amiti Uttarwar)
26304b4100201754fb32440bec3e3b78cd3f0e6d [net/refactor] Introduce an enum to distinguish type of connection (Amiti Uttarwar)
3f1b7140e95d0f8f958cb35f31c3d964c57e484d scripted-diff: Rename OneShot to AddrFetch (Amiti Uttarwar)
Pull request description:
**This is part 1 of #19315, which enables the ability to test `outbound` and `block-relay-only` connections from the functional tests.** Please see that PR for more information of overall functionality.
**This PR simplifies how we manage different connection types.** It introduces an enum with the various types of connections so we can explicitly define the connection type. The existing system relies on a series of independent flags, then has asserts scattered around to ensure that conflicting flags are not enabled at the same time. I find this approach to be both brittle and confusing. While making these changes, I found a small bug due to the silent assumptions.
This PR also proposes a rename from `OneShot` to `AddrFetch`. I find the name `OneShot` to be very confusing, especially when we also have `onetry` manual connections. Everyone I've talked to offline has agreed that the name is confusing, so I propose a potential alternative. I think this is a good opportunity for a rename since I'm creating an enum to explicitly define the connection types.
(some context for the unfamiliar: `oneshot` or `addrfetch` connections are short-lived connections created on startup. They connect to the seed peers, send a `getaddr` to solicit addresses, then close the connection.)
Overview of this PR:
* rename `oneshot` to `addrfetch`
* introduce `ConnectionType` enum
* one by one, add different connection types to the enum
* expose the `conn_type` on CNode, and use this to reduce reliance on flags (& asserts)
* fix the bug in counting different type of connections
* some additional cleanup to simplify logic and make expectations explicit/inclusive rather than implicit/exclusive.
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
utACK 01e283068b9e6214f2d77a2f772a4244ebfe2274
laanwj:
Code review ACK 01e283068b9e6214f2d77a2f772a4244ebfe2274, the commits are pretty straightforward to follow, and I think this is a move in the right direction overall
vasild:
ACK 01e283068
sdaftuar:
ACK 01e283068b9e6214f2d77a2f772a4244ebfe2274.
fanquake:
ACK 01e283068b9e6214f2d77a2f772a4244ebfe2274 - I don't have as much experience with the networking code but these changes look fairly straight forward, the new code seems more robust/understandable and the additional documentation is great. I'm glad that a followup branch is already underway. There might be some more review comments here later today, so keep an eye on the discussion, however I'm going to merge this now.
jb55:
wow this code was messy before... ACK 01e283068b9e6214f2d77a2f772a4244ebfe2274
Tree-SHA512: 7bb644a6ed5849913d777ebc2ff89133ca0fbef680355a9a344e07496a979e6f9ff21a958e8eea93dcd7d5c343682b0c7174b1a3de380a4247eaae73da436e15
68537275bd91d1dc14a69609ae443f955bfdbd64 build: Enable -Werror=sign-compare (Ben Woosley)
eac6a3080d38cfd4eb7204ecd327df213958e51a refactor: Rework asmap Interpret to avoid ptrdiff_t (Ben Woosley)
df37377e30678ac9b8338ea920e50b7296da6bd5 test: Fix outstanding -Wsign-compare errors (Ben Woosley)
Pull request description:
Disallowing sign-comparison mismatches can help to prevent the introduction of overflow and interpretation bugs.
In this case, ~all~ most existing violations are in the tests, and most simply required annotating the literal as unsigned for comparison.
This was previously prevented by violations in leveldb which were fixed upstream and merged in #17398. You can test that by building this branch against: 22d11187ee3c7abfe9d43c9eb68f102498cc2b9a vs 75fb37ce68289eb7e00e2ccdd2ef7f9271332545
ACKs for top commit:
fjahr:
re-ACK 68537275bd91d1dc14a69609ae443f955bfdbd64
practicalswift:
ACK 68537275bd91d1dc14a69609ae443f955bfdbd64
Tree-SHA512: 14b5daa38c496fb51548feb30fb4dd179e6f76a8d355f52bc8e2a18f2f9340f0bc98dcf36d8b3d6521045d013891c3103749a4eda88ceef00202a6a0cf93f73c
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Asset Unlock tx uses platform's quorum on devnets, testnet, mainnet, but
still quorum type "Test (100)" on Reg Tests
That's part II PR, prior work is here:
https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/5618
## What was done?
- Removed `consensus.llmqTypeAssetLocks` which has been kept only for
RegTest - use `consensus.llmqTypePlatform` instead.
- Functional test `feature_asset_locks.py` uses `llmq_type_test = 106`
instead `llmq_type_test = 100` for asset unlock tx
- there's 4 MNs + 3 evo nodes instead 3 MNs as before: evo nodes
requires to have IS to be active
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run unit/functional tests
## Breaking Changes
Asset Unlock tx uses correct quorum "106 llmq_test_platform" on reg test
instead "100 llmq_test"
## 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
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Dead-code, useless conditions can be potential source of bug.
## What was done?
See each particular commit.
This particular commit "fix: check ptr in assert before usage" fixes
potential UB - `assert` is better than UB.
All other commits are not fixing any real issue, just to tidy-up code a
bit or to shut a potential warning.
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run unit/functional 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
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Fixes a bug we missed in #5736
## What was done?
Use all collected indexes, not just the last one
## How Has This Been Tested?
## 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
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository
code-owners and collaborators only)_
Prior required changes: bitcoin/bitcoin#19438 from
https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/5740
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Assertion failure:
```
assertion: ok
file: evo/mnhftx.cpp, line: 287
function: AbstractEHFManager::Signals CMNHFManager::GetFromCache(const CBlockIndex*)
No debug information available for stacktrace. You should add debug information and then run: dash-qt -printcrashinfo=bvcgc43iinzgc43ijfxgm3ybaadwiyltnawxc5e3ifzxgzlsoruw63ramzqws3dvojstucraebqxg43foj2gs33ohiqg62ykeaqgm2lmmu5cazlwn4xw23timz2hqltdobycyidmnfxgkoragi4docraebthk3tdoruw63r2ebawe43uojqwg5cfjbde2ylomftwk4r2hjjwsz3omfwhgicdjvheqrsnmfxgcz3foi5dur3fordhe33ninqwg2dffbrw63ttoqqegqtmn5rwwslomrsxqkrjbyrelhyaaaaaaaedgkiaaaaaaaadsm4qaaaaaaaa7gpyqaaaaaaaa2njraaaaaaaadkl3caaaaaaaabhxznqaaaaaaadqa2eaaaaaaaax33twaaaaaaabwaihqaaaaaaac7yooqbaaaaaahba45qcaaaaaacwkz2aeaaaaaaeitgeaiaaaaaaaa=
dash-qt: evo/mnhftx.cpp:287: AbstractEHFManager::Signals CMNHFManager::GetFromCache(const CBlockIndex*): Assertion `ok' failed.
```
This can happen in case if Dash Core has been update from v19 (or
earlier v20.alphaX) to v20.0.0 after v20 activation without re-indexing
## What was done?
`CMNHFManager` is visiting missing blocks recursively until reach first
v20 block or first block actually saved in evoDb.
Without changes from bitcoin/bitcoin#19438 there's an other issue:
```
2023-11-27T11:12:10Z POTENTIAL DEADLOCK DETECTED
Previous lock order was:
(2) 'cs_main' in llmq/instantsend.cpp:459 (in thread 'isman')
(1) 'cs_llmq_vbc' in llmq/utils.cpp:711 (in thread 'isman')
Current lock order is:
'cs_dip3list' in qt/masternodelist.cpp:135 (TRY) (in thread 'main')
(1) 'cs_llmq_vbc' in llmq/utils.cpp:719 (in thread 'main')
(2) 'cs_main' in node/blockstorage.cpp:77 (in thread 'main')
Assertion failed: detected inconsistent lock order for 'cs_main' in node/blockstorage.cpp:77 (in thread 'main'), details in debug log.
2023-11-27T11:12:10Z Posix Signal: Aborted
```
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run unit/functional test; run dash-qt on my local backup of problematic
storage (succeed without error); reindex testnet.
## 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
- [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository
code-owners and collaborators only)_
e48826ad87b4f92261f7433e84f48dac9bd9e5c3 tests: remove ComputeBlockVersion shortcut from versionbits tests (Anthony Towns)
c5f36725e877d8eb492383844f8ef7535466b366 [refactor] Move ComputeBlockVersion into VersionBitsCache (Anthony Towns)
4a69b4dbe0d7f504811b67c399da7e6d11e4f805 [move-only] Move ComputeBlockVersion from validation to versionbits (Anthony Towns)
0cfd6c6a8f929d5567ac41f95c21548f115efee5 [refactor] versionbits: make VersionBitsCache a full class (Anthony Towns)
8ee3e0bed5bf2cd3c7a68ca6ba6c65f7b9a72cca [refactor] rpc/blockchain.cpp: SoftForkPushBack (Anthony Towns)
92f48f360da5f425428b761219301f509826bec4 deploymentinfo: Add DeploymentName() (Anthony Towns)
ea68b3a5729f5d240e968388c4f88acffeb27228 [move-only] Rename versionbitsinfo to deploymentinfo (Anthony Towns)
c64b2c6a0f79369624ae96b2e3d579d50aae4de6 scripted-diff: rename versionbitscache (Anthony Towns)
de55304f6e7a8b607e6b3fc7436de50910747b0c [refactor] Add versionbits deployments to deploymentstatus.h (Anthony Towns)
2b0d291da8f479739ff394dd92801da8c40b9f8e [refactor] Add deploymentstatus.h (Anthony Towns)
eccd736f3dc231ac0306ca763c3b72cf8247230a versionbits: Use dedicated lock instead of cs_main (Anthony Towns)
36a4ba0aaaa9b35185d7178994e36bc02cca9887 versionbits: correct doxygen comments (Anthony Towns)
Pull request description:
Introduces helper functions to make it easy to bury future deployments, along the lines of the suggestion from [11398](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11398#issuecomment-335599326) "I would prefer it if a buried deployment wouldn't require all code paths that check the BIP9 status to require changing".
This provides three functions: `DeploymentEnabled()` which tests if a deployment can ever be active, `DeploymentActiveAt()` which checks if a deployment should be enforced in the given block, and `DeploymentActiveAfter()` which checks if a deployment should be enforced in the block following the given block, and overloads all three to work both with buried deployments and versionbits deployments.
This adds a dedicated lock for the versionbits cache, which is acquired internally by the versionbits functions, rather than relying on `cs_main`. It also moves moves versionbitscache into deploymentstatus to avoid a circular dependency with validation.
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
ACK e48826ad87b4f92261f7433e84f48dac9bd9e5c3
gruve-p:
ACK e48826ad87
MarcoFalke:
re-ACK e48826ad87b4f92261f7433e84f48dac9bd9e5c3 🥈
Tree-SHA512: c846ba64436d36f8180046ad551d8b0d9e20509b9bc185aa2639055fc28803dd8ec2d6771ab337e80da0b40009ad959590d5772f84a0bf6199b65190d4155bed
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
- The name `CB_V19_VERSION` is confusing because CbTx v2 was introduced
in v14, not v19
https://github.com/dashpay/dash/blob/master/doc/release-notes/dash/release-notes-0.14.0.md#dip0004---coinbase-payload-v2
- There are magic numbers instead of constants in some places
- `CheckCbTx` should check whatever the upper limit is, not
`CB_V20_VERSION` specifically
## What was done?
Turn CbTx versions into enum using self-describing names
## 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
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository
code-owners and collaborators only)_
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Some headers include other heavy headers, such as `logging.h`,
`tinyformat.h`, `iostream`. These headers are heavy and increase
compilation time on scale of whole project drastically because can be
used in many other headers.
## What was done?
Moved many heavy includes from headers to cpp files to optimize
compilation time.
In some places added forward declarations if it is reasonable.
As side effect removed 2 circular dependencies:
```
"llmq/debug -> llmq/dkgsessionhandler -> llmq/debug"
"llmq/debug -> llmq/dkgsessionhandler -> llmq/dkgsession -> llmq/debug"
```
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run build 2 times before refactoring and after refactoring: `make clean
&& sleep 10s; time make -j18`
Before refactoring:
```
real 5m37,826s
user 77m12,075s
sys 6m20,547s
real 5m32,626s
user 76m51,143s
sys 6m24,511s
```
After refactoring:
```
real 5m18,509s
user 73m32,133s
sys 6m21,590s
real 5m14,466s
user 73m20,942s
sys 6m17,868s
```
~5% of improvement for compilation time. That's not huge, but that's
worth to get merged
There're several more refactorings TODO but better to do them later by
backports:
- bitcoin/bitcoin#27636
- bitcoin/bitcoin#26286
- bitcoin/bitcoin#27238
- and maybe this one: bitcoin/bitcoin#28200
## 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
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
`ConnectBlock` can fail after `ProcessSpecialTxsInBlock`, we shouldn't
be notifying too early. Same for `DisconnectBlock` but that's less of an
issue imo.
## What was done?
Move notifications to the end of `ConnectBlock`/`DisconnectBlock`. There
is no `connman` in `CChainState` and I don't want to pass it in updates
struct so I changed `NotifyMasternodeListChanged` and used `connman`
from `CDSNotificationInterface` instead.
## How Has This Been Tested?
run unit test, run testnet qt wallet
## 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
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository
code-owners and collaborators only)_
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Use not_null if the function would crash if given a nullptr
## What was done?
Refactored to use gsl::not_null
## How Has This Been Tested?
Compiled
## Breaking Changes
Should be none
## 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
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository
code-owners and collaborators only)_
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Addressed issues and comments from [PR
comment](https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/5469#discussion_r1317886678)
and [PR
comment](https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/5469#discussion_r1338704082)
`Params()` should be const; global variable `CMNHFManager` is a better
out-come.
## What was done?
The helpers and direct calls of `UpdateMNParams` for each block to
update non-constant member in `Params()` is not needed anymore. Instead
`CMNHFManager` takes cares about status of Signals for each block,
update them dynamically and save in evo db.
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run unit/functional tests.
## Breaking Changes
Changed rpc `getblockchaininfo`.
the field `ehf` changed meaning: it's now only a flag -1/0; but it is
introduced a new field `ehf_height` now that a height.
## 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
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
---------
Co-authored-by: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: PastaPastaPasta <6443210+PastaPastaPasta@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: thephez <thephez@users.noreply.github.com>
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
https://github.com/dashpay/dash/issues/5471
## What was done?
It splits from https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/5443
Adds extra unit tests for BLS basic scheme; enforces BLS basic for Evo
Nodes in serialization/unserialization of CProRegTx, CProUpServTx.
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run functional/unit tests + added new unit tests.
## Breaking Changes
Serialization slightly changed, but it should be not breaking change
## 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
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
There's too much spamming log items related to new v20 features: credit
pool, asset locks, EHF manager, EHF Signaling for MN_RR.
Some logs are still spamming after this PR but related code is not
changed here https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/5658
## What was done?
- Removed some log items, tidy-up other.
- logs that supposed to appear for each block are moved to new
categories EHF and CREDITPOOL
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run unit/functional tests, reviewed log output
## 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
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
No need to log things like `punished MN <protxhash>, penalty 515->515
(max=515)`
(check block 907818 on testnet, it has a lot of these)
## What was done?
## How Has This Been Tested?
n/a
## 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
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository
code-owners and collaborators only)_
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
1. inactive MNs (`activeMasternodeInfo.proTxHash.IsNull() == true`)
should simply drop duplicated connections like regular nodes do.
2. we should not instantly drop inbound (potentially probe) connections
(even if `DeterministicOutboundConnection` results would say so), should
let `CMasternodeUtils::DoMaintenance` do that. This way a probing peer
should have a chance to get our `mnauth` back and mark this attempt as a
success. This should hopefully reduce the number of random unexplained
pose-punishments.
3. probe nodes must be disconnected ignoring everything else, quorum
nodes and relay members connect using their own logic which should not
interfere with the way probe nodes work. (meaningful changes only:
9134d964a0)
## What was done?
pls see individual commits
as a side-effect `activeMasternodeInfoCs` lock is moved out of
`ForEachNode`
## How Has This Been Tested?
run tests, run a testnet mn
## 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
- [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository
code-owners and collaborators only)_
# Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Fixed some clang-tidy warnings
## What was done?
used more if-init
## How Has This Been Tested?
built
## Breaking Changes
None
## 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
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository
code-owners and collaborators only)_
---------
Co-authored-by: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
As discovered during platform testing by @shumkov , it seems as the
chain can halt in miner if somehow mempool would have several
transactions that are somehow invalid (maybe too low fee or something
else). They can't be mined, but miner can't prepare a valid block with
correct Credit Pool amount.
It is indeed can happen although I haven't reproduced it with functional
tests at the moment 🤷♂️
## What was done?
Refactored and simplified a logic of Credit Pool amount of validation
and added one more layer of validation: after all transaction are
actually added to block by miner, it is recalculated one more time.
Also used correct `pindexPrev` instead Tip() for EHF signals.
## How Has This Been Tested?
Before this changes platform failed with this error and chain halt:
```
2023-10-20T06:20:16Z (mocktime: 2023-10-20T06:28:29Z) ERROR: ConnectBlock(DASH): CheckCreditPoolDiffForBlock for block 9d635e1fd0d7a8a5bf16ce158d3a39cbf903864bb6d671769836ea7db6055230 failed with bad-cbtx-asse locked-amount
```
With changes from this PR platform is generate the asset-lock
transactions that are included to block and chain is not halt:
```
2023-10-27T10:45:37Z (mocktime: 2023-10-27T14:37:22Z) GetCreditPoolDiffForBlock: CCreditPool is CCreditPool(locked=32100015, currentLimit=32100015)
```
unit/functional tests are succeed.
## Breaking Changes
N/A; no consensus rules are changed
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [x] 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
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
---------
Co-authored-by: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: PastaPastaPasta <6443210+PastaPastaPasta@users.noreply.github.com>
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
fix: possible assert call if nHeight in CDeterministicMNListDiff is
higher than Tip
Example of new log:
```
2023-09-28T17:35:50Z GetProjectedMNPayeesAtChainTip WARNING pindex is nullptr due to height=914160 chain height=914159
```
instead assert call:
```
...
#6 0x00007ffff7a33b86 in __assert_fail (assertion=0x55555783afd2 "pindex", file=0x5555577f2ed8 "llmq/utils.cpp", line=730,
function=0x5555577f2448 "bool llmq::utils::IsMNRewardReallocationActive(const CBlockIndex*)") at ./assert/assert.c:101
#7 0x0000555555ab7daf in llmq::utils::IsMNRewardReallocationActive (pindex=<optimized out>) at llmq/utils.cpp:730
#8 0x00005555559458ad in CDeterministicMNList::GetProjectedMNPayees (this=this@entry=0x7fffffffc690, pindex=0x0, nCount=<optimized out>, nCount@entry=2147483647)
at evo/deterministicmns.cpp:231
#9 0x000055555594614f in CDeterministicMNList::GetProjectedMNPayeesAtChainTip (this=this@entry=0x7fffffffc690, nCount=nCount@entry=2147483647) at evo/deterministicmns.cpp:216
#10 0x00005555558c9f51 in MasternodeList::updateDIP3List (this=this@entry=0x55555908cfd0) at qt/masternodelist.cpp:194
#11 0x00005555558ca9a0 in MasternodeList::updateDIP3ListScheduled (this=0x55555908cfd0) at qt/masternodelist.cpp:157
#12 0x000055555684a60f in void doActivate<false>(QObject*, int, void**) ()
#13 0x00005555568525b1 in QTimer::timerEvent(QTimerEvent*) ()
#14 0x0000555556844ce5 in QObject::event(QEvent*) ()
#15 0x0000555556ac3252 in QApplicationPrivate::notify_helper(QObject*, QEvent*) ()
#16 0x000055555681e6b8 in QCoreApplication::sendEvent(QObject*, QEvent*) ()
#17 0x000055555686de2a in QTimerInfoList::activateTimers() ()
#18 0x000055555686be84 in QEventDispatcherUNIX::processEvents(QFlags<QEventLoop::ProcessEventsFlag>) ()
#19 0x00005555569bf8a2 in QXcbUnixEventDispatcher::processEvents(QFlags<QEventLoop::ProcessEventsFlag>) ()
#20 0x000055555681caf6 in QEventLoop::exec(QFlags<QEventLoop::ProcessEventsFlag>) ()
#21 0x0000555556825f8a in QCoreApplication::exec() ()
...
```
## What was done?
ClientModel returns now a pair: MNList and CBlockIndex; so, we always
know the which one has been used even if current chain is switched.
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run on my localhost from `c034ff0c2606142ba3e8894bc74f693b87374e5c` -
aborted with backtrace like above.
With both of commit - no assert more.
## 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
- [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
Should not be 2 forks in one version
## What was done?
- Asset Unlock transactions (withdrawals) should be available only in
MN_RR fork
- MN_RR should not be auto-activated on Main net without intentional
release of code (and not by spork), but they are need on test net to
test platform.
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run unit/functional tests
## Breaking Changes
Yes (see "what was done")
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [x] 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
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Implementation of accepted proposal:
https://www.dashcentral.org/p/expedite-60-20-20-reallocation
## What was done?
Activates changers brought in #5588 on `v20` hard fork instead of
`mn_rr`.
## How Has This Been Tested?
run tests
## Breaking Changes
Again, Testnet sync is broken
## 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
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository
code-owners and collaborators only)_
---------
Co-authored-by: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
`GetAdjustedTime()` can be manipulated by our peers, we should avoid
using it for our internal data structures/logic.
## What was done?
Use `GetTime<T>()` instead, fix some includes while at it.
## How Has This Been Tested?
run tests, run a node
## Breaking Changes
should be none
## 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
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository
code-owners and collaborators only)_
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
fix: double lock of deterministicMNManager->cs
Logs:
```
node1 2023-10-21T16:46:03.990302Z (mocktime: 2014-12-04T17:33:19Z) [httpworker.1] DOUBLE LOCK DETECTED
node1 2023-10-21T16:46:03.990322Z (mocktime: 2014-12-04T17:33:19Z) [httpworker.1] Lock order:
node1 2023-10-21T16:46:03.990339Z (mocktime: 2014-12-04T17:33:19Z) [httpworker.1] 'cs_main' in miner.cpp:129 (in thread 'httpworker.1')
node1 2023-10-21T16:46:03.990353Z (mocktime: 2014-12-04T17:33:19Z) [httpworker.1] 'm_mempool.cs' in miner.cpp:129 (in thread 'httpworker.1')
node1 2023-10-21T16:46:03.990366Z (mocktime: 2014-12-04T17:33:19Z) [httpworker.1] (*) 'deterministicMNManager->cs' in evo/cbtx.cpp:114 (in thread 'httpworker.1')
node1 2023-10-21T16:46:03.990439Z (mocktime: 2014-12-04T17:33:19Z) [httpworker.1] (*) 'cs' in ./evo/deterministicmns.h:614 (in thread 'httpworker.1')
node1 2023-10-21T16:46:04.003619Z (mocktime: 2014-12-04T17:33:19Z) [httpworker.1] Posix Signal: Aborted
No debug information available for stacktrace. You should add debug information and then run:
dashd -printcrashinfo=bvcgc43iinzgc43ijfxgm3ybaacwiyltnbsbkudponuxqictnftw4ylmhiqecytpoj2gkzaphcbzaaaaaaaaayeurhimekiaaav6ldwqyiuqaafwsoe5bqrjaaahz6eh2dbcsaaakhhzaaaaaaaaanreseaaaaaaacgguliaaaaaaadyauwqaaaaaaacp3daaaaaaaaamxigcaaaaaaablpulyaaaaaaadovy3yaaaaaaahj7vbaaaaaaaadnbsdaaaaaaaaaa======
```
Part of backtrace:
```
#9 UniqueLock<AnnotatedMixin<std::mutex>, std::unique_lock<std::mutex> >::UniqueLock (fTry=false, nLine=615, pszFile=0x55a9f71a3710 "./evo/deterministicmns.h",
pszName=0x55a9f719caff "cs", mutexIn=..., this=0x7f7e1e71b250) at ./sync.h:164
#10 CDeterministicMNManager::GetListForBlock (this=0x55a9f84d06b0, pindex=0x7f7db03621c0) at ./evo/deterministicmns.h:615
#11 0x000055a9f6612258 in llmq::utils::ComputeQuorumMembersByQuarterRotation (pCycleQuorumBaseBlockIndex=0x7f7db03a6930, llmqParams=...) at /usr/include/c++/12/bits/unique_ptr.h:191
#12 llmq::utils::GetAllQuorumMembers (llmqType=<optimized out>, pQuorumBaseBlockIndex=0x7f7db0359bc0, reset_cache=reset_cache@entry=false) at llmq/utils.cpp:150
#13 0x000055a9f694d957 in CDeterministicMNManager::HandleQuorumCommitment (qc=..., pQuorumBaseBlockIndex=<optimized out>, mnList=..., debugLogs=debugLogs@entry=false)
at evo/deterministicmns.cpp:989
#14 0x000055a9f695c455 in CDeterministicMNManager::BuildNewListFromBlock (this=<optimized out>, block=..., pindexPrev=pindexPrev@entry=0x7f7db03c1ac0, state=..., view=...,
mnListRet=..., debugLogs=false) at evo/deterministicmns.cpp:918
#15 0x000055a9f692e7cd in CalcCbTxMerkleRootMNList (block=..., pindexPrev=pindexPrev@entry=0x7f7db03c1ac0, merkleRootRet=..., state=..., view=...)
at /usr/include/c++/12/bits/unique_ptr.h:191
#16 0x000055a9f6a352ed in BlockAssembler::CreateNewBlock (this=this@entry=0x7f7e1e71f0b0, scriptPubKeyIn=...) at ./validation.h:649
#17 0x000055a9f6771c49 in generateBlocks (chainman=..., mempool=..., evodb=..., llmq_ctx=..., coinbase_script=..., nGenerate=10, nMaxTries=<optimized out>) at rpc/mining.cpp:167
#18 0x000055a9f677a496 in generatetoaddress (request=...) at /usr/include/c++/12/bits/unique_ptr.h:191
#19 0x000055a9f671ea02 in CRPCCommand::CRPCCommand(char const*, char const*, UniValue (*)(JSONRPCRequest const&), std::initializer_list<char const*>)::{lambda(JSONRPCRequest const&, UniValue&, bool)#1}::operator()(JSONRPCRequest const&, UniValue&, bool) const (__closure=<optimized out>, result=..., request=...) at ./rpc/server.h:120
```
## What was done?
`CDeterministicMNManager::BuildNewListFromBlock` doesn't require `cs`
lock anymore
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run unit/functional 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
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
---------
Co-authored-by: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: pasta <pasta@dashboost.org>
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Current implementation relies either on asserts or sometimes checks then
returning a special value; In the case of asserts (or no assert where we
use the value without checks) it'd be better to make it explicit to
function caller that the ptr must be not_null; otherwise gsl::not_null
will call terminate.
See
https://github.com/microsoft/GSL/blob/main/docs/headers.md#user-content-H-pointers-not_null
and
https://isocpp.github.io/CppCoreGuidelines/CppCoreGuidelines#Rf-nullptr
I'm interested in a conceptual review; specifically on if this is
beneficial over just converting these ptrs to be a reference?
## What was done?
*Partial* implementation on using gsl::not_null in dash code
## How Has This Been Tested?
Building
## Breaking Changes
None
## 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
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository
code-owners and collaborators only)_
---------
Signed-off-by: pasta <pasta@dashboost.org>
Co-authored-by: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
It makes more sense for DecreaseScores to be inside of the MNList itself
imo
## What was done?
Refactored as such
## How Has This Been Tested?
Reindexed
I had originally expected some performance improvements due to the
removal of `GetMN` but in my benchmarking I didn't see any noticeable
perf changes. I do still think the removal of `GetMN` and using a
shared_ptr the whole time is better as it removes the chance of the
master node disappearing from the list (which would have previously
thrown, but is now impossible).
## Breaking Changes
None
## 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
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository
code-owners and collaborators only)_
---------
Co-authored-by: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
Implementation EHF mechanism, part 4. Previous changes are:
- https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/4577
- https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/5505
- https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/5469
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Currently MN_RR is activated automatically by soft-fork activation after
v20 is activated.
It is not flexible enough, because platform may not be released by that
time yet or in opposite it can be too long to wait.
Also, any signal of EHF requires manual actions from MN owners to sign
EHF signal - it is automated here.
## What was done?
New spork `SPORK_24_MN_RR_READY`; new EHF manager that sign EHF signals
semi-automatically without manual actions; and send transaction with EHF
signal when signal is signed to network.
Updated rpc `getblockchaininfo` to return information about of EHF
activated forks.
Fixed function `IsTxSafeForMining` in chainlock's handler to skip
transactions without inputs (empty `vin`).
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run unit/functional tests. Some tests have been updated due to new way
of MN_RR activation: `feature_asset_locks.py`, `feature_mnehf.py`,
`feature_llmq_evo.py` and unit test `block_reward_reallocation_tests`.
## Breaking Changes
New way of MN_RR activation.
## 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
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository
code-owners and collaborators only)_
---------
Co-authored-by: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: PastaPastaPasta <6443210+PastaPastaPasta@users.noreply.github.com>
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Calculation of `platformReward` should ignore fees and rely only on
Block subsidy.
cc @QuantumExplorer
## What was done?
From now on, the following formula is applied:
```
blockReward = blockSubsidy + feeReward
masternodeReward = masternodeShare(blockSubsidy)
platformReward = platformShare(masternodeReward)
masternodeReward += masternodeShare(feeReward)
```
## How Has This Been Tested?
## Breaking Changes
`plaftormReward` differs in networks where `mn_rr` is already active
## 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
- [x] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository
code-owners and collaborators only)_
---------
Co-authored-by: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
