5619c8f5fd docs: add release notes for v21.0.1 and archive v21.0.0 (pasta)
9e80d128c0 Merge #6163: fix: use blocks-only instead of address-only for inventory (pasta)
e10c5c9579 Merge #6160: feat: add sbom and provenance in release for dockerhub; use jammy; apt remove as possible (pasta)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Backport PRs for v21.0.1
## What was done?
See commits
## How Has This Been Tested?
See CI
## 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)_
ACKs for top commit:
knst:
utACK 5619c8f5fd
kwvg:
utACK 5619c8f5fd
UdjinM6:
utACK 5619c8f5fd
Tree-SHA512: 42c1e31319775e5800da2d82af00cae3aa0cee3baadd0123a809efc246d4ca5d0e6a4166b574e6ddebf66c0a80f4ee1655caff085f1687bb533889414a9fd4cf
3468ab34d1 fix: use blocks-only instead of address-only for inventory (Konstantin Akimov)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Mobile client (without full blockchain) can't receive transactions before they are mined in the block.
## What was done?
Fixed a condition "is an addr relay" to "not a block relay".
It's an alternate solution for https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/6162
## How Has This Been Tested?
Tested with hashengineering - it works!
## 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
ACKs for top commit:
PastaPastaPasta:
utACK [3468ab3](3468ab34d1); no diff
kwvg:
utACK 3468ab34d1
Tree-SHA512: 6ad257a72be0f2fd4d7a8e3674d537e2a2c5f0c7c1bdfdf825403d8cb2975261bcf4574949fb02a16de76762d3f30b40e094be448cfa4ee6bae9f1f5be5f44d5
9178e8a75f feat: add smob and provenance in release for dockerhub; use jammy; apt remove as possible (pasta)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Docker provenance refers to the origin and history of Docker images, including how they were built, modified, and by whom. An SBOM (Software Bill of Materials) is a detailed list of all components in a software application, providing transparency about libraries, dependencies, and versions used, which is crucial for security and compliance.
## What was done?
Add SBOM and provenance to docker build; this may allow some level of validation that GitHub actions is actually doing what it says it is.
See this for more information https://docs.docker.com/build/ci/github-actions/attestations/
## How Has This Been Tested?
Building with buildx with sbom and provenance flags locally
## 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)_
ACKs for top commit:
UdjinM6:
utACK 9178e8a75f
Tree-SHA512: 6e3f35a0b30f002e2d5d80d6dd18ee554a1c15c62c1d4cbe1185f38977f55a199998515cf5bb9a027670f068f3d56ef33faa062d8c4122a886375d00afe6bf2f
98a33939fd chore: set release to true (pasta)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Sets release flag to true.
## 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)_
ACKs for top commit:
UdjinM6:
utACK 98a33939fd
Tree-SHA512: 2dfe7097eaad936fa426186233e9088c7fe41a33277cee9e4ff88061e9f68ad76741d4e7e6204294687edad9d16083a1af0375b0b572ff144e6051c429860699
cd0a3a6cc6 Merge #6154: chore: remove trailing whitespaces in release notes (pasta)
6bc60a7236 Merge #6151: chore: update seeds for v21 release (pasta)
88e949aa1b Merge #6146: chore: bump assumevalid, minchainwork, checkpoints, chaintxdata (pasta)
cc14427ccd Merge #6144: docs: release notes for v21.0.0 (pasta)
0a8ece1fd2 Merge #6122: chore: translations 2024-07 (pasta)
146d24401f Merge #6140: feat: harden all sporks on mainnet to current values (pasta)
024d272eb9 Merge #6126: feat: enable EHF activation of MN_RR on mainnet (pasta)
e780b3d48d Merge #6125: docs: update manpages for 21.0 (pasta)
5ede23c2ba Merge #6118: docs: add release notes notifying change of default branch to `develop` (pasta)
1b6fe9c720 Merge #6117: docs: update supported versions in SECURITY.md (pasta)
27d20beda8 Merge #6116: fix: mitigate crashes associated with some upgradetohd edge cases (pasta)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Backports to v21 for rc.3; there are more PRs to be back ported here
## What was done?
see commits
## How Has This Been Tested?
## 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
- [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)_
ACKs for top commit:
UdjinM6:
utACK cd0a3a6cc6
Tree-SHA512: 0a8d027c5952fcb61317cc413a0de1f3152ae675c5690942400c3e4655cc6a803c702a7e1b18d8dac77aa0f483783f5cdbe29d6c0592165c4f0517d6f37b91a4
4969a72cc9 chore: remove trailing whitespaces in release notes (UdjinM6)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
https://gitlab.com/dashpay/dash/-/jobs/7421310092
## 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
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository code-owners and collaborators only)_
ACKs for top commit:
PastaPastaPasta:
utACK 4969a72cc9
Tree-SHA512: 2c85bb45a097543abad3e8f97fd9b7cd847fbfdfd4b4916e24f6725ffc05cad38647ff008dc4a35b188a6db631e6fffcbd535362a794f440d45a678255c13428
43c39537d8 chore: update seeds (Konstantin Akimov)
16dd04357b chore: added extra onion seeds (provided by pasta) (Konstantin Akimov)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
https://github.com/dashpay/dash/issues/6081
## What was done?
Extra onion seeds are provided by pasta.
```sh
dash-cli protx list valid 1 2110129 > protx_list.json
# Make sure the onion seeds still work!
while IFS= read -r line
do
address=$(echo $line | cut -d':' -f1)
port=$(echo $line | cut -d':' -f2)
nc -v -x 127.0.0.1:9050 -z $address $port
done < "onion_seeds.txt"
python3 makeseeds.py protx_list.json onion_seeds.txt > nodes_main.txt
python3 generate-seeds.py . > ../../src/chainparamsseeds.h
```
## 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
- [x] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
ACKs for top commit:
UdjinM6:
utACK 43c39537d8
PastaPastaPasta:
utACK 43c39537d8
Tree-SHA512: 8583f030949c6b26b5410eaa4db4f9b85fbe14bc147083861519d9564ae1fff52716b2d8deb233d30ecfb679e778cb2bb2f0ef3dee392cff1986b004b03d9e1e
dfe708993d chore: bump assumevalid, minchainwork, checkpoints, chaintxdata (pasta)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
bump assumevalid, minchainwork, checkpoints, chaintxdata in prep for v21 release final
## What was done?
## How Has This Been Tested?
Reindex TBD
## Breaking Changes
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)_
ACKs for top commit:
UdjinM6:
utACK dfe708993d
kwvg:
utACK dfe708993d
Tree-SHA512: 34ef58092cbae4389db87e3f4fc9978356abf19ea110575b89663f00c7621091141f138ce03bc21d7deca9f5b86588c1c2e0874aa8a85d7c54efa41a201d51cc
dfd144b64d docs: add v21.0.0 release notes, archive old release notes, delete partials (pasta)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Add release notes for v21.0.0
## What was done?
See commits
## How Has This Been Tested?
## Breaking Changes
## 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
- [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)_
Top commit has no ACKs.
Tree-SHA512: fafe225f7db59ccea6aa998b04204f22b913ab4d0a178737ca2311b093c04be39ce57c2a6ab3e8e0e312a10159118a024371a7315dcb5df3d8651d3535417861
85762dc633 60%+: bg, ro, vi (UdjinM6)
2d0e68dcd6 80%+: ar, de, es, fi, fr, it, ja, ko, nl, pl, pt, ru, sk, th, tr, zh_CN, zh_TW (UdjinM6)
f7992b0b03 en (UdjinM6)
49fc976121 dashstrings (UdjinM6)
c8333a59c5 chore: replace remaining `...` with `…` in translated strings (UdjinM6)
ac2e9ea1e7 qt: Extract translations correctly from UTF-8 formatted source (Hennadii Stepanov)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Mostly regular translation updates but with 2 additional fixes:
- ac2e9ea is a backport, without it `make translate` fails to update `dashstrings.cpp` properly (but I couldn't figure out which PR it belongs to 🤷♂️ )
- c8333a5 is needed to make it easier to replace all `...` with `…` in `*.ts` files locally to avoid annoying translators (`...` and `…` are visually the same in transifex interface)
## 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
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository code-owners and collaborators only)_
ACKs for top commit:
PastaPastaPasta:
utACK 85762dc633
Tree-SHA512: c3624d8e5b26b0fd4d488e6988e81000d05bdc66f9e126b5d3fe3c1f6bceaa846ee81dfc7c0d18613b0ac682a94e0b17007e86724e7cc02d9cfce87b22ce6916
e1030a058c docs: add release notes for 6140 (pasta)
9ed292a6e1 feat: harden all sporks on mainnet to current values (pasta)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Harden all sporks on the mainnet; they are no longer necessary. Although retaining them might be beneficial in addressing bugs or issues, the greater priority is to protect mainnet by minimizing risks associated with potential centralization or even its perception. Sporks will continue to be valuable for testing on developer networks; however, on mainnet, the risks of maintaining them now outweigh the benefits of retaining them.
## What was done?
Adjust CSporkManager::GetSporkValue to always return 0 for sporks in general and 1 for SPORK_21_QUORUM_ALL_CONNECTED specifically.
## How Has This Been Tested?
Ran main net node with this patch. Sporks show as expected
## Breaking Changes
This is not a 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
- [ ] 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)_
ACKs for top commit:
knst:
utACK e1030a058c
UdjinM6:
utACK e1030a058c (CI failure is unrelated)
Tree-SHA512: f20d0f614b7e9d6eb5606c545d0747a9d415f2905512dd6100a2f9fb00bb6de02c8d5aa74cb41aa39163fde0ab05fe472913acc227b1b4afce7e984f8897940d
a8a3ea0e90 feat: enable EHF activation of MN_RR on mainnet (Konstantin Akimov)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
https://github.com/dashpay/dash/issues/6081
## What was done?
Removed a code, that disabled MN_RR activation with EHF on Main Net
## How Has This Been Tested?
This code is tested on devnet, is in process of testing on testnet.
## Breaking Changes
It make MN_RR possible to get active on mainnet.
## 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
ACKs for top commit:
UdjinM6:
utACK a8a3ea0e90
PastaPastaPasta:
utACK a8a3ea0e90
Tree-SHA512: 0ae7aecca8463436e952154210cf564333cd77dd1149f7ff88ca144f3b7c434e75e473ea3a6850da1b126efd8a9cece34e46b4bf2b37f5937bcf1f5780e18f50
e2f56de7f4 docs: update manpages for 21.0 (Konstantin Akimov)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
https://github.com/dashpay/dash/issues/6081
## What was done?
run `./contrib/devtools/gen-manpages.sh`, sanitize version name
## 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
ACKs for top commit:
UdjinM6:
utACK e2f56de7f4
PastaPastaPasta:
utACK e2f56de7f4
Tree-SHA512: 9b56f7a31279457aed1b7ed0b627d4364f786948f6df3176e24ab73b68d785fc90d9bf6136d7965c1c5b97b589b4d228edd338e666d1999e841c6e544f054c05
8a66af25e8 docs: add release notes notifying change of default branch to `develop` (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
Pull request description:
## Additional Information
Add a release note notifying the new default branch as `develop`.
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code **(note: N/A)**
- [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas **(note: N/A)**
- [x] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests **(note: N/A)**
- [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)_
ACKs for top commit:
PastaPastaPasta:
utACK 8a66af25e8
UdjinM6:
utACK 8a66af25e8
Tree-SHA512: 82212ce670cf4b0f243a79170914ad04b1d118406ce6402b33dfb42a5ae0865c36de4b816530238bb9ded796c66f3dcc36fa9400ace59b6e7dad24ba47653e4f
878bce0f45 docs: update SECURITY.md supported versions (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
Pull request description:
## Additional Information
Updates the supported versions list in `SECURITY.md`
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code **(note: N/A)**
- [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas **(note: N/A)**
- [x] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests **(note: N/A)**
- [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)_
ACKs for top commit:
PastaPastaPasta:
utACK 878bce0f45
UdjinM6:
utACK 878bce0f45
knst:
utACK 878bce0f45
Tree-SHA512: d941a3ca0792b2f08f68cab562a35d869d8e93f627918a25a9753955b6103d1515899b0ca50ff936c966b9f9fd603e12d27b03267361c8f1030a31f9fffdf2ae
69c37f4ec2 rpc: make sure `upgradetohd` always has the passphrase for `UpgradeToHD` (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
619b640a77 wallet: unify HD chain generation in CWallet (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
163d31861c wallet: unify HD chain generation in LegacyScriptPubKeyMan (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
Pull request description:
## Motivation
When filming demo footage for https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/6093, I realized that if I tried to create an encrypted blank legacy wallet and run `upgradetohd [mnemonic]`, the client would crash.
```
dash@b9c6631a824d:/src/dash$ ./src/qt/dash-qt
QStandardPaths: XDG_RUNTIME_DIR not set, defaulting to '/tmp/runtime-dash'
dash-qt: wallet/scriptpubkeyman.cpp:399: void LegacyScriptPubKeyMan::GenerateNewCryptedHDChain(const SecureString &, const SecureString &, CKeyingMaterial): Assertion `res' failed.
Posix Signal: Aborted
No debug information available for stacktrace. You should add debug information and then run:
dash-qt -printcrashinfo=bvcgc43iinzgc43ijfxgm3ybaadwiyltnawxc5avkbxxg2lyebjwsz3omfwduicbmjxxe5dfmqaaa===
```
The expected set of operations when performing privileged operations is to first use `walletpassphrase [passphrase] [time]` to unlock the wallet and then perform the privileged operation. This routine that applies for almost all privileged RPCs doesn't apply here, the unlock state of the wallet has no bearing on constructing an encrypted HD chain as it needs to be encrypted with the master key stored in the wallet, which in turn is encrypted with a key derived from the passphrase (i.e., `upgradetohd` imports **always** need the passphrase, if encrypted).
You might have noticed that I used `upgradetohd [mnemonic]` instead of the correct syntax, `upgradetohd [mnemonic] "" [passphrase]` that is supposed to be used when supplying a mnemonic to an encrypted wallet, because when you run the former, you don't get told to enter the passphrase into the RPC command, you're told.
```
Error: Please enter the wallet passphrase with walletpassphrase first.
```
Which tells you to treat it like any other routine privileged operation and follow the routine as mentioned above. This is where insufficient validation starts rearing its head, we only validate the passphrase if we're supplied one even though we should be demanding one if the wallet is encrypted and it isn't supplied. We didn't supply a passphrase because we're following the normal routine, we unlocked the wallet so `EnsureWalletIsUnlocked()` is happy, so now the following happens.
```
upgradetohd()
| Insufficient validation has allowed us to supply a blank passphrase
| for an encrypted wallet
|- CWallet::UpgradeToHD()
|- CWallet::GenerateNewHDChainEncrypted()
| We get our hands on vMasterKey by generating the key from our passphrase
| and using it to unlock vCryptedMasterKey.
|
| There's one small problem, we don't know if the output of CCrypter::Decrypt
| isn't just gibberish. Since we don't have a passphrase, whatever came from
| CCrypter::SetKeyFromPassphrase isn't the decryption key, meaning, the
| vMasterKey we just got is gibberish
|- LegacyScriptPubKeyMan::GenerateNewCryptedHDChain()
|- res = LegacyScriptPubKeyMan::EncryptHDChain()
| |- EncryptSecret()
| |- CCrypter::SetKey()
| This is where everything unravels, the gibberish key's size doesn't
| match WALLET_CRYPTO_KEY_SIZE, it's no good for encryption. We bail out.
|- assert(res)
We assume are inputs are safe so there's no real reason we should crash.
Except our inputs aren't safe, so we crash. Welp! :c
```
This problem has existed for a while but didn't cause the client to crash, in v20.1.1 (19512988c6), trying to do the same thing would return you a vague error
```
Failed to generate encrypted HD wallet (code -4)
```
In the process of working on mitigating this crash, another edge case was discovered, where if the wallet was unlocked and an incorrect passphrase was provided to `upgradetohd`, the user would not receive any feedback that they entered the wrong passphrase and the client would similarly crash.
```
upgradetohd()
| We've been supplied a passphrase, so we can try and validate it by
| trying to unlock the wallet with it. If it fails, we know we got the
| wrong passphrase.
|- CWallet::Unlock()
| | Before we bother unlocking the wallet, we should check if we're
| | already unlocked, if we are, we can just say "unlock successful".
| |- CWallet::IsLocked()
| | Wallet is indeed unlocked.
| |- return true;
| The validation method we just tried to use has a bail-out mechanism
| that we don't account for, the "unlock" succeded so I guess we have the
| right passphrase.
[...] (continue call chain as mentioned earlier)
|- assert(res)
Oh...
```
This pull request aims to resolve crashes caused by the above two edge cases.
## Additional Information
As this PR was required me to add additional guardrails on `GenerateNewCryptedHDChain()` and `GenerateNewHDChainEncrypted()`, it was taken as an opportunity to resolve a TODO ([source](9456d0761d/src/wallet/wallet.cpp (L5028-L5038))). The following mitigations have been implemented.
* Validating `vMasterKey` size (any key not of `WALLET_CRYPTO_KEY_SIZE` size cannot be used for encryption and so, cannot be a valid key)
* Validating `secureWalletPassphrase`'s presence to catch attempts at passing a blank value (an encrypted wallet cannot have a blank passphrase)
* Using `Unlock()` to validate the correctness of `vMasterKey`. (the two other instances of iterating through `mapMasterKeys` use `Unlock()`, see [here](1394c41c8d/src/wallet/wallet.cpp (L5498-L5500)) and [here](1394c41c8d/src/wallet/wallet.cpp (L429-L431)))
* `Lock()`'ing the wallet before `Unlock()`'ing the wallet to avoid the `IsLocked()` bail-out condition and then restoring to the previous lock state afterwards.
* Add an `IsCrypted()` check to see if `upgradetohd`'s `walletpassphrase` is allowed to be empty.
## 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 **(note: N/A)**
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository code-owners and collaborators only)_
ACKs for top commit:
knst:
utACK 69c37f4ec2
UdjinM6:
utACK 69c37f4ec2
PastaPastaPasta:
utACK 69c37f4ec2
Tree-SHA512: 4bda1f7155511447d6672bbaa22b909f5e2fc7efd1fd8ae1c61e0cdbbf3f6c28f6e8c1a8fe2a270fdedff7279322c93bf0f8e01890aff556fb17288ef6907b3e
db828177bf Merge #6106: feat: create new composite quorum-command platformsign (pasta)
a45e6df58b Merge #6104: fix: adjust incorrect parameter description that says there is a default that doesn't exist (pasta)
7330982631 Merge #6100: feat: make whitelist works with composite commands for platform needs (pasta)
9998ffd92b Merge #6096: feat: split type of error in submitchainlock - return enum in CL verifying code (pasta)
cdf7a25012 Merge #6095: fix: createwallet to require 'load_on_startup' for descriptor wallets (pasta)
c1c2c55690 Merge #6092: fix: mixing for partially unlocked descriptor wallets (pasta)
117548660d Merge #6073: feat: add logging for RPC HTTP requests: command, user, http-code, time of running (pasta)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Backports a set of 6 PRs needed in rc.2
## What was done?
Backported PRs with labels
## How Has This Been Tested?
## Breaking Changes
## 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)_
ACKs for top commit:
kwvg:
LGTM, utACK db828177bf
UdjinM6:
utACK db828177bf
Tree-SHA512: 1b242c5db04bd5873ef622543bc2a25e29567f15962c677ea51ff05cb784291968d18f419bf611c206b912e8f15d687208ae75af33aab89038b6f0167d99c4bf
2db69d7b81 chore: add release notes for "quorum platformsign" (Konstantin Akimov)
283c5f89a2 feat: create new composite command "quorum platformsign" (Konstantin Akimov)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
It splits from #6100
With just whitelist it is impossible to limit the RPC `quorum sign` to use only one specific quorum type, this PR aim to provide ability for quorum signing for platform quorum only.
## What was done?
Implemented a new composite command "quorum platformsign"
This composite command let to limit quorum type for signing for case of whitelist.
After that old way to limit platform commands can be deprecated - #6105
## How Has This Been Tested?
Updated a functional tests to use platform signing for Asset Unlocks feature.
## 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
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
ACKs for top commit:
UdjinM6:
utACK 2db69d7b81
PastaPastaPasta:
utACK 2db69d7b81
Tree-SHA512: b0dff9934137c4faa85664058e1e77f85067cc8d931e6d76ee5b9e610164ac8b0609736d5f09475256cb78d65bf92466624d784f0b13d20136df7e75613662cb
60e36b786a fix: adjust incorrect parameter description that says there is a default that doesn't exist (pasta)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
This default doesn't actually exist in code.
## What was done?
Remove default from text
## How Has This Been Tested?
## Breaking Changes
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)_
ACKs for top commit:
UdjinM6:
utACK 60e36b786a
Tree-SHA512: 658eb2cf101d0450619461b7ffe6069de5c04c1fdcca216713f9374cc1e60413ec9b96c3a2931fb69a4c2f8277dd6677100270960a58197da3b92dffb1e9e327
85abbb97b4 chore: add release notes for composite command for whitelist (Konstantin Akimov)
78ad778bb0 feat: test composite commands in functional test for whitelist (Konstantin Akimov)
a102a59787 feat: add support of composite commands in RPC'c whitelists (Konstantin Akimov)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
https://github.com/dashpay/dash-issues/issues/66https://github.com/dashpay/dash-issues/issues/65
## What was done?
Our composite commands such as "quorum list" have been refactored to make them truly compatible with other features, such as whitelist, see https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/6052https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/6051https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/6055 and other related PRs
This PR makes whitelist feature to be compatible with composite commands.
Instead implementing additional users such "dapi" better to provide universal way which do not require new build for every new API that has been used by platform, let's simplify things.
Platform at their side can use config such as this one (created based on shumkov's example):
```
rpc: {
host: '127.0.0.1',
port: 9998,
users: [
{
user: 'dashmate',
password: 'rpcpassword',
whitelist: null,
lowPriority: false,
},
{
username: 'platform-dapi',
password: 'rpcpassword',
whitelist: [],
lowPriority: true,
},
{
username: 'platform-drive-consensus',
password: 'rpcpassword',
whitelist: [getbestchainlock,getblockchaininfo,getrawtransaction,submitchainlock,verifychainlock,protx_listdiff,quorum_listextended,quorum_info,getassetunlockstatuses,sendrawtransaction,mnsync_status]
lowPriority: false,
},
{
username: 'platform-drive-other',
password: 'rpcpassword',
whitelist: [getbestchainlock,getblockchaininfo,getrawtransaction,submitchainlock,verifychainlock,protx_listdiff,quorum_listextended,quorum_info,getassetunlockstatuses,sendrawtransaction,mnsync_status]
],
lowPriority: true,
},
],
allowIps: ['127.0.0.1', '172.16.0.0/12', '192.168.0.0/16'],
},
```
## How Has This Been Tested?
Updated functional tests, see commits
## 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
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
ACKs for top commit:
UdjinM6:
LGTM, utACK 85abbb97b4
PastaPastaPasta:
utACK 85abbb97b4
Tree-SHA512: 88608179c347420269880c352cf9f3b46272f3fc62e8e7158042e53ad69dc460d5210a1f89e1e09081d090250c87fcececade88e2ddec09f73f1175836d7867b
0133c9866d feat: add functional test for submitchainlock far ahead in future (Konstantin Akimov)
6004e06769 feat: return enum in RecoveredSig verifying code, apply for RPC submitchainlock (Konstantin Akimov)
130b6d1e96 refactor: replace static private member method to static method (Konstantin Akimov)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Currently by result of `submitchainlock` impossible to distinct a situation when a signature is invalid and when a core is far behind and just doesn't know about signing quorum yet.
This PR aims to fix this issue, as requested by shumkov for needs of platform:
> mailformed signature and can’t verify signature due to unknown quorum is the same error?
> possible to distingush ?
## What was done?
Return enum in CL verifying code `chainlock_handler.VerifyChainLock`.
The RPC `submitchainlock` now returns error with code=-1 and message `no quorum found. Current tip height: {N} hash: {HASH}`
## How Has This Been Tested?
Functional test `feature_llmq_chainlocks.py` is updated
## Breaking Changes
`submitchainlock` return one more error code - not really a breaking change though, because v21 hasn't released yet.
## 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
ACKs for top commit:
UdjinM6:
utACK 0133c9866d
PastaPastaPasta:
utACK 0133c9866d
Tree-SHA512: 794ba410efa57aaa66c47a67914deed97c1d060326e5d11a722c9233a8447f5e9215aa4a5ca401cb2199b8fc445144b2b2a692fc35494bf3296a74e9e115bda7
a42e9df06f fix: createwallet to require 'load_on_startup' for descriptor wallets (Konstantin Akimov)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
RPC `createwallet` has changed list of arguments: `createwallet "wallet_name" ( disable_private_keys blank "passphrase" avoid_reuse descriptors load_on_startup )` since https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/5965
`load_on_startup` used to be an argument 5 but now it has a number 6. Both arguments 5 and 6 are boolean and it can confuse an user: they may even not notice that something wrong when it meant to be "load on startup" but got "descriptor wallet" which is not expected.
See also previous attempt to resolve issue: https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/6029
## What was done?
To prevent confusion if user is not aware about this breaking changes, the RPC createwallet throws an exception if user trying to create descriptor wallet but has not mentioned load_on_startup. This requirement can be removed when major amount of users updated to v21.
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run unit/functional tests
Tested with CLI:
```
$ createwallet "tmp-create" true true "" false true
RPC createwallet would not accept creating descriptor wallets without specifying 'load_on_startup' flag. It is required explicitly in v21 due to breaking changes in createwallet RPC (code -8)
$ createwallet "tmp-create" true true "" false true true
{
"name": "tmp-create",
"warning": "Empty string given as passphrase, wallet will not be encrypted.\nWallet is an experimental descriptor wallet"
}
```
## Breaking Changes
You can't more pass 'descriptor=NN' without https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/5965 which has not been released yet.
## 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
ACKs for top commit:
UdjinM6:
utACK a42e9df06f
PastaPastaPasta:
utACK a42e9df06f
thephez:
utACK a42e9df06f
Tree-SHA512: bf57fed40d04a32e756e4f8bfabbe39c0cbf87275546c92f4efc19523bc3c5dd3ddc5a884d67285971dc301a6c5808bef979db52c35645ca2db0810046fe1bdc
c944908399 refactor: simplify implementation of function CWallet::IsLocked (Konstantin Akimov)
685cf34cb9 fix: unlock descriptor wallet for mixing-only (Konstantin Akimov)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
As [noticed by kwvg](https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/6090#pullrequestreview-2153639183), mixing doesn't work with descriptor wallets if do "unlock only for mixing". This PR is aiming to fix this issue.
https://github.com/dashpay/dash-issues/issues/59
## What was done?
Removed default argument "bool mixing = false" from WalletStorage interface,
Refactored a logic of CWallet::IsLocked to make it shorter, clearer and unified with bitcoin.
## How Has This Been Tested?
A. Run Dash-Qt with descriptor wallet, run mixing, enter passphrase.
The wallet is partially unlocked (for mixing only) - possible to see yellow lock in status. Mixing happens.
B. Open "send transaction dialog", try to send a transaction: the app asks password to unlock wallet as expected.
Though, I am not sure how exactly to test that **all** rpc are indeed locked when descriptor wallet is unlocked for mixing only.
## 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
ACKs for top commit:
UdjinM6:
LGTM, ~utACK~ light ACK c944908399
kwvg:
ACK c944908399
PastaPastaPasta:
utACK c944908399
Tree-SHA512: 236c895dd75042449282b051e90781ace1c941a3b2c34bb29ddadb6e62ba9c8d57c2a677ed98847630ff7fb6df4e14d2b59f3473d8f299ec104afeeb8103930c
1a691bd100 feat: add logging for RPC HTTP requests: command, user, http-code, time of running (Konstantin Akimov)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Currently there is no way to gather stats for http rpc in dash core. This PR aim to change it.
## What was done?
Implemented some basic stats for each RPC request:
- rpc command
- flag "is external"
- http status
- time to serve query (rpc time, not http time)
## How Has This Been Tested?
See new logs:
```log
[httpworker.0] [httprpc.cpp:100] [~RpcHttpRequest] -- HTTP RPC request handled: user=platform-user command=getbestblockhash is_external=false status=200 elapsed_time_ms=0
[httpworker.2] [httprpc.cpp:100] [~RpcHttpRequest] -- HTTP RPC request handled: user=platform-user command=quorum is_external=false status=500 elapsed_time_ms=0
[httpworker.3] [httprpc.cpp:100] [~RpcHttpRequest] -- HTTP RPC request handled: user=platform-user command= is_external=false status=401 elapsed_time_ms=0
[httpworker.3] [httprpc.cpp:100] [~RpcHttpRequest] -- HTTP RPC request handled: user=platform-user command=getbestblockhash is_external=true status=200 elapsed_time_ms=28
[httpworker.0] [httprpc.cpp:100] [~RpcHttpRequest] -- HTTP RPC request handled: user=operator command=getbestblockhash is_external=false status=200 elapsed_time_ms=0
```
## Breaking Changes
N/A
It doesn't change behavior of rpc server and http server.
## 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
ACKs for top commit:
PastaPastaPasta:
utACK 1a691bd100
Tree-SHA512: b62fceedb9a901e87c23c4aa6e6dfa7226d44da84a081ea245b40e7ff887103302147cebe0f7ff90bf9c8d4fa9ecafbaa6f25f39d2008f62c4f2beeef2877b57
bebea4b9b6 fix: auto backup issue with descriptor wallets for CJ (Konstantin Akimov)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Qt CoinJoin session has problems (https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/5579#pullrequestreview-1912946808):
- Autobackup problems
- False keypool depletion reporting
https://github.com/dashpay/dash-issues/issues/59
## What was done?
Disables check for "remaining keys left" and "auto-backups" for non-legacy wallet.
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run unit/functional test
Try to run CJ mixing for descriptor wallet.
## 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
ACKs for top commit:
PastaPastaPasta:
utACK bebea4b9b6
Tree-SHA512: 610551001d054c447ddca9451ac6d94f3d063ecf3ccfab437d99324efc5f99ff86e59d80a36f4ff4983d3c8107aa19292c021cb3210fcf51e79919387169c414
684503db6b feat: add a marker experimental for descriptor wallets (Konstantin Akimov)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Descriptor wallets pass most of functional tests now, but they are not really tested in-the-real-environment by multiple users.
## What was done?
Add a marker "experimental" for 'createwallet' rpc, for create wallet UI form.
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run and check
## 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
ACKs for top commit:
PastaPastaPasta:
utACK 684503db6b
Tree-SHA512: e843e5b8080c7cd4273ea532038f3ec65e0260419b2c2a3db07ee1fadd856a7ce47f367705b4ddb19c5fc91cee5a529a54d580dbf53428c3e5e8b433c96ec0c9
375838378a feat: bump protocol version to distinguish v21 from v20.1 (pasta)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
See commit
## What was done?
## How Has This Been Tested?
## Breaking Changes
None really; will require MNs to upgrade in order to not be banned
## 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)_
Top commit has no ACKs.
Tree-SHA512: c4a61e3c9a1ccda9b00a8982eaaff6ea7672bf59d9538342b0e45a16977554224b44b34db48d3355d28e2b26a01ab3133a5e0c38bb00a3d7a1410cfd1fcfc4ae
6c5246803d test: add tests for both current and future behaviour (UdjinM6)
4e86bda4dc feat: stricter bestCLHeightDiff checks (UdjinM6)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Current `bestCLHeightDiff` checks are too relaxed
## What was done?
Make`bestCLHeightDiff` checks stricter
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run a node on mainnet/testet, run tests
## Breaking Changes
Old nodes aren't aware of this new logic so it's activated via `mn_rr` hardfork
## 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)_
ACKs for top commit:
PastaPastaPasta:
utACK 6c5246803d
Tree-SHA512: 2028d0ceb00a2270c92831ef38488d009d0bac47be4fc6a23ac93efdcf74847f1b9e99a529863fb4e14c65f120adda4e12c5b9e084d0f667d5f0fbaf80e3701d
8fb863008e refactor: inline sorting and make available through argument (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
3e0fcf471f refactor: move accessing CBlockTreeDB global out of Get*Index (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
ee9d11214e refactor: move pair value swapping out of CTxMemPool::getAddressIndex() (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
808842b1a3 refactor: define all key/value pairings as *Entry and use them instead (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
488f0474a8 rpc: extend error-on-failure to GetSpentIndex (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
9a6503d9e8 refactor: make CBlockTreeDB::Read*Index arguments const (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
625982e8d2 refactor: make CTxMemPool::get*Index functions and arguments const (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
5ad49ad668 refactor: move Get{Address*, Timestamp, Spent}Index out of validation (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
Pull request description:
## Additional Information
This pull request is motivated by [bitcoin#22371](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22371), which gets rid of the `pblocktree` global.
The sole usage of `pblocktree` introduced by Dash is for managing our {address, spent, timestamp} indexes with most of invocations within `BlockManager` or `CChainState`, granting them internal access to `pblocktree` (now `m_block_tree_db`). The sole exception being `Get*Index`, that relies on accessing the global and has no direct internal access.
This pull request aims to refactor code associated with `Get*Index` with the eventual aim of moving gaining access to the global out of the function. `Get*Index` is called exclusively called through RPC, which makes giving it access to `ChainstateManager` quite easy, which makes switching from the global to accessing it through `ChainstateManager` when backporting [bitcoin#22371](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22371) a drop-in replacement.
Alongside that, the surrounding code has been given some TLC:
* Moving code out of `validation.cpp` and into `rpc/index_util.cpp`. The code is exclusively used in RPC logic and doesn't aid in validation.
* Add lock annotations for accessing `pblocktree` (while already protected by `::cs_main`, said protection is currently not enforced but will be once moved into `BlockManager` in the backport)
* `const`-ing input arguments and using pass-by-value for input arguments that can be written inline (i.e. types like `CSpentIndexKey` are still pass-by-ref).
* While `const`ing `CTxMemPool` functions were possible (courtesy of the presence of `const_iterator`s), the same is currently not possible with `CBlockTreeDB` functions as the iterator is non-`const`.
* Extend error messages to `GetSpentIndex` to bring it line with other `Get*Index`es.
* Define key-value pairings as a `*Entry` typedef and replacing all explicit type constructions with it.
* Make `CTxMemPool::getAddressIndex` indifferent to how `CMempoolAddressDeltaKey` is constructed.
* Current behaviour is to accept a `std::pair<uint160, AddressType>` and construct the `CMempoolAddressDeltaKey` internally, this was presumably done to account for the return type of `getAddressesFromParams` in the sole call for the `CTxMemPool::getAddressIndex`.
* This has been changed, moving the construction into the RPC call.
* Moving {height, timestamp} sorting out of RPC and into the applicable `Get*Index` functions.
## Breaking Changes
None expected.
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas (note: N/A)
- [x] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests (note: N/A)
- [x] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation (note: N/A)
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository code-owners and collaborators only)_
ACKs for top commit:
PastaPastaPasta:
utACK 8fb863008e
UdjinM6:
utACK 8fb863008e
Tree-SHA512: 425a383e8284bbd74a5e9bcda4a9d7988221197055f43faa591e6f0d579625cee28f6a6046dab951e7afa0c3e33af1778fb4bb5f0a2e1e5792fe0d9396897a14
489b44c647 Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#27610: Improve performance of p2p inv to send queues (fanquake)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Couple of performance improvements when draining the inventory-to-send queue:
* drop txs that have already been evicted from the mempool (or included in a block) immediately, rather than at the end of processing
* marginally increase outgoing trickle rate during spikes in tx volume
## What was done?
Backport bitcoin#27610
## 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
ACKs for top commit:
UdjinM6:
utACK 489b44c647
PastaPastaPasta:
utACK 489b44c647
Tree-SHA512: 4afca4705b0f9680d147f0bef006fb82a6fd9692fef898dd50aede8570d02b6fece367ec30ab2caa973279df28d90348006a1f78b550dd8b0f7e72dbcb1bba5b
5b3406094f2679dfb3763de4414257268565b943 net_processing: Boost inv trickle rate (Anthony Towns)
228e9201efb5574b1b96bb924de1d2e8dd1317f3 txmempool: have CompareDepthAndScore sort missing txs first (Anthony Towns)
Pull request description:
Couple of performance improvements when draining the inventory-to-send queue:
* drop txs that have already been evicted from the mempool (or included in a block) immediately, rather than at the end of processing
* marginally increase outgoing trickle rate during spikes in tx volume
ACKs for top commit:
willcl-ark:
ACK 5b34060
instagibbs:
ACK 5b3406094f
darosior:
utACK 5b3406094f2679dfb3763de4414257268565b943
glozow:
code review ACK 5b3406094f2679dfb3763de4414257268565b943
dergoegge:
utACK 5b3406094f2679dfb3763de4414257268565b943
Tree-SHA512: 155cd3b5d150ba3417c1cd126f2be734497742e85358a19c9d365f4f97c555ff9e846405bbeada13c3575b3713c3a7eb2f780879a828cbbf032ad9a6e5416b30
b23d94b14f partial bitcoin#23706: getblockfrompeer followups (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
7e5cc5e375 merge bitcoin#23702: Add missing optional to getblockfrompeer (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
c294457b52 merge bitcoin#20295: getblockfrompeer (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
63ac87f011 merge bitcoin#22722: update estimatesmartfee rpc to return max of estimateSmartFee, mempoolMinFee and minRelayTxFee. (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
07e4c2cdd0 merge bitcoin#21934: Include versionbits signalling details during LOCKED_IN (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
960e7687d4 merge bitcoin#19651: importdescriptors update existing (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
1f31823fed merge bitcoin#21910: remove redundant fOnlySafe argument (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
69c5aa8947 merge bitcoin#21359: include_unsafe option for fundrawtransaction (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
169dce7e50 merge bitcoin#20286: deprecate addresses and reqSigs from rpc outputs (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
7cddf70c58 merge bitcoin#20867: Support up to 20 keys for multisig under Segwit context (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
7c59923845 merge bitcoin#18344: Fix nit in getblockchaininfo (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
ec0803a0f5 refactor: align `TxToUniv` argument list with upstream (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
Pull request description:
## Additional Information
* Closes https://github.com/dashpay/dash/issues/6000
* `TxToUniv`'s argument list needed to be rearranged to match upstream as closely as possible (i.e. placing Dash-specific arguments at the end of the list to allow for code to be backported unmodified, relying on default arguments instead of having to modify each invocation to insert the default argument in between).
This was due to a new `TxToUniv` variant being introduced in [bitcoin#20286](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20286)
* The maximum number of public keys in a multisig remains the same. The upper limit for bare multisigs is and always has been `MAX_PUBKEYS_PER_MULTISIG` ([source](19512988c6/src/script/interpreter.cpp (L1143-L1144))), which has always been 20 ([source](19512988c6/src/script/script.h (L28-L29))). The limit of up to 16 comes from P2SH overhead ([source](19512988c6/src/script/descriptor.cpp (L877-L880))) and that hasn't changed.
In effect, what [bitcoin#20867](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20867) does to Dash Core is change the error from "too many public keys" (as we'll be testing against the bare multisig limit) to "excessive redeemScript size" ([source](19512988c6/src/rpc/util.cpp (L223-L225))) (which is the _true_ limitation).
* Backporting [bitcoin#21934](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21934) required a minor change in the condition needed to emit `activation_height` as `has_signal` in the preceding block will evaluate true for both `STARTED` and `LOCKED_IN` while earlier it would only for `STARTED`.
* In [bitcoin#22722](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22722), a `self.stop_node` had to be added to account for the absurd fee warning that a new test condition introduces.
* [bitcoin#23706](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/23706) is partial due to commits in it that rely on RPC type enforcement, which is currently not implemented in Dash Core.
* `feature_dip3_deterministicmns.py` depends on the reporting of `addresses` to validate multisigs containing expected payees. There is no replacement RPC call to report the pubkeys that compose a multisig address. In the interm, the `-deprecatedrpc=addresses` flag has been enabled to allow the test to run otherwise unmodified.
## Breaking Changes
* The following RPCs: `gettxout`, `getrawtransaction`, `decoderawtransaction`, `decodescript`, `gettransaction`, and REST endpoints: `/rest/tx`, `/rest/getutxos`, `/rest/block` deprecated the following fields (which are no longer returned in the responses by default): `addresses`, `reqSigs`.
The `-deprecatedrpc=addresses` flag must be passed for these fields to be included in the RPC response. Note that these fields are attributes of the `scriptPubKey` object returned in the RPC response. However, in the response of `decodescript` these fields are top-level attributes, and included again as attributes of the `scriptPubKey` object.
* When creating a hex-encoded Dash transaction using the `dash-tx` utility with the `-json` option set, the following fields: `addresses`, `reqSigs` are no longer returned in the tx output of the response.
* The error message for attempts at making multisigs with >16 pubkeys will change to an "excessive redeemScript size" instead of the previous "too many public keys".
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas **(note: N/A)**
- [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)_
ACKs for top commit:
UdjinM6:
utACK b23d94b14f
PastaPastaPasta:
utACK b23d94b14f
Tree-SHA512: 659d9ba3a0a9f8594b307a7056ab172309d5a0d9efec605bc4b345f7e0fb1032ad303af9e8f51dbd6549e82d0b738ad41eae8a5b3aebf59081f39df0d4b5ec7c
91aae7b2fe refactor: use properly RPCHelpMan for governance RPC getsuperblockbudget (Konstantin Akimov)
e92e5ef526 refactor: use properly RPCHelpMan for governance RPC voteraw (Konstantin Akimov)
87b3011e55 refactor: duplicated code between governance RPC list and diff (Konstantin Akimov)
faa61795fb docs: move comments from the old code to the new implementation of governance RPC (Konstantin Akimov)
39cd5e41b1 fix: format code for rpc governance (Konstantin Akimov)
006242114f refactor: use new style of composite commands for RPC gobject NNN (Konstantin Akimov)
42e0b37cb2 refactor: use properly RPCHelpMan for governance RPC getgovernanceinfo (Konstantin Akimov)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
See #6051
## What was done?
Commands starting from 'governance ...' uses new a new way to make composite commands.
This PR includes also a refactoring to remove common code between `gobject list` and `gobject diff`
This PR includes also a refactoring to properly use RPCHelpMan for remaining governance's RPC.
## 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
- [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
ACKs for top commit:
UdjinM6:
utACK 91aae7b2fe
PastaPastaPasta:
utACK 91aae7b2fe
Tree-SHA512: 46c00df924a7d2c5af799c605bfc479034019eed346f9d487827b0688993aa712ba3dc528d9bdd09b64f0e07b6940078337ca1baf0a1355f87eb792406c676ca
7b44af26ca refactor: move common code inside protx_register_common_wrapper (Konstantin Akimov)
89d5e26473 refactor: replace bunch of bool flags to the enum (Konstantin Akimov)
1351bc9aad refactor: move common code to the wrapper (Konstantin Akimov)
8d4c28a983 refactor: remove unused protx code from old implementation (Konstantin Akimov)
2a837f8243 refactor: use new composite for RPC 'protx NNN' (Konstantin Akimov)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
See #6051
## What was done?
Commands starting from 'protx ...' uses new a new way to make composite commands.
## 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
- [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
ACKs for top commit:
PastaPastaPasta:
utACK 7b44af26ca
Tree-SHA512: a5124121de93ba566bfa6c7c58a5217446301dd027839d137e056df00388282af6be0feb0b81ea0217310e12231a68e3b405fa82b66df93a3fb159d341d7a199
