9913419cc9db5f8ce7afa0c3774468c330136064 test: remove type: comments in favour of actual annotations (fanquake)
Pull request description:
Now that we require Python 3.6+, we should be using variable type
annotations directly rather than `# type:` comments.
Also takes care of the discarded value issue in p2p_message_capture.py.
See: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19509/files#r571674446.
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
review ACK 9913419cc9db5f8ce7afa0c3774468c330136064
jnewbery:
Code review ACK 9913419cc9db5f8ce7afa0c3774468c330136064
Tree-SHA512: 63aba5eef6c1320578f66cf8a6d85ac9dbab9d30b0d21e6e966be8216e63606de12321320c2958c67933bf68d10f2e76e9c43928e5989614cea34dde4187aad8
bff7c66e67aa2f18ef70139338643656a54444fe Add documentation to contrib folder (Troy Giorshev)
381f77be858d7417209b6de0b7cd23cb7eb99261 Add Message Capture Test (Troy Giorshev)
e4f378a505922c0f544b4cfbfdb169e884e02be9 Add capture parser (Troy Giorshev)
4d1a582549bc982d55e24585b0ba06f92f21e9da Call CaptureMessage at appropriate locations (Troy Giorshev)
f2a77ff97bec09dd5fcc043d8659d8ec5dfb87c2 Add CaptureMessage (Troy Giorshev)
dbf779d5deb04f55c6e8493ce4e12ed4628638f3 Clean PushMessage and ProcessMessages (Troy Giorshev)
Pull request description:
This PR introduces per-peer message capture into Bitcoin Core. 📓
## Purpose
The purpose and scope of this feature is intentionally limited. It answers a question anyone new to Bitcoin's P2P protocol has had: "Can I see what messages my node is sending and receiving?".
## Functionality
When a new debug-only command line argument `capturemessages` is set, any message that the node receives or sends is captured. The capture occurs in the MessageHandler thread. When receiving a message, it is captured as soon as the MessageHandler thread takes the message off of the vProcessMsg queue. When sending, the message is captured just before the message is pushed onto the vSendMsg queue.
The message capture is as minimal as possible to reduce the performance impact on the node. Messages are captured to a new `message_capture` folder in the datadir. Each node has their own subfolder named with their IP address and port. Inside, received and sent messages are captured into two binary files, msgs_recv.dat and msgs_sent.dat, like so:
```
message_capture/203.0.113.7:56072/msgs_recv.dat
message_capture/203.0.113.7:56072/msgs_sent.dat
```
Because the messages are raw binary dumps, included in this PR is a Python parsing tool to convert the binary files into human-readable JSON. This script has been placed on its own and out of the way in the new `contrib/message-capture` folder. Its usage is simple and easily discovered by the autogenerated `-h` option.
## Future Maintenance
I sympathize greatly with anyone who says "the best code is no code".
The future maintenance of this feature will be minimal. The logic to deserialize the payload of the p2p messages exists in our testing framework. As long as our testing framework works, so will this tool.
Additionally, I hope that the simplicity of this tool will mean that it gets used frequently, so that problems will be discovered and solved when they are small.
## FAQ
"Why not just use Wireshark"
Yes, Wireshark has the ability to filter and decode Bitcoin messages. However, the purpose of the message capture added in this PR is to assist with debugging, primarily for new developers looking to improve their knowledge of the Bitcoin Protocol. This drives the design in a different direction than Wireshark, in two different ways. First, this tool must be convenient and simple to use. Using an external tool, like Wireshark, requires setup and interpretation of the results. To a new user who doesn't necessarily know what to expect, this is unnecessary difficulty. This tool, on the other hand, "just works". Turn on the command line flag, run your node, run the script, read the JSON. Second, because this tool is being used for debugging, we want it to be as close to the true behavior of the node as possible. A lot can happen in the SocketHandler thread that would be missed by Wireshark.
Additionally, if we are to use Wireshark, we are at the mercy of whoever it maintaining the protocol in Wireshark, both as to it being accurate and recent. As can be seen by the **many** previous attempts to include Bitcoin in Wireshark (google "bitcoin dissector") this is easier said than done.
Lastly, I truly believe that this tool will be used significantly more by being included in the codebase. It's just that much more discoverable.
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
re-ACK bff7c66e67aa2f18ef70139338643656a54444fe only some minor changes: 👚
jnewbery:
utACK bff7c66e67aa2f18ef70139338643656a54444fe
theStack:
re-ACK bff7c66e67aa2f18ef70139338643656a54444fe
Tree-SHA512: e59e3160422269221f70f98720b47842775781c247c064071d546c24fa7a35a0e5534e8baa4b4591a750d7eb16de6b4ecf54cbee6d193b261f4f104e28c15f47
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Should fix failures like
https://gitlab.com/dashpay/dash/-/jobs/6107697452
## What was done?
See inline comments
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run lots of `feature_governance.py` in parallel multiple times
## 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)_
---------
Co-authored-by: Konstantin Akimov <knstqq@gmail.com>
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
This pull request is a follow-up to
[some](https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/5834#discussion_r1470105685)
[feedback](https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/5834#discussion_r1467009815)
received on [dash#5834](https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/5834) as
the patterns highlighted were present in different parts of the codebase
and hence not corrected within the PR itself but addressed separately.
This is that separate PR 🙂 (with some additional cleanup of my own)
## What was done?
* This pull request will remain a draft until
[dash#5834](https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/5834) as it will
introduce more changes that will need to be corrected in this PR.
* Code introduced that is unique to Dash Core (CoinJoin, InstantSend,
etc.) has been excluded from un-Dashification as the purpose of it is to
reduce backport conflicts, which don't apply in those cases.
* `CWallet::CreateTransaction` and the `CreateTransactionTest` fixture
have been excluded as the former originates from
[dash#3668](https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/3668) and the latter
from [dash#3667](https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/3667) and are
distinct enough to be unique to Dash Core.
* There are certain Dashifications and SegWit-removals that prove
frustrating as it would break compatibility with programs that rely on
the naming of certain keys
* `getrawmempool`, `getmempoolancestors`, `getmempooldescendants` and
`getmempoolentry` return `vsize` which is currently an alias of `size`.
I have been advised to retain `vsize` in lieu of potential future
developments. (this was originally remedied in
219a1d08973e7ccda6e778218b9a8218b4aae034 but has since been dropped)
* `getaddressmempool`, `getaddressutxos` and `getaddressdeltas` all
return a value with the key `satoshis`. This is frustrating to rename to
`duffs` for compatibility reasons.
* `decodepsbt` returns (if applicable) `non_witness_utxo` which is
frustrating to rename simply to `utxo` for the same reason.
* `analyzepsbt` returns (if applicable) `estimated_vsize` which
frustrating to rename to `estimated_size` for the same reason.
## How Has This Been Tested?
## Breaking Changes
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
HD wallets are old-existsing feature, appeared in Dash years ago, but
enabling HD wallets is not trivial task that requires multiple steps and
command line/rpc calls.
Let's have them enabled by default.
## What was done?
- HD wallets are enabled by default. Currently behavior `dashd`,
`dash-qt` are similar to run with option `-usehd=1`
- the rpc `upgradewallet` do not let to upgrade from non-HD wallet to HD
wallet to don't encourage user use non-crypted wallets (postponed till
v21)
- the initialization of ScriptPubKey is updated to be sure that encypted
HD seed is never written on disk (if passphrase is provided)
- enabled and dashified a script `wallet_upgradewallet.py` which test
compatibility between different versions of wallet
## What is not done?
- wallet tool still does not support passhprase, HD seed can appear on
disk
- there's no dialog that show user a mnemonic phrase and encourage him
to make a paper backup
Before removing a command line 'usehd' (backport bitcoin#11250) need to
make at least one major release for fail-over option (if someone wish to
use non-HD wallets only).
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run unit and functional tests.
Enabled new functional test `wallet_upgradewallet.py` that has been
backported long time ago but waited this PR to be enabled.
## Breaking Changes
HD wallets are created by default.
## 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>
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Fix failures like https://gitlab.com/dashpay/dash/-/jobs/6120923632
## What was done?
Handle disconnects and reconnection of the revoked MN in the right
place.
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run multiple `feature_dip3_v19.py` in parallel a few times
## 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)_
56010f92564a94b0ca6c008c0e6f74a19fad4a2a test: hoist p2p values to test framework constants (Jon Atack)
75447f0893f9ad9bf83d182b301d139430d8de1c test: improve msg sends and p2p disconnections in p2p_invalid_messages (Jon Atack)
57960192a5362ff1a7b996995332535f4c2a25c3 test: refactor test_large_inv() into 3 tests with common method (Jon Atack)
e2b21d8a597c536a8617408d43958bfe9f98a442 test: add p2p_invalid_messages logging (Jon Atack)
9fa494dc0969c61d5ef33708a08923cca19ce091 net: update misbehavior logging for oversized messages (Jon Atack)
Pull request description:
...seen while reviewing #19264, #19252, #19304 and #19107:
in `net_processing.cpp`
- make the debug logging for oversized message size misbehavior the same for `addr`, `getdata`, `headers` and `inv` messages
in `p2p_invalid_messages`
- add missing logging
- improve assertions/message sends, move cleanup disconnections outside the assertion scopes
- split a slowish 3-part test into 3 order-independent tests
- add a few p2p constants to the test framework
ACKs for top commit:
troygiorshev:
reACK 56010f92564a94b0ca6c008c0e6f74a19fad4a2a
MarcoFalke:
ACK 56010f9256 🎛
Tree-SHA512: db67b70278f8d4c318907e105af54b54eb3afd15500f9aa0c98034f6fd4bd1cf9ad1663037bd9b237ff4890f3059b37291a6498d8d6ae2cc38efb9f045f73310
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
kudos to kwvg to report issue: he pointed out that functional tests
randomly fail lately.
Bisect pointed out an exact commit: bitcoin#20027 - mockable time
everywhere
## What was done?
Added call `mn.node.mockscheduler` as it is done in 20027 for other
functional tests
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run 20 times. Without this patch 20% failures; with this patch - zero
failures.
```
test/functional/test_runner.py -j20 feature_llmq_simplepose.py feature_llmq_simplepose.py feature_llmq_simplepose.py feature_llmq_simplepose.py feature_llmq_simplepose.py feature_llmq_simplepose.py feature_llmq_simplepose.py feature_llmq_simplepose.py feature_llmq_simplepose.py feature_llmq_simplepose.py feature_llmq_simplepose.py feature_llmq_simplepose.py feature_llmq_simplepose.py feature_llmq_simplepose.py feature_llmq_simplepose.py feature_llmq_simplepose.py feature_llmq_simplepose.py feature_llmq_simplepose.py feature_llmq_simplepose.py feature_llmq_simplepose.py
```
## 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>
fa2ecadd0d3283a89d27772dc0275e76277ae17e test: Fix intermittent rpc_net issue (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
The test fails because getpeerinfo and getnettotals are not synchronised, so a `wait_until` is needed for each RPC (separately).
Fixes https://cirrus-ci.com/task/4663366629195776?command=ci#L5034
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
utACK fa2ecadd0d3283a89d27772dc0275e76277ae17e
Tree-SHA512: 5ea7128801aab8dbe3d9e6737545ff4ee770e4a9c5a2096ba2339a688424f1879ccba6bf8bcb219983acf86eb28af06fc629586613e7fe28aeffadd2c98633e8
778cd0d88d8d6dd22d7f0fb740f3ca3dbb2280a1 [tests] Remove getnettotals/getpeerinfo consistency test (John Newbery)
Pull request description:
We make no guarantees about consistency between RPC calls.
Alternative to 18784
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
review ACK 778cd0d88d8d6dd22d7f0fb740f3ca3dbb2280a1
troygiorshev:
ACK 778cd0d88d8d6dd22d7f0fb740f3ca3dbb2280a1 after reading discussion on 18784, code review, ran test
Tree-SHA512: 438333a111cc93a09680cec47f13fbe03557d4803e5d826aec6f72e5afea62a088622645f0756e8fd2c9182c2a69ccca867d4d6fed2250364bee2b6c834adb1a
fa299ac27364bd7a59e6fb7e0c4ce476f2deec40 test: Speed up wallet_resendwallettransactions test with mockscheduler RPC (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Also fixes#20143
ACKs for top commit:
guggero:
ACK fa299ac2
Tree-SHA512: 024ced4aa5f5c266e24fd0583d47b45b19c2a6ae25a06fabeacaa0ac996eec0c45f11cc34b2df17d01759b78ed31a991aa86978aafcc76cb0017382f601bf85a
c82336c493b112160d781974d4066fcb956b85f6 Remove references to CreateWalletFromFile (fanquake)
Pull request description:
`CWallet::CreateWalletFromFile()` was removed in 8b5e7297c02f3100a9cb27bfe206e3fc617ec173 but these references remain.
ACKs for top commit:
hebasto:
ACK c82336c493b112160d781974d4066fcb956b85f6
Tree-SHA512: 3dd50fe0cd5a60bbc96d265107d4739f3e08f943435f3772038963ac4be9e4a87a863412ac0d571226ea66d71550b17b52f01b9d46a6282d49feae1508fd682e
8f0b64fb513e8c6cdd1f115856100a4ef5afe23e Better error messages for invalid addresses (Bezdrighin)
Pull request description:
This PR addresses #20809.
We add more detailed error messages in case an invalid address is provided inside the 'validateaddress' and 'getaddressinfo' RPC calls. This also covers the case when a user provides an address from a wrong network.
We also add a functional test to test the new error messages.
ACKs for top commit:
kristapsk:
ACK 8f0b64fb513e8c6cdd1f115856100a4ef5afe23e
meshcollider:
Code review ACK 8f0b64fb513e8c6cdd1f115856100a4ef5afe23e
Tree-SHA512: ca0f806ab573e96b79e98d9f8c810b81fa99c638d9b5e4d99dc18c8bd2568e6a802ec305fdfb2983574a97a19a46fd53b77645f8078fb77e9deb24ad2a22cf93
… best height
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Platform wants to know the height of the bestchainlock when they call
submitchainlock; sooo we change the API of submitchainlock to also
return the height
## What was done?
Adjust API and tests
## How Has This Been Tested?
New tests added for this behavior
## Breaking Changes
Not really any; I **guess** that return value could be considered
breaking change; but going from nothing -> something feels unlikely to
break anything although it in theory could.
## 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: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Konstantin Akimov <knstqq@gmail.com>
31cf68a3ad1f0a5537c8419e2912b55fbfb88fa0 [util] add RunCommandParseJSON (Sjors Provoost)
c17f54ee535faaedf9033717403e1f775b5f1530 [ci] use boost::process (Sjors Provoost)
32128ba682033560d6eb2e4848a9f77a842016d2 [doc] include Doxygen comments for HAVE_BOOST_PROCESS (Sjors Provoost)
3c84d85f7d218fa27e9343c5cd1a55e519218980 [build] msvc: add boost::process (Sjors Provoost)
c47e4bbf0b44f2de1278f9538124ec98ee0815bb [build] make boost-process opt-in (Sjors Provoost)
929cda5470f98d1ef85c05b1cad4e2fb9227e3b0 configure: add ax_boost_process (Sjors Provoost)
8314c23d7b39fc36dde8b40b03b6efbe96f85698 [depends] boost: patch unused variable in boost_process (Sjors Provoost)
Pull request description:
Prerequisite for external signer support in #16546. Big picture overview in [this gist](https://gist.github.com/Sjors/29d06728c685e6182828c1ce9b74483d).
This adds a new dependency [boost process](https://github.com/boostorg/process/tree/boost-1.64.0). This is part of Boost since 1.64 which is part of `depends`. Because the minimum Boost version is 1.47, this functionality is skipped for older versions of Boost.
Use `./configure --with-boost-process` to opt in, which checks for the presence of Boost::Process.
We add `UniValue runCommandParseJSON(const std::string& strCommand)` to `system.{h,cpp}` which calls an arbitrary command and processes the JSON returned by it. This is currently only called by the test suite.
~For testing purposes this adds a new regtest-only RPC method `runcommand`, as well as `test/mocks/command.py` used by functional tests.~ (this is no longer the case)
TODO:
- [ ] review boost process in #15440
ACKs for top commit:
achow101:
ACK 31cf68a3ad1f0a5537c8419e2912b55fbfb88fa0
hebasto:
re-ACK 31cf68a3ad1f0a5537c8419e2912b55fbfb88fa0, only rebased (verified with `git range-diff`) and removed an unintentional tab character since the [previous](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15382#pullrequestreview-458371035) review.
meshcollider:
Very light utACK 31cf68a3ad1f0a5537c8419e2912b55fbfb88fa0, although I am not very confident with build stuff.
promag:
Code review ACK 31cf68a3ad1f0a5537c8419e2912b55fbfb88fa0, don't mind the nit.
ryanofsky:
Code review ACK 31cf68a3ad1f0a5537c8419e2912b55fbfb88fa0. I left some comments below that could be ignored or followed up later. The current change is clean and comprehensive.
Tree-SHA512: c506e747014b263606e1f538ed4624a8ad7bcf4e025cb700c12cc5739964e254dc04a2bbb848996b170e2ccec3fbfa4fe9e2b3976b191222cfb82fc3e6ab182d
a76dafa51dd16e3f1ed665f6f7b6b2b6a708b9b4 ci: Add tsan suppression for race in BerkeleyBatch (Hennadii Stepanov)
Pull request description:
A temporary workaround for #19448.
Top commit has no ACKs.
Tree-SHA512: 47b83ff373e710bc9ba8c3661f9850a14417436028c42eb7765d21337ef25faaac4cf8cf93be844ae592d40264934d7d2f6b7ba0ab6c7209fc0da8fc13067769
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Dashmate wanted a way to know if it is safe to restart the masternode.
This new RPC indicates the number of active DKG sessions, and the number
of blocks until next potential DKG.
## What was done?
Examples of responses:
`{'active_dkgs': 0, 'next_dkg': 22}`
## How Has This Been Tested?
`feature_llmq_rotation.py` was updated
## Breaking Changes
no
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [x] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [x] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [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
RPC `getassetunlockstatuses` is now accepting an extra optional
parameter `height`.
When a valid `height` is passed, then the RPC returns the status of
AssetUnlock indexes up to this specific block. (Requested by Platform
team)
## What was done?
Note that in order to avoid cases that can lead to deterministic result,
when `height` is passed, then the only `chainlocked` and `unknown`
outcomes are possible.
## How Has This Been Tested?
`feature_asset_locks.py` was updated.
## 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)_
---------
Co-authored-by: Konstantin Akimov <knstqq@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
82dee87933ed0714976ff4eb9657acfc13c6de84 test: test decodepsbt fee calculation (count input value only once per UTXO) (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
Fixes#19523, adding a simple test to `rpc_psbt.py` that checks that the decodepsbt fee matches the one given by the wallet (`walletcreatefundedpsbt`). This is in particular important for PSBTs with segwit inputs that have both a witness- and a non-witness-UTXO type set.
Example test run after reverting commit 75122780e2c46505d977e24c5612dfa9442ab754 ("Increment input value sum only once per UTXO in decodepsbt"):
```
$ test/functional/rpc_psbt.py
2020-07-26T11:31:44.862000Z TestFramework (INFO): Initializing test directory /tmp/bitcoin_func_test__sutcd4y
20.00007580
2020-07-26T11:31:47.073000Z TestFramework (ERROR): Assertion failed
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/home/honeybadger/buidl/bitcoin_thestack/test/functional/test_framework/test_framework.py", line 118, in main
self.run_test()
File "test/functional/rpc_psbt.py", line 166, in run_test
assert_equal(decoded['fee'], created_psbt['fee'])
File "/home/honeybadger/buidl/bitcoin_thestack/test/functional/test_framework/util.py", line 49, in assert_equal
raise AssertionError("not(%s)" % " == ".join(str(arg) for arg in (thing1, thing2) + args))
AssertionError: not(20.00007580 == 0.00007580)
2020-07-26T11:31:47.125000Z TestFramework (INFO): Stopping nodes
......
```
ACKs for top commit:
achow101:
ACK 82dee87933ed0714976ff4eb9657acfc13c6de84
Tree-SHA512: 296b8a701f851d482ef6200c6cbf0cf0257a79a828ac6dbc39b05d8c2d839c6fdb9d3f5a084015295cfa3eac7c11faa2f2d52e619c11627b04c75150eead8330
BACKPORT NOTICE
fixup psbt. all missing changes belongs to src/wallet/scriptpubkeyman.h/cpp ----- they are related to descriptor wallet!
-------------------
931dd4760855e036c176a23ec2de367c460e4243 Make lint-spelling.py happy (Glenn Willen)
11a0ffb29d1b4dcc55c8826873f340ab4196af21 [gui] Load PSBT from clipboard (Glenn Willen)
a6cb0b0c29d327d01aebb98b0504f317eb19c3dc [gui] PSBT Operations Dialog (sign & broadcast) (Glenn Willen)
5dd0c03ffa3aeaa69d8a3a716f902f450d5eaaec FillPSBT: report number of inputs signed (or would sign) (Glenn Willen)
9e7b23b73387600d175aff8bd5e6624dd51f86e7 Improve TransactionErrorString messages. (Glenn Willen)
Pull request description:
Add a "PSBT Operations" dialog, reached from the "Load PSBT..." menu item, giving options to sign or broadcast the loaded PSBT as appropriate, as well as copying the result to the clipboard or saving it to a file.
This is based on Sjors' #17509, and depends on that PR going in first. (It effectively replaces the small "load PSBT" dialog from that PR with a more feature-rich one.)
Some notes:
* The way I display status information is maybe unusual (a status bar, rather than messageboxes.) I think it's helpful to have the information in it be persistent rather than transitory. But if people dislike it, I would probably move the "current state of the transaction" info to the top line of the main label, and the "what action just happened, and did it succeed" info into a messagebox.
* I don't really know much about the translation/localization stuff. I put tr() in all the places it seemed like it ought to go. I did not attempt to translate the result of TransactionErrorString (which is shared by GUI and non-GUI code); I don't know if that's correct, but it matches the "error messages in logs should be googleable in English" heuristic. I don't know whether there are things I should be doing to reduce translator effort (like minimizing the total number of distinct message strings I use, or something.)
* I don't really know how (if?) automated testing is applied to GUI code. I can make a list of PSBTs exercising all the codepaths for manual testing, if that's the right approach. Input appreciated.
ACKs for top commit:
instagibbs:
tested ACK 931dd47608
Sjors:
re-tACK 931dd4760855e036c176a23ec2de367c460e4243
jb55:
ACK 931dd4760855e036c176a23ec2de367c460e4243
achow101:
ACK 931dd4760855e036c176a23ec2de367c460e4243
Tree-SHA512: ade52471a2242f839a8bd6a1fd231443cc4b43bb9c1de3fb5ace7c5eb59eca99b1f2e9f17dfdb4b08d84d91f5fd65677db1433dd03eef51c7774963ef4e2e74f
5da96210fc2fda9fbd79531f42f91262fd7a9257 doc: release note for getpeerinfo last_block/last_transaction (Jon Atack)
cfef5a2c98b9563392a4a258fedb8bdc869c9749 test: rpc_net.py logging and test naming improvements (Jon Atack)
21c57bacda766a4f56ee75a2872f5d0f94e3901e test: getpeerinfo last_block and last_transaction tests (Jon Atack)
8a560a7d57cbd9f473d6a3782893a0e2243c55bd rpc: expose nLastBlockTime/TXTime as getpeerinfo last_block/transaction (Jon Atack)
02fbe3ae0bd91cbab2828cb7aa46f6493c82f026 net: add nLastBlockTime/TXTime to CNodeStats, CNode::copyStats (Jon Atack)
Pull request description:
This PR adds inbound peer eviction criteria `nLastBlockTime` and `nLastTXTime` to `CNodeStats` and `CNode::copyStats`, which then allows exposing them in the next commit as `last_transaction` and `last_block` Unix Epoch Time fields in RPC `getpeerinfo`.
This may be useful for writing missing eviction tests. I'd also like to add `lasttx` and `lastblk` columns to the `-netinfo` dashboard as described in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19643#issuecomment-671093420.
Relevant discussion at the p2p irc meeting http://www.erisian.com.au/bitcoin-core-dev/log-2020-08-11.html#l-549:
```text
<jonatack> i was specifically trying to observe and figure out how to test https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19500
<jonatack> which made me realise that i didn't know what was going on with my peer conns in enough detail
<jonatack> i'm running bitcoin locally with nLastBlockTime and nLastTXTime added to getpeerinfo for my peer connections dashboard
<jonatack> sipa: is there a good reason why that (eviction criteria) data is not exposed through getpeerinfo currently?
<sipa> jonatack: nope; i suspect just nobody ever added it
<jonatack> sipa: thanks. will propose.
```
The last commit is optional, but I think it would be good to have logging in `rpc_net.py`.
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
Code review ACK 5da96210fc2fda9fbd79531f42f91262fd7a9257
theStack:
Code Review ACK 5da96210fc2fda9fbd79531f42f91262fd7a9257
darosior:
ACK 5da96210fc2fda9fbd79531f42f91262fd7a9257
Tree-SHA512: 2db164bc979c014837a676e890869a128beb7cf40114853239e7280f57e768bcb43bff6c1ea76a61556212135281863b5290b50ff9d24fce16c5b89b55d4cd70
b6834e312a6a7bb395ec7266bc9469384639df96 Avoid 'timing mishap' warnings when mocking (Pieter Wuille)
ec3916f40a3fc644ecbbaaddef6258937c7fcfbc Use mockable time everywhere in net_processing (Pieter Wuille)
Pull request description:
The fact that net_processing uses a mix of mockable tand non-mockable time functions made it hard to write functional tests for #19988.
I'm opening this as a separate PR as I believe it's independently useful. In some ways this doesn't go quite as far as it could, as there are now several data structures that could be converted to `std::chrono` types as well now. I haven't done that here, but I'm happy to reconsider that.
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
ACK b6834e312a 🌶
jnewbery:
utACK b6834e312a6a7bb395ec7266bc9469384639df96
naumenkogs:
utACK b6834e3
Tree-SHA512: 6528a167c57926ca12894e0c476826411baf5de2f7b01c2125b97e5f710e620f427bbb13f72bdfc3de59072e56a9c1447bce832f41c725e00e81fea019518f0e
0fcaf731997c4989b869e42d8990f742637799c2 test: use explicit p2p objects where available (Oliver Gugger)
Pull request description:
This is a follow-up patch to #19804 as suggested by MarcoFalke (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19804#discussion_r494950062).
To make the intent of the tests easier to understand, we reference the
p2p connection objects by their explicit names instead of the p2ps array.
ACKs for top commit:
theStack:
ACK 0fcaf731997c4989b869e42d8990f742637799c2
Tree-SHA512: 37db22185077beeadfa7245bb768b87d6b7a2cfb906c3c859ab92ec3d657122db7301777f0838e13dfc748f37303850144fb7553e6cb6c66903e304d6e10e659
10d61505fe77880d6989115defa5e08417f3de2d [test] remove confusing p2p property (gzhao408)
549d30faf04612d9589c81edf9770c99e3221885 scripted-diff: replace p2p with p2ps[0] in p2p_invalid_tx (gzhao408)
7a0de46aeafb351cffa3410e1aae9809fd4698ad [doc] sample code for test framework p2p objects (gzhao408)
784f757994c1306bb6584b14c0c78617d6248432 [refactor] clarify tests by referencing p2p objects directly (gzhao408)
Pull request description:
The `TestNode` has a `p2p` property which is an alias for `p2ps[0]`.
I think this should be removed because it can be confusing and misleading (to both the test writer and reviewer), especially if a TestNode has multiple p2ps connected (which is the case for many tests).
Another example is when a test has multiple subtests that connect 1 p2p and use the `p2p` property to reference it. If the subtests don't completely clean up after themselves, the subtests may affect one another.
The best way to refer to a connected p2p is use the object returned by `add_p2p_connection` like this:
```py
p2p_conn = node.add_p2p_connection(P2PInterface())
```
A good example is [p2p_invalid_locator.py](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/test/functional/p2p_invalid_locator.py), which cleans up after itself (waits in both `wait_for_disconnect` and in `disconnect_p2ps`) but wouldn't need so much complexity if it just referenced the connections directly.
If there is only one connected, it's not really that tedious to just use `node.p2ps[0]` instead of `node.p2p` (and it can always be aliased inside the test itself).
ACKs for top commit:
robot-dreams:
utACK 10d61505fe77880d6989115defa5e08417f3de2d
jnewbery:
utACK 10d61505fe77880d6989115defa5e08417f3de2d
guggero:
Concept ACK 10d61505.
Tree-SHA512: 5965548929794ec660dae03467640cb2156d7d826cefd26d3a126472cbc2494b855c1d26bbb7b412281fbdc92b9798b9765a85c27bc1a97f7798f27f64db6f13
BACKPORT NOTICE
There's some difference with original PR but that's not important because we do not actually use travis.
The variable TRAVIS_BRANCH would be removed anyway in bitcoin#20697 - let's just skip it for simplicity
--------------
a91ab86fae91d416d664d19d2f482a8d19c115a6 lint: Use TRAVIS_BRANCH in lint-git-commit-check.sh (Fabian Jahr)
c11dc995c98e908dfd9cea64d4b34329b1dbb5c6 lint: Don't use TRAVIS_COMMIT_RANGE in whitespace linter (Fabian Jahr)
1b41ce8f5f3debae03ca60e4acada14680df9185 lint: Don't use TRAVIS_COMMIT_RANGE for commit-script-check (Fabian Jahr)
Pull request description:
This is causing problems again, very similar to #19654.
UPDATE: This now removes all remaining usages of TRAVIS_COMMIT_RANGE and instead uses TRAVIS_BRANCH for the range, including `lint-git-commit-check` where TRAVIS_COMMIT_RANGE had already been removed. For builds triggered by a pull request, TRAVIS_BRANCH is the name of the branch targeted by the pull request. In the linters there is still a fallback that assumes master as the target branch.
ACKs for top commit:
sipa:
ACK a91ab86fae91d416d664d19d2f482a8d19c115a6. See test I tried in #20075.
Tree-SHA512: 1378bdebd5d8787a83fbda5d9999cc9447209423e7f0218fe5eb240e6a32dc1b51d1cd53b4f8cd1f71574d935ac5e22e203dfe09cce17e9976a48416038e1263
fa12d8d3edfbed8d5ce746e75af94eb92372f6b7 ci: Add tsan suppression for race in wallet (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Workaround to fix#19417 (Intermittent CI failure)
Top commit has no ACKs.
Tree-SHA512: 2d68783d6db1bf425ce830cb23eab2f7fa3b9ee18cfb08665e4187196af571547206646dc6dfac0b4444e3dc6c4c13ae45efb09607d2d50df20a3d0a4eec98bd
fa7e002d520d8390f3ff4b0383cfdfc14713355d ci: tsan with wallet (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
ACKs for top commit:
practicalswift:
ACK fa7e002d520d8390f3ff4b0383cfdfc14713355d -- patch looks correct and Travis is happy
hebasto:
ACK fa7e002d520d8390f3ff4b0383cfdfc14713355d, I have reviewed the code and it looks OK, I agree it can be merged.
Tree-SHA512: 1138459bbef72f402f32dae1e28d96f174901d4248d959b538b973747c8b06f221ecd81a386a1f915c0a2faaefb9fb8f11e3be39e6c5e2468bf9ae43d9f97757
BACKPORT NOTICE:
this PR doesn't actually swithc to libc++ due to multiple CI failures such as
linking errors or other
------------------
faf62e6ed0ca45db44c370844c3515eb5a8cda12 ci: Remove unused workaround (MarcoFalke)
fa7c8509153bfd2d5b4dcff86ad27dfd73e8788b ci: Install llvm to get llvm symbolizer (MarcoFalke)
fa563cef61e8a217c5e8ec059e174afae61087a5 test: Add more tsan suppressions (MarcoFalke)
fa0cc02c0a029133f080680ae9186002a144738f ci: Mute depends logs completely (MarcoFalke)
fa906bf2988c799765a04c484269f890964ec3ee test: Extend tsan suppressions for clang stdlib (MarcoFalke)
fa10d850790bbe52d948659bb1ebbb88fe718065 ci: Use libc++ instead of libstdc++ for tsan (MarcoFalke)
fa0d5ee1126a8cff9f30f863eb8f5c78bf57e168 ci: Set halt_on_error=1 for tsan (MarcoFalke)
fa2ffe87f794caa74f80c1c2d6e6067ee4849632 ci: Deduplicate DOCKER_EXEC (MarcoFalke)
fac2eeeb9d718bdb892eef9adf333ea61ba8f3d0 cirrus: Remove no longer needed install step (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
According to the [ThreadSanitizer docs](https://clang.llvm.org/docs/ThreadSanitizer.html#current-status):
> C++11 threading is supported with **llvm libc++**.
For example, the thread sanitizer build is currently not checking for double lock of mutexes.
Fixes (partially) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19038#issuecomment-632138003
ACKs for top commit:
practicalswift:
ACK faf62e6ed0ca45db44c370844c3515eb5a8cda12
fanquake:
ACK faf62e6ed0ca45db44c370844c3515eb5a8cda12
hebasto:
ACK faf62e6ed0ca45db44c370844c3515eb5a8cda12, maybe re-organize commits to modify suppressions in a single one?
Tree-SHA512: 98ce5154b4736dfb811ffdb6e6f63a7bc25fe50d3b73134404a8f3715ad53626c31f9c8132dbacf85de47b9409f1e17a4399e35f78b1da30b1577167ea2982ad
39d526bde48d98af4fa27906e85db0399b6aa8b1 test: Bump linter versions (Duncan Dean)
Pull request description:
As per #19346, `mypy==0.700` was incompatible with Python 3.8.
I've bumped the versions of all the linters to their latest stable versions.
Checked with both Python 3.7 and 3.8 and everything still seems to work fine.
ACKs for top commit:
hebasto:
ACK 39d526bde48d98af4fa27906e85db0399b6aa8b1, I have reviewed the code and it looks OK, I agree it can be merged.
Tree-SHA512: f3ee7fda8095aa25aa68685e863076d52a6b82649770d24b0064d652763c0ceb8ebcbf9024fc74fca45c754e67b2a831dd070b3af23bc099140e6d27e89a5319
21f24336019d438e225c7bd6653871119883a4ee test: run mempool_spend_coinbase.py even with wallet disabled (Michael Dietz)
Pull request description:
Run the mempool spend coinbase test even when the wallet was not compiled, as proposed in #20078.
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
ACK 21f24336019d438e225c7bd6653871119883a4ee
Tree-SHA512: 301582c04376371cfa8f1ebb2418a4341b42ddcd9ad4f48b58bcf888d867a97bdc409972856b67a8339ac5e60124aefee82a049b4f7fc6bca7a18d7e92e090be
3b064fcb9dd3df6c438a440f0fea86e9cf7b5f57 test: run mempool_expiry.py even with wallet disabled (Michael Dietz)
Pull request description:
Run the mempool expiry test even when the wallet was not compiled, as proposed in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20078.
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
ACK 3b064fcb9dd3df6c438a440f0fea86e9cf7b5f57
Tree-SHA512: 5860dc021d02bc3752268ec1e859505bec87174953223b34b1af8a8e4ab66d645458fbf9571c0b816a9de891c3ff41314996e580869671fccd6972c093e78154
5b77f8098de537898151ab116d0e547fd6ff9466 test: add p2p_lock acquires in p2p_leak_tx.py (Sebastian Falbesoner)
cc8c6823b4a8b74922f78ce6ce527ced9325bd49 test: use MiniWallet for p2p_leak_tx.py (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
This PR enables one more of the non-wallet functional tests (p2p_leak_tx.py) to be run even with the Bitcoin Core wallet disabled by using the new MiniWallet instead, as proposed in #20078. It also adds missing p2p_lock acquires that need to be held while modifying internal p2p Interface state (in this case the `last_message` dictionary) to avoid data races.
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
Code review ACK 5b77f8098de537898151ab116d0e547fd6ff9466
Tree-SHA512: 6661bc6e3491a9af4bf040f379e5955c525136397e99d3eadde92e247580d0d87efff750e6d3b1f6d9a4e578144a433a982f574ef056b44dd6bca33873a1bae6
e15344889aac50aadee9211ac34e466867d5862b Clarify blocksonly whitelistforcerelay test (t-bast)
Pull request description:
As discussed in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19943, this test may be a bit misleading to newcomers.
We underscore the fact that our peer needs to run a modified version of Bitcoin Core to actually relay transactions to a `blocksonly` node and benefit from the `whitelistforcerelay` parameter.
ACKs for top commit:
naumenkogs:
ACK e15344889aac50aadee9211ac34e466867d5862b
Tree-SHA512: cc3526ac26c40a2d878b0ad863008663040683fd21092fcdc93866c2b0a79db8c2d29767d1f70bf56195092fca2aa2961cdbee52b5f0b1ae757cece9cd206301
b128b566725a5037fdaea99940d1b9de5553d198 test: add logging for mining_getblocktemplate_longpoll.py (Sebastian Falbesoner)
8ee3536b2b77aeb3a48df5b34effbc7345ef34d8 test: remove unused helpers random_transaction(), make_change() and gather_inputs() (Sebastian Falbesoner)
fddce7e199308d96e366d700dca982ef088ba98b test: use MiniWallet for mining_getblocktemplate_longpoll.py (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
This PR enables one more of the non-wallet functional tests (mining_getblocktemplate_longpoll.py) to be run even with the Bitcoin Core wallet disabled by using the new MiniWallet instead, as proposed in #20078. Also adds missing log messages for the subtests.
This was the only functional test that used the `random_transaction` helper in `test_framework/util.py`, hence it is removed, together with other helpers (`make_change` and `gather_inputs`) that were again only used by `random_transaction`.
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
ACK b128b566725a5037fdaea99940d1b9de5553d198
Tree-SHA512: 09a5fa7b0f5976a47040f7027236d7ec0426d5a4829a082221c4b5fae294470230e89ae3df0bca0eea26833162c03980517f5cc88761ad251c3df4c4a49bca46
faabc26a61873b2cd0390a21df571fe53c893c11 test: Replace getmempoolentry with testmempoolaccept in MiniWallet (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
This is a refactor to not use the return value of `sendrawtransaction` and `getmempoolentry` with the goal that submitting the tx to the mempool will become optional.
ACKs for top commit:
mjdietzx:
ACK faabc26a61873b2cd0390a21df571fe53c893c11
Tree-SHA512: 4260a59e65fed1c807530dad23f1996ba6e881bcce91995f5b498a0be6001f67b3e0251507c8801750fe105410147c68bb2f393ebe678c6a3a4d045e5d72fc19
a7599c80ebb9579df45e2d6ccf3168302cf42f03 test: run mempool_compatibility.py even with wallet disabled (Michael Dietz)
Pull request description:
Another functional test rewritten as proposed in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20078
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
review ACK a7599c80ebb9579df45e2d6ccf3168302cf42f03 didn't test
Tree-SHA512: cc7a617e5489ed27bbdbdee85a82fa08525375061f7f4524577a6b8ecb340396adac88419b51f513be22ca53edd0a3bd5d572d9f43ffc2c18550b0ef9069d238
faf251d854e3a670533ea3e9087e82c92f3ae533 test: gettxoutproof duplicate txid (João Barbosa)
faf5eb45c4a08fbfd9a8c12534bca8adfe756ef2 test: Test empty array in gettxoutproof (MarcoFalke)
fa56e866e8ac08b35e775a4e37a4e5849e093c7d test: Run rpc_txoutproof.py even with wallet disabled (MarcoFalke)
faba790bd40b5a9e8849997785020790ff60571b test: MiniWallet: Default fee_rate in send_self_transfer, Pass in utxo_to_spend (MarcoFalke)
fa65a11d0c9a34ff7f4cc4efd53367794e751749 test: bugfix: Actually pick largest utxo (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Run the consensus test even when the wallet was not compiled. Also:
* Minor bugfix in MiniWallet
* Two new test cases (one cherry-picked from #19847)
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
utACK faf251d854e3a670533ea3e9087e82c92f3ae533. Thanks Marco!
kristapsk:
ACK faf251d854e3a670533ea3e9087e82c92f3ae533
Tree-SHA512: a5ab33695c88cfb3c369021d4506069c08ce298e24e891db55159130693ed3817444c72f6aad3f472235aa4597b2c601010af714411c2ec8ad9c2d2e0b00ecbc
fa188c9c59b8c3e43c31be01797f073e27a7bc10 test: Use MiniWalet in p2p_feefilter (MarcoFalke)
fa39c62eb7f39e7d249b8d46c075c4e7a9aec684 test: inline hashToHex (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
This introduces a minimalistic test wallet, which can be used as a drop in replacement for the Bitcoin Core wallet to create dummy transactions with a given fee rate.
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
utACK fa188c9c59b8c3e43c31be01797f073e27a7bc10
Tree-SHA512: 0aad9cb14eea4f0055bd6a47cc8c8f82a16941b152598c3bf1e083aae84cca4ffa23f0b854a362a68be1b917deba1b5ec7c0207b63b0805d747ba9a7d1d82efe
84d295e51341a126a6c3cbeea7a8caa04c7b5bc3 tests: Check that segwit inputs in psbt have both UTXO types (Andrew Chow)
46004790588c24174a0bec49b540d158ce163ffd psbt: always put a non_witness_utxo and don't remove it (Andrew Chow)
5279d8bc07d601fe6a67ad665fbc7591fe73c7de psbt: Allow both non_witness_utxo and witness_utxo (Andrew Chow)
72f6bec1da198764d4648a10a61c485e7ab65e9e rpc: show both UTXOs in decodepsbt (Andrew Chow)
Pull request description:
Due to recent changes to hardware wallets, the full previous transaction will need to be provided for segwit inputs. Since some software may be checking for the existence of a `witness_utxo` to determine whether to produce a segwit signature, we keep that field to ease the transition.
Because all of the sanity checks implemented by the `IsSane` functions were related to having mixed segwit and non-segwit data in a PSBT, those functions are removed as those checks are no longer proper.
Some tests are updated/removed to accommodate this and a simple test added to check that both UTXOs are being added to segwit inputs.
As discussed in the wallet IRC meeting, our own signer will not require `non_witness_utxo` for segwit inputs.
ACKs for top commit:
Sjors:
utACK 84d295e51341a126a6c3cbeea7a8caa04c7b5bc3 (didn't retest compared to 836d6fc, but fortunately HWI's CI tracks our master branch, with a bunch of hardware wallet simulators)
ryanofsky:
Code review re-ACK 84d295e51341a126a6c3cbeea7a8caa04c7b5bc3. No changes since last review, but now I understand the context better. I think it would good to improve the comments as suggested https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19215#discussion_r447889473 and maybe refer to
meshcollider:
utACK 84d295e51341a126a6c3cbeea7a8caa04c7b5bc3
Tree-SHA512: ccc1fd3c16ac3859f5aca4fa489bd40f68be0b81bbdc4dd51188bbf28827a8642dc8b605a37318e5f16cf40f1c4910052dace2f27eca21bb58435f02a443e940
7984c39be11ca04460883365e1ae2a496aaa6c0e test framework: serialize/deserialize inv type as unsigned int (Jon Atack)
407175e0c2bc797599ebd9c0a1f2ec89ad7af136 p2p: change CInv::type from int to uint32_t (Jon Atack)
Pull request description:
Fixes UBSan implicit-integer-sign-change issue per https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19610#issuecomment-680686460.
Credit to Crypt-iQ for finding and reporting the issue and to vasild for the original review suggestion in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19590#pullrequestreview-455788826.
Closes#19678.
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
ACK 7984c39be11ca04460883365e1ae2a496aaa6c0e
MarcoFalke:
ACK 7984c39be11ca04460883365e1ae2a496aaa6c0e 🌻
vasild:
ACK 7984c39be
Tree-SHA512: 59f3a75f40ce066ca6f0bb1927197254238302b4073af1574bdbfe6ed580876437be804be4e47d51467d604f0d9e3a5875159f7f2edbb2351fdb2bb9465100b5
6d1f51343cf11b07cd401fbd0c5bc3603e185a0e [rpc] fundrawtransaction, walletcreatefundedpsbt lock manually selected coins (Sjors Provoost)
Pull request description:
When using `fundrawtransaction` and `walletcreatefundedpsbt` with `lockUnspents`, it would only lock automatically selected coins, not manually selected coins. That doesn't make much sense to me if the goal is to prevent accidentally double-spending yourself before you broadcast a transaction.
Note that when creating a transaction, manually selected coins are automatic "unlocked" (or more accurately: the lock is ignored). Earlier versions of this PR introduced an error when a locked coin is manually selected, but this idea was abandoned after some discussion. An application that uses this RPC should either rely on automatic coin selection (with `lockUnspents`) or handle lock concurrency itself with manual coin selection. In particular it needs to make sure to avoid/pause calls with automatic coin selection between calling `lockunspent` and the subsequent spending RPC.
See #7518 for historical background.
ACKs for top commit:
meshcollider:
Code review ACK 6d1f51343cf11b07cd401fbd0c5bc3603e185a0e
fjahr:
Code review ACK 6d1f51343cf11b07cd401fbd0c5bc3603e185a0e
Tree-SHA512: 8773c788d92f2656952e1beac147ba9956b8c5132d474e0880e4c89ff53642928b4cbfcd1cb3d17798b9284f02618a8830c93a9f7a4733e5bded96adff1d5d4d
fa330ec2fe5f5ba68a8d43fff0b19584c0b1ff39 test: Remove confusing and broken use of wait_until global (MarcoFalke)
fa6583c30bf7d82cf7ffdae995f8f16524ad2c0d ci: Set increased --timeout-factor by default (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Assuming that tests don't have a logic error or race, setting a high timeout should not cause any issues. The tests will still pass just as fast in the fastest case, but it allows for some buffer in case of slow disks or otherwise starved ci machines.
Fixes#19729
ACKs for top commit:
hebasto:
ACK fa330ec2fe5f5ba68a8d43fff0b19584c0b1ff39, I have reviewed the code, and it looks OK, I agree it can be merged.
Tree-SHA512: 3da80ee008c7b08bab5fdaf7804d57c79d6fed49a7d37b9c54fc89756659fcb9981fd10afc4d07bd90d93c1699fd410a0110a3cd34d016873759d114ce3cd82d
This backport is marked as full, not partial, but it has only refactorings
and non-witness related changes.
Included commits are:
- test: Update test framework p2p protocol version to 70016
- Rename AddInventoryKnown() to AddKnownTx()
- Add support for tx-relay via wtxid
This adds a field to CNodeState that tracks whether to relay transactions with
that peer via wtxid, instead of txid. As of this commit the field will always
be false, but in a later commit we will add a way to negotiate turning this on
via p2p messages exchanged with the peer.
- Just pass a hash to AddInventoryKnown
Since it's only used for transactions, there's no need to pass in an inv type.
- Add wtxid to mempool unbroadcast tracking
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
For platform needs `getrawtransactionmulti` will help to reduce amount
of rpc calls for sake of performance improvement.
## What was done?
Implemented new RPC, basic functional test, release note.
## How Has This Been Tested?
On testnet:
```
> getrawtransactionmulti '{"000000abbe61a4d9b9356cb1d7deb1132d0b444a62869e71c2f3aa8ce2361359":["6e3ef19a3f955ac75a1f84dae60d42bbe11548ef54e37033ff2d91b3c4a09e9c", "415d5fafd5ee24ada8b99c36df339785a3066170c0dca6bb1aa6a5b96cf51e35"], "0":["ec7090f01c0e9b6e29d3be8810b12c780d2fb34372a53b231ce18bb7d2f1e8b0"]}'
> getrawtransactionmulti '{"000000abbe61a4d9b9356cb1d7deb1132d0b444a62869e71c2f3aa8ce2361359":["6e3ef19a3f955ac75a1f84dae60d42bbe11548ef54e37033ff2d91b3c4a09e9c", "415d5fafd5ee24ada8b99c36df339785a3066170c0dca6bb1aa6a5b96cf51e35"], "0":["ec7090f01c0e9b6e29d3be8810b12c780d2fb34372a53b231ce18bb7d2f1e8b0"]}' true
```
## 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
- [x] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
---------
Co-authored-by: pasta <pasta@dashboost.org>
d841301010914203fb5ef02627c76fad99cb11f1 test: Add docstring to wait_until() in util.py to warn about its usage (Seleme Topuz)
1343c86c7cc1fc896696b3ed87c12039e4ef3a0c test: Update wait_until usage in tests not to use the one from utils (Seleme Topuz)
Pull request description:
Replace global (from [test_framework/util.py](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/test/functional/test_framework/util.py#L228)) `wait_until()` usages with the ones provided by `BitcoinTestFramework` and `P2PInterface` classes.
The motivation behind this change is that the `util.wait_until()` expects a timeout, timeout_factor and lock and it is not aware of the context of the test framework. `BitcoinTestFramework` offers a `wait_until()` which has an understandable amount of default `timeout` and a shared `timeout_factor`. Moreover, on top of these, `mininode.wait_until()` also has a shared lock.
closes#19080
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
ACK d841301010914203fb5ef02627c76fad99cb11f1 🦆
kallewoof:
utACK d841301010914203fb5ef02627c76fad99cb11f1
Tree-SHA512: 81604f4cfa87fed98071a80e4afe940b3897fe65cf680a69619a93e97d45f25b313c12227de7040e19517fa9c003291b232f1b40b2567aba0148f22c23c47a88
12410b1feb80189061eb4a2b43421e53cbb758a8 test: fix intermittent p2p_ibd_txrelay race, add test_framework.py#wait_until (Jon Atack)
Pull request description:
To fix these intermittent failures in Travis CI.
```
162/163 - p2p_ibd_txrelay.py failed, Duration: 2 s
stdout:
2020-07-19T05:44:17.213000Z TestFramework (INFO):
Check that nodes set minfilter to MAX_MONEY while still in IBD
2020-07-19T05:44:17.216000Z TestFramework (ERROR): Assertion failed
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/Users/travis/build/bitcoin/bitcoin/ci/scratch/build/bitcoin-x86_64-apple-darwin16/test/functional/test_framework/test_framework.py", line 117, in main
self.run_test()
File "/Users/travis/build/bitcoin/bitcoin/ci/scratch/build/bitcoin-x86_64-apple-darwin16/test/functional/p2p_ibd_txrelay.py", line 30, in run_test
assert_equal(conn_info['minfeefilter'], MAX_FEE_FILTER)
File "/Users/travis/build/bitcoin/bitcoin/ci/scratch/build/bitcoin-x86_64-apple-darwin16/test/functional/test_framework/util.py", line 49, in assert_equal
raise AssertionError("not(%s)" % " == ".join(str(arg) for arg in (thing1, thing2) + args))
AssertionError: not(0E-8 == 0.09170997)
2020-07-19T05:44:17.293000Z TestFramework (INFO): Stopping nodes
```
At Marco's suggestion, cherry-picked part of #19134 to nicely simplify using `wait_until`.
ACKs for top commit:
vasild:
ACK 12410b1fe
Tree-SHA512: 615f509883682fd693e578b259cba35a9fa0bc519f1394e88c857e8b0650bfec5397bfa856cfa9e6d5ef81d0ee6ad02e4ad2b0eb0bd530b4c281cbe3e663790b
d5800da5199527a366024bc80cad7fcca17d5c4a [test] Remove final references to mininode (John Newbery)
5e8df3312e47a73e747ee892face55ed9ababeea test: resort imports (John Newbery)
85165d4332b0f72d30e0c584b476249b542338e6 scripted-diff: Rename mininode to p2p (John Newbery)
9e2897d020b114a10c860f90c5405be029afddba scripted-diff: Rename mininode_lock to p2p_lock (John Newbery)
Pull request description:
New contributors are often confused by the terminology in the test framework, and what the difference between a _node_ and a _peer_ is. To summarize:
- a 'node' is a bitcoind instance. This is the thing whose behavior is being tested. Each bitcoind node is managed by a python `TestNode` object which is used to start/stop the node, manage the node's data directory, read state about the node (eg process status, log file), and interact with the node over different interfaces.
- one of the interfaces that we can use to interact with the node is the p2p interface. Each connection to a node using this interface is managed by a python `P2PInterface` or derived object (which is owned by the `TestNode` object). We can open zero, one or many p2p connections to each bitcoind node. The node sees these connections as 'peers'.
For historic reasons, the word 'mininode' has been used to refer to those p2p interface objects that we use to connect to the bitcoind node (the code was originally taken from the 'mini-node' branch of https://github.com/jgarzik/pynode/tree/mini-node). However that name has proved to be confusing for new contributors, so rename the remaining references.
ACKs for top commit:
amitiuttarwar:
ACK d5800da519
MarcoFalke:
ACK d5800da5199527a366024bc80cad7fcca17d5c4a 🚞
Tree-SHA512: 2c46c2ac3c4278b6e3c647cfd8108428a41e80788fc4f0e386e5b0c47675bc687d94779496c09a3e5ea1319617295be10c422adeeff2d2bd68378e00e0eeb5de
dac7a111bdd3b0233d94cf68dae7a8bfc6ac9c64 refactor: test: use _ variable for unused loop counters (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
This tiny PR substitutes Python loops in the form of `for x in range(N): ...` by `for _ in range(N): ...` where applicable. The idea is indicating to the reader that a block (or statement, in list comprehensions) is just repeated N times, and that the loop counter is not used in the body, hence using the throwaway variable. This is already done quite often in the current tests (see e.g. `$ git grep "for _ in range("`). Another alternative would be using `itertools.repeat` (according to Python core developer Raymond Hettinger it's [even faster](https://twitter.com/raymondh/status/1144527183341375488)), but that doesn't seem to be widespread in use and I'm not sure about a readability increase.
The only drawback I see is that whenever one wants to debug loop iterations, one would need to introduce a loop variable again. Reviewing this is basically a no-brainer, since tests would fail immediately if a a substitution has taken place on a loop where the variable is used.
Instances to replace were found by `$ git grep "for.*in range("` and manually checked.
ACKs for top commit:
darosior:
ACK dac7a111bdd3b0233d94cf68dae7a8bfc6ac9c64
instagibbs:
manual inspection ACK dac7a111bd
practicalswift:
ACK dac7a111bdd3b0233d94cf68dae7a8bfc6ac9c64 -- the updated code is easier to reason about since the throwaway nature of a variable is expressed explicitly (using the Pythonic `_` idiom) instead of implicitly. Explicit is better than implicit was we all know by now :)
Tree-SHA512: 5f43ded9ce14e5e00b3876ec445b90acda1842f813149ae7bafa93f3ac3d510bb778e2c701187fd2c73585e6b87797bb2d2987139bd1a9ba7d58775a59392406
292828cd7744ec7eadede4ad54aa2117087c5435 [test] Test addr cache for multiple onion binds (dergoegge)
3382905befd23364989d941038bf7b1530fea0dc [net] Seed addr cache randomizer with port from binding address (dergoegge)
f10e80b6e4fbc151abbf1c20fbdcc3581d3688f0 [net] Use ConnectedThroughNetwork() instead of GetNetwork() to seed addr cache randomizer (dergoegge)
Pull request description:
The addr cache id randomizer is currently supposed to be seeded with the network of the inbound connection and the local socket (only the address is used not the port): a8098f2cef/src/net.cpp (L2800-L2804)
For inbound onion connections `CNode::addr.GetNetwork()` returns `NET_UNROUTABLE` and `CNode::addrBind` is set to `127.0.0.1:<onion bind port>`. This results in the same addr cache for all inbound connections on 127.0.0.1 binds.
To avoid the same addr cache across all onion and other 127.0.0.1 binds, we should seed the addr cache randomizer with the correct network for inbound onion connections (using `CNode::ConnectedThroughNetwork()`) as well as the port of `CNode::addrBind`.
ACKs for top commit:
sipa:
utACK 292828cd7744ec7eadede4ad54aa2117087c5435
mzumsande:
Code Review ACK 292828cd7744ec7eadede4ad54aa2117087c5435
naumenkogs:
utACK 292828cd7744ec7eadede4ad54aa2117087c5435
Tree-SHA512: d0be13bab6bc121c2926d4b168687f6c2ed4ce0c9dd19be71eb4886adeba8afc3daacdc4e232a0ba3b03a89d69b618abc5595b69abd1ad0c476d825bc6ea1f9f
ebfc308ea4b8851118e8194d837556bf443c329c test: add coverage for non-hex value to -minimumchainwork (brunoerg)
Pull request description:
This PR adds test coverage for the following init error:
b9ef5a10e2/src/init.cpp (L917-L919)
Passing a non-hex value to -minimumchainwork should throw an initial error.
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
Code review ACK ebfc308ea4b8851118e8194d837556bf443c329c
kristapsk:
re-ACK ebfc308ea4b8851118e8194d837556bf443c329c
Tree-SHA512: c665903757ae3b8b2480df97bb888e60ba4387b009fcb8031041822e87a155a0e4950ebe79873c1034f0826504521d82b1fdfdb5e8378b227d14ca545b8d4e11
6d7e46ce23217da53ff52f535879c393c02fa2b2 Remove `Warning:` (Prayank)
Pull request description:
Reason: I noticed that `Warning` is printed 2 times in `-getinfo` while reviewing https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21832#issuecomment-851004943
Same string is used for GUI, log and stderr. If we need to add `Warning:` in GUI or other place we can always prepend to this string.
CLI:
```
Warnings: Unknown new rules activated (versionbit 28)
```
GUI:
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
review ACK 6d7e46ce23217da53ff52f535879c393c02fa2b2
Tree-SHA512: 25760cf6d850f6c2216d651fa46574d2d21a9d58f4577ecb58f9566ea8cd07bfcd6679bb8a1f53575e441b02d295306f492c0c99a48c909e60e5d977ec1861f6
c133cdcdc3397a734d57e05494682bf9bf6f4c15 Cap listsinceblock target_confirmations param (Adam Stein)
Pull request description:
This addresses an issue brought up in #19587.
Currently, the `target_confirmations` parameter to `listsinceblock` is not checked for being too large. When `target_confirmations` is greater than one more than the current number of blocks, `listsinceblock` fails with error code -1. In comparison, when `target_confirmations` is less than 1, a -8 "Invalid parameter" error code is thrown.
This PR fixes the issue by returning a -8 "Invalid parameter" error if the `target_confirmations` value corresponds to a block with more confirmations than the genesis block. This happens if `target_confirmations` exceeds one more than the number of blocks.
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
Code review ACK c133cdcdc3397a734d57e05494682bf9bf6f4c15
ryanofsky:
Code review ACK c133cdcdc3397a734d57e05494682bf9bf6f4c15. Just suggested changes since last review. Thanks!
Tree-SHA512: 02680f4cb937d2c24d5019abd0ebfa188b8a50679a1e64e9c26bfe5c17eef6aea906832e6e2d492ba8a2ea160041bf185d66795ee691e340f6793db03c21b89a
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Running 3 nodes on RegTest as platform does uses do not let to create
`llmq_test_instantsend` quorum:
```
1. switch to `llmq_test_instantsend`:
+ self.extra_args = [["-llmqtestinstantsenddip0024=llmq_test_instantsend"]] * 5
2. removed cycle-quorum related code:
- self.move_to_next_cycle()
- self.log.info("Cycle H height:" + str(self.nodes[0].getblockcount()))
- self.move_to_next_cycle()
- self.log.info("Cycle H+C height:" + str(self.nodes[0].getblockcount()))
- self.move_to_next_cycle()
- self.log.info("Cycle H+2C height:" + str(self.nodes[0].getblockcount()))
-
- self.mine_cycle_quorum(llmq_type_name='llmq_test_dip0024', llmq_type=103)
3. added new quorum:
+ self.mine_quorum(llmq_type_name='llmq_test_instantsend', llmq_type=104)
and eventually it stucked, no quorum happens
2024-01-13T19:18:49.317000Z TestFramework (INFO): Expected quorum_0 at:984
2024-01-13T19:18:49.317000Z TestFramework (INFO): Expected quorum_0 hash:6788e18f0235a5c85f3d3c6233fe132a80e74a2912256db3ad876a8ebf026048
2024-01-13T19:18:49.317000Z TestFramework (INFO): quorumIndex 0: Waiting for phase 1 (init)
<frozen>
```
## What was done?
Updated condition to enable "llmq_test_instantsend":
- it is RegTest and DIP0024 is not active
- it is RegTest, DIP0024 is active, and specified as
`llmqTypeDIP0024InstantSend`
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run unit and functional tests.
Beside that functional test feature_asset_locks.py now uses this quorum
for instant send and that's an arrow that hit 2 birds: we have test for
command line option `-llmqtestinstantsenddip0024` and code of
feature_asset_locks.py is simplified.
## Breaking Changes
yes, that's a bugfix that fix quorum `llmq_test_instantsend` absentance
on regtest after dip-0024 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)_
## 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
9a40cfc558b3f7fa4fff1270f969582af17479a5 [refactor] use waiting inside disconnect_p2ps (gzhao408)
aeb9fb414e2d000830287d9dd3fed7fc2eb570d2 [test] wait for disconnect_p2ps to be reflected in getpeerinfo (gzhao408)
e81942d2e1288367e8da94adb2b2a88be99e4751 [test] logging and style followups for bloomfilter tests (gzhao408)
Pull request description:
Followup to #19083 which adds bloomfilter-related tests.
1. Make test_node `disconnect_p2ps` wait until disconnection is complete to avoid race conditions (and not place the burden on tests) from MarcoFalke's [comment](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19083#discussion_r437383989). And clean up any redundant `wait_until`s in the functional tests.
2. Clean up style + logging in p2p_filter.py and p2p_nobloomfilter_messages.py and jonatack's other [comments](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19083#pullrequestreview-428955784)
ACKs for top commit:
jonatack:
Code review ACK 9a40cfc from re-reviewing the diff and `git range-diff 5cafb46 8386ad5 9a40cfc`
MarcoFalke:
ACK 9a40cfc558b3f7fa4fff1270f969582af17479a5 🐂
Tree-SHA512: 2e14b1c12fc08a355bd5ccad7a2a734a4ccda4bc7dc7bac171cb57359819fc1599d764290729af74832fac3e2be258c5d406c701e78ab6d7262835859b9a7d87
3a10d935ac8ebabdfd336569d943f042ff84b13e [p2p/refactor] move disconnect logic and remove misbehaving (gzhao408)
ff8c430c6589ea72b9e169455cf6437c8623cc52 [test] test disconnect for filterclear (gzhao408)
1c6b787e0319c44f0e0bede3f4a77ac7c2089db2 [netprocessing] disconnect node that sends filterclear (gzhao408)
Pull request description:
Nodes that don't have bloomfilters turned on (i.e. no `NODE_BLOOM` service) should disconnect peers that send them `filterclear` P2P messages.
Non-bloomfilter nodes already disconnect peers for [`filteradd` and `filterload`](19e919217e/src/net_processing.cpp (L2218)), but #8709 removed `filterclear` so it could be used to reset tx relay. This isn't needed now because using `feefilter` message is much better for this purpose (See #19204).
Also refactors existing disconnect logic for `filteradd` and `filterload` into respective message handlers and removes banning for them.
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
Code review ACK 3a10d935ac8ebabdfd336569d943f042ff84b13e
naumenkogs:
utACK 3a10d93
gillichu:
tested ACK: quick test_runner on macOS [`3a10d93`](3a10d935ac)
MarcoFalke:
re-ACK 3a10d935ac only change is replacing false with true 🚝
Tree-SHA512: 7aad8b3c0b0e776a47ad52544f0c1250feb242320f9a2962542f5905042f77e297a1486f8cdc3bf0fb93cd00c1ab66a67b2ec426eb6da3fe4cda56b5e623620f
(BACKPORT NOTICE: p2p_filter.py has also fixes for d5fbd4a92a3e7c1f8266d4cb4b639a0fe4c4c61f:test/functional/p2p_filter.py)
+ Merge #18726: test: check misbehavior more independently in p2p_filter.py
---------------------
dca73941eb0f0a4c9b68efed3870b536f7dd6cfe scripted-diff: rename node to peer for mininodes (gzhao408)
0474ea25afc65546cbfe5f822c0212bf3e211023 [test] fix race conditions and test in p2p_filter (gzhao408)
4ef80f0827392a1310ca5a29cc1f8f5ca5d16f95 [test] sending invalid msgs to node with bloomfilters=0 causes disconnect (gzhao408)
497a619386008dfaec0db15ecaebcdfaf75f5011 [test] add BIP 37 test for node with fRelay=false (gzhao408)
e8acc6015695c8439fc971a12709468995b96dcf [test] add mempool msg test for node with bloomfilter enabled (gzhao408)
Pull request description:
This PR adds a few tests that are bloomfilter-related, including behavior for when bloomfilters are turned _off_:
1. Tests p2p message `msg_mempool`: a node that has `peerbloomfilters` enabled should send its mempool (disabled behavior already tested [here](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/test/functional/p2p_mempool.py)).
2. Tests that bloomfilter peers with [`fRelay=False`](https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0037.mediawiki#extensions-to-existing-messages) in the `version` message should not receive any invs until they set the filter. The rest is the same as what’s already tested in `p2p_filter.py`.
3. Tests that peers get disconnected if they send `filterload` or `filteradd` p2p messages to a node with bloom filters disabled.
4. Refactor: renames p2p_mempool.py to p2p_nobloomfilter_messages.py.
5. Fixes race conditions in p2p_filter.py
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
ACK dca73941eb only changes is restoring accidentally deleted test 🍮
jonatack:
ACK dca73941eb0f0a4c9b68efed3870b536f7dd6cfe modulo a few nits if you retouch, happy to re-ACK if you take any of them but don't feel obliged to.
Tree-SHA512: 442aeab0755cb8b830251ea170d1d5e6da8ac9029b3276d407a20ee3d588cc61b77b8842368de18c244056316b8c63b911776d6e106bc7c023439ab915b27ad3
af2a145e575f23c64909e6cf1fb323c603bda7ca Refactor resource exhaustion test (Troy Giorshev)
5c4648d17ba18e4194959963994cc6b37053f127 Fix "invalid message size" test (Troy Giorshev)
ff1e7b884447a5ba10553b2d964625f94e255bdc Move size limits to module-global (Troy Giorshev)
57890abf2c7919eddfec36178b1136cd44ffe883 Remove two unneeded tests (Troy Giorshev)
Pull request description:
This PR touches only the p2p_invalid_messages.py functional test module. There are two main goals accomplished here. First, it fixes the "invalid message size" test, which previously made a message that was invalid for multiple reasons. Second, it refactors the file into a single consistent style. This file appears to have originally had two authors, with different styles and some test duplication.
It should now be easier and quicker to understand this module, anticipating the upcoming [BIP324](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18242) and [AltNet](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18989) changes.
This should probably go in ahead of #19107, but the two are not strictly related.
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
ACK af2a145e575f23c64909e6cf1fb323c603bda7ca
MarcoFalke:
re-ACK af2a145e57 🍦
Tree-SHA512: 9b57561e142c5eaefac5665f7355c8651670400b4db1a89525d2dfdd20e872d6873c4f6175c4222b6f5a8e5210cf5d6a52da69b925b673a2e2ac30a15d670d1c
fa0a4d6c605b8ed47796f68068d6273bef7fcaef test: remove assert_blockchain_height (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
This simplifies the code and solves intermittent timeouts caused by commit 0d39b5848a7a341cd2b958336861cdd4098e2616.
E.g. https://cirrus-ci.com/task/5196092369272832?command=ci#L3126
```
test 2021-02-08T12:27:56.275000Z TestFramework (ERROR): Assertion failed
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/tmp/cirrus-ci-build/ci/scratch/build/bitcoin-x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/test/functional/test_framework/test_framework.py", line 127, in main
self.run_test()
File "/tmp/cirrus-ci-build/ci/scratch/build/bitcoin-x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/test/functional/feature_assumevalid.py", line 180, in run_test
self.assert_blockchain_height(self.nodes[0], 101)
File "/tmp/cirrus-ci-build/ci/scratch/build/bitcoin-x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/test/functional/feature_assumevalid.py", line 92, in assert_blockchain_height
assert False, "blockchain too short after timeout: %d" % current_height
AssertionError: blockchain too short after timeout: 101
ACKs for top commit:
glozow:
ACK fa0a4d6c60
Tree-SHA512: 3859b0c1581c21f03c775f119204cc3a219e5d86346883634886f6da46feaf254b9c6c49c1ec4581ffe409cdf05f6e91ec38c3976c3daf4a9e67f96ddc1e0dce
fa362064e383163a2585ffbc71ac1ea3bcc92663 rpc: Return total fee in mempool (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
This avoids having to loop over the whole mempool to query each entry's fee
ACKs for top commit:
achow101:
ACK fa362064e383163a2585ffbc71ac1ea3bcc92663
glozow:
ACK fa362064e3🧸
jnewbery:
ACK fa362064e383163a2585ffbc71ac1ea3bcc92663
Tree-SHA512: e2fa1664df39c9e187f9229fc35764ccf436f6f75889c5a206d34fff473fc21efbf2bb143f4ca7895c27659218c22884d0ec4195e7a536a5a96973fc9dd82d08
b6121edf70a8d50fd16ddbba0c3168e5e49bfc2e swapped "is" for "==" in literal comparison (Tyler Chambers)
Pull request description:
In Python 3.8+ literal comparisons using "is" instead of "==" produce a SyntaxWarning [source](https://docs.python.org/3.8/whatsnew/3.8.html#changes-in-python-behavior).
I checked the entire devtools directory, this seems to be the only occurrence.
This is a small fix, but removes the SyntaxWarning.
Fixes: #20338
ACKs for top commit:
hebasto:
re-ACK b6121edf70a8d50fd16ddbba0c3168e5e49bfc2e, only squashed since my [previous](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20346#pullrequestreview-525934568) review.
practicalswift:
re-ACK b6121edf70a8d50fd16ddbba0c3168e5e49bfc2e: patch still looks correct
theStack:
utACK b6121edf70a8d50fd16ddbba0c3168e5e49bfc2e
Tree-SHA512: 82a43495d6552fbaa3b02b58f0930b049d27aa937fe44b47714e3c059f844cc494de20674557371cbccf24fb8873ecb7376fb965ae326847eed2b855ed2d59c6
5dc6d9207778c51c10c16fac4b3663bc7905bafc test: make BIP157 messages default-constructible (MESSAGEMAP compatibility) (Sebastian Falbesoner)
71e4cfefe765c58937b3fd3125782ca8407315d2 test: p2p: add missing BIP157 message types to MESSAGEMAP (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
The script [message-capture-parser.py](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/contrib/message-capture/message-capture-parser.py) currently doesn't support parsing the BIP157 messages `getcfilters`, `getcfheaders` and `getcfcheckpt`, e.g.
```
$ ./contrib/message-capture/message-capture-parser.py msgs_recv.dat
...
WARNING - Unrecognized message type b'getcfcheckpt' in /home/thestack/bitcoin/msgs_recv.dat
...
```
This PR fixes this by adding the missing message type mappings to the [`MESSAGEMAP`](225e5b57b2/test/functional/test_framework/p2p.py (L95-L127)) in the test framework and add default-constructors for the corresponding `msg_`... classes.
Without the second commit, the following error message would occur:
```
File "/home/thestack/bitcoin/./contrib/message-capture/message-capture-parser.py", line 141, in process_file
msg = MESSAGEMAP[msgtype]()
TypeError: __init__() missing 2 required positional arguments: 'filter_type' and 'stop_hash'
```
ACKs for top commit:
dunxen:
tACK [5dc6d92](5dc6d92077)
Tree-SHA512: d656c4d38a856373f01d7c293ae7d2b27378a9fc248048ebf2a64725ef8b498b3ddf4f420704abdb20d0c68ca548f1777602c5e73b66821a20c97ae618f1d63f
faac67cab02a755b0ce67716c5e5889432b13b83 test: Fix intermittent race in p2p_unrequested_blocks.py (MacroFake)
Pull request description:
Disconnect may also result in an `OSError`, not only an `AssertionError`. Instead of maintaining a dead code path and enumerating disconnect reasons, just assume disconnection happens every time.
ACKs for top commit:
jamesob:
Code review ACK faac67cab0
Tree-SHA512: d2cec003168e421a5faed275cb2e1ef9fc63f9e8514f41d21da17e8964c79e5b453ccd72cd7ec62805f45293cf877be5bc8124ae98a515c0aa42d6e053409653
1df42bc262d994c30d390ea73b232b8d2548899e test: compare `/mempool/info` response with `getmempoolinfo` RPC (brunoerg)
Pull request description:
This PRs compares `/mempool/info` REST response with `getmempoolinfo` RPC in `interface_rest.py`.
Similar to #24936 and #24797.
ACKs for top commit:
theStack:
ACK 1df42bc262d994c30d390ea73b232b8d2548899e
Tree-SHA512: 2de36d70fa61612e7976f875e55f98e78b1cdb909b48cff18e6a70c55eda34b799e210bcd55361ea947388b7778d867290a73be4f799bb36afd65423ad49c487
3258bad996262792ba77573d6080dafa3952929c changes color of skipped functional tests (Jacob P. Fickes)
Pull request description:
changes the color of skipped functional tests (currently grey and can be hard to read/invisible on dark backgrounds) to yellow.
resolves#24791
ACKs for top commit:
theStack:
Tested ACK 3258bad996262792ba77573d6080dafa3952929c
jarolrod:
Tested ACK 3258bad996
Tree-SHA512: 3fe5ae0d3b4902b2b6bda6e89ab780feb8bf4b7cb1ce7e8467057b94a1e0a26ddeaf3cac0bc19b06ef10d8bccaac9c495029d42740fbedab8fb0d5fdd7d02eaf
bef61496ab5e12e38ac5794cd0836723af070ab5 test: compare `/mempool/contents` response with `getrawmempool` RPC (brunoerg)
5bc5cbaf310f60e89c72e8ecf3f6187c85499027 doc: add reference to `getrawmempool` RPC in `/mempool/contents` REST doc (brunoerg)
Pull request description:
This PR is similar to #24797, it compares `/mempool/contents` REST response with `getrawmempool` RPC (verbose=True) since they use the same `MempoolToJSON` function.
Also, adds a reference to `getrawmempool` RPC help to get details about the fields from `/mempool/contents`.
ACKs for top commit:
0xB10C:
ACK bef6149
Tree-SHA512: b7e9e9c765ee837986ba167b9234a9b95c9ef0a9ebcc2a03d50f6be6d3aba1480bd77c78111d95df1e4023cde6dfc64bf1e7908d9e5b6f96ca46b76611a4a9b4
9b4fa0af40cd88ed25dd77962235fbf268bdcaa7 net: Print error message if -proxy is specified without arguments (instead of continuing without proxy server) (practicalswift)
Pull request description:
Exit with error message if `-proxy` is specified without arguments (instead of continuing without proxy server).
Continuing without a proxy server when the end-user has specified `-proxy` may result in accidental loss of privacy. (The end-user might think he/she is using a proxy when he/she is not.)
Before this patch:
```
$ src/bitcoind -proxy
…
2020-09-23T00:24:33Z InitParameterInteraction: parameter interaction: -proxy set -> setting -listen=0
2020-09-23T00:24:33Z InitParameterInteraction: parameter interaction: -proxy set -> setting -upnp=0
2020-09-23T00:24:33Z InitParameterInteraction: parameter interaction: -proxy set -> setting -discover=0
2020-09-23T00:24:33Z InitParameterInteraction: parameter interaction: -listen=0 -> setting -listenonion=0
…
2020-09-23T00:24:33Z init message: Starting network threads...
```
`bitcoind` is now running *without* a proxy server (`GetProxy(…, …) == false`, `HaveNameProxy() == false`, etc.).
Note that the "-proxy set" log messages above which the end-user might interpret as "good, my traffic is now routed via the proxy".
After this patch:
```
$ src/bitcoind -proxy
Error: No proxy server specified. Use -proxy=<ip> or -proxy=<ip:port>.
$ echo $?
1
```
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
re-ACK 9b4fa0af40cd88ed25dd77962235fbf268bdcaa7
kristapsk:
ACK 9b4fa0af40cd88ed25dd77962235fbf268bdcaa7, I have tested the code.
hebasto:
re-ACK 9b4fa0af40cd88ed25dd77962235fbf268bdcaa7
Tree-SHA512: 4ba7a011991699a54b5bb87ec68367c681231bf5dcd36f8c89ff9ddc2e8d29df453817b7e362597e652ad6b341a22b7274be0fd78d435e5f0fd8058e5221c4ce
It is partial de-circularisation of dependencies between that includes net_processing
Classes that still depends on net_processing but should not:
- llmq/dkgsessionmgr
- llmq/signing
- llmq/instantsend
They have asynchronous processing and with current impl that's impossible to do
5d77549d8b287eb773db695b88c165ebe3be1005 doc: Add mypy to test dependencies (Hennadii Stepanov)
7dda912e1c28b02723c9f24fa6c4e9003d928978 test: Do not swallow flake8 exit code (Hennadii Stepanov)
Pull request description:
After #18210 the `flake8` exit code in `test/lint/lint-python.sh` just not used that makes the linter broken.
This PR:
- combines exit codes of `flake8` and `mypy` into the `test/lint/lint-python.sh` exit code
- documents `mypy` as the test dependency
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
Approach ACK 5d77549d8b287eb773db695b88c165ebe3be1005, fine with me
practicalswift:
ACK 5d77549d8b287eb773db695b88c165ebe3be1005
Tree-SHA512: e948ba04dc4d73393967ebf3c6a26c40d428d33766382a0310fc64746cb7972e027bd62e7ea76898b742a656cf7d0fcda2fdd61560a21bfd7be249cea27f3d41
bd7e530f010d43816bb05d6f1590d1cd36cdaa2c This PR adds initial support for type hints checking in python scripts. (Kiminuo)
Pull request description:
This PR adds initial support for type hints checking in python scripts.
Support for type hints was introduced in Python 3.5. Type hints make it easier to read and review code in my opinion. Also an IDE may discover a potential bug sooner. Yet, as PEP 484 says: "It should also be emphasized that Python will remain a dynamically typed language, and the authors have no desire to ever make type hints mandatory, even by convention."
[Mypy](https://mypy.readthedocs.io/en/latest/index.html) is used in `lint-python.sh` to do the type checking. The package is standard so there is little chance that it will be abandoned. Mypy checks that type hints in source code are correct when they are not, it fails with an error.
**Notes:**
* [--ignore-missing-imports](https://mypy.readthedocs.io/en/latest/command_line.html#cmdoption-mypy-ignore-missing-imports) switch is passed on to `mypy` checker for now. The effect of this is that one does not need `# type: ignore` for `import zmq`. More information about import processing can be found [here](https://mypy.readthedocs.io/en/stable/running_mypy.html#missing-imports). This can be changed in a follow-up PR, if it is deemed useful.
* We are stuck with Python 3.5 until 04/2021 (see https://packages.ubuntu.com/xenial/python3). When Python version is bumped to 3.6+, one can change:
```python
_opcode_instances = [] # type: List[CScriptOp]
```
to
```python
_opcode_instances:List[CScriptOp] = []
```
for type hints that are **not** function parameters and function return types.
**Useful resources:**
* https://docs.python.org/3.5/library/typing.html
* https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0484/
ACKs for top commit:
fanquake:
ACK bd7e530f010d43816bb05d6f1590d1cd36cdaa2c - the type checking is not the most robust (there are things it fails to detect), but I think this is worth adopting (in a limited capacity while we maintain 3.5 compat).
MarcoFalke:
ACK bd7e530f010d43816bb05d6f1590d1cd36cdaa2c fine with me
Tree-SHA512: 21ef213915fb1dec6012f59ef17484e6c9e0abf542a316b63d5f21a7778ad5ebabf8961ef5fc8e5414726c2ee9c6ae07c7353fb4dd337f8fcef5791199c8987a
fa41b0a6dac7afd77e2b94eca6520ab3d2adc231 pep-8 test/functional/test_framework/util.py (MarcoFalke)
faa841bc979ca306f5ba4d5f7b78fcc427b8e413 test: refactor: Inline adjust_bitcoin_conf_for_pre_17 (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
This removes mental and code complexity as well as attack surface for bikeshedding
ACKs for top commit:
Sjors:
utACK fa41b0a6dac7afd77e2b94eca6520ab3d2adc231
Tree-SHA512: 6e3c872e66d98ffaa7aecdfd64aa7dd8fbb51815a8fdaba170ce0772b4c3360084d0ebab4a5feac768ab5df50d04528d7daafc51ba07c15445c1ef94fa3efd34
62068381a3b9c065d81300be79abba7aecfdb41b [tests] Make mininode_lock non-reentrant (John Newbery)
c67c1f2c032a8efa141d776a7e5be58f052159ea [tests] Don't call super twice in P2PTxInvStore.on_inv() (John Newbery)
9d80762fa0931fe553fad241e95bcc1515ef0e95 [tests] Don't acquire mininode_lock twice in wait_for_broadcast() (John Newbery)
edae6075aa3b1169c84b65e76fd48d68242a294e [tests] Only acquire lock once in p2p_compactblocks.py (John Newbery)
Pull request description:
There's no need for mininode_lock to be reentrant.
Use a simpler non-recursive lock.
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
ACK 62068381a3b9c065d81300be79abba7aecfdb41b 😃
jonatack:
ACK 62068381a3b9c0
Tree-SHA512: dcbc19e6c986970051705789be0ff7bec70c69cf76d5b468c2ba4cb732883ad512b1de5c3206c2eca41fa3f1c4806999df4cabbf67fc3c463bb817458e59a19c
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Fix/tidy up a few `qdata`/`qwatch` related parts, improve performance
for regular non-watching nodes
~based on #5744 atm~
## What was done?
pls see individual commits
## How Has This Been Tested?
run 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
- [ ] 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)_
a512925e19a70d7f6b80ac530a169f45ffaafa1c [doc] Release notes (Amiti Uttarwar)
50f94b34a33c954f6e207f509c93d33267a5c3e2 [rpc] Deprecate getpeerinfo addnode field (Amiti Uttarwar)
df091b9b509f0b10e4315c0bfa2da0cc0c31c22f [refactor] Rename test file to allow any getpeerinfo deprecations. (Amiti Uttarwar)
395acfa83a5436790c1a722a5609ac9d48df235f [rpc] Add connection type to getpeerinfo RPC, update tests (Amiti Uttarwar)
49c10a9ca40967d28ae16dfea9cccc6f3a6624a1 [log] Add connection type to log statement (Amiti Uttarwar)
Pull request description:
After #19316, we can more directly expose information about the connection type on the `getpeerinfo` RPC. Doing so also makes the existing addnode field redundant, so this PR begins the process of deprecating this field.
This PR also includes one commit that improves a log message, as both use a shared function to return the connection type as a string.
Suggested by sdaftuar- https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19316#discussion_r468001604 & https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19316#discussion_r468018093
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
Code review ACK a512925e19a70d7f6b80ac530a169f45ffaafa1c.
sipa:
utACK a512925e19a70d7f6b80ac530a169f45ffaafa1c
guggero:
Tested and code review ACK a512925e.
MarcoFalke:
cr ACK a512925e19a70d7f6b80ac530a169f45ffaafa1c 🌇
promag:
Code review ACK a512925e19a70d7f6b80ac530a169f45ffaafa1c.
Tree-SHA512: 601a7a38aee235ee59aca690784f886dc2ae4e418b2e6422c4b58cd597376c00f74910f66920b08a08a0bec28bf8022e71a1435785ff6ba8a188954261aba78e
3a7e79478ab41af7c53ce14d9fca9815bffe1f73 test: retry when write to a socket fails on macOS (Ivan Metlushko)
8cf9d15b823d91d2a74fc83832fccca2219342c9 test: use pgrep for better compatibility (Ivan Metlushko)
Pull request description:
Rationale: a few minor changes to make experience of running tests on macOS a bit better
1.`pidof` is not available on BSD/macOS, while `pgrep` is present on BSD, Linux and macOS
2. Add retry as a workaround for a weird behavior when writing to a socket (https://bugs.python.org/issue33450). Stacktrace attached
Man pages:
https://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=pgrep&apropos=0&sektion=1&manpath=FreeBSD+6.0-RELEASE&arch=default&format=htmlhttps://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man1/pgrep.1.html
Related to #19281
Stacktrace example:
```
...
33/161 - feature_abortnode.py failed, Duration: 63 s
stdout:
2020-06-11T10:46:43.947000Z TestFramework (INFO): Initializing test directory /var/folders/2q/d5w9zh614r7g5c8r74ln3g400000gq/T/test_runner_₿_🏃_20200611_174102/feature_abortnode_128
2020-06-11T10:46:45.199000Z TestFramework (INFO): Waiting for crash
2020-06-11T10:47:15.921000Z TestFramework (INFO): Node crashed - now verifying restart fails
2020-06-11T10:47:47.068000Z TestFramework (INFO): Stopping nodes
[node 1] Cleaning up leftover process
stderr:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/Users/xxx/Projects/bitcoin/test/functional/feature_abortnode.py", line 50, in <module>
AbortNodeTest().main()
File "/Users/xxx/Projects/bitcoin/test/functional/test_framework/test_framework.py", line 142, in main
exit_code = self.shutdown()
File "/Users/xxx/Projects/bitcoin/test/functional/test_framework/test_framework.py", line 266, in shutdown
self.stop_nodes()
File "/Users/xxx/Projects/bitcoin/test/functional/test_framework/test_framework.py", line 515, in stop_nodes
node.stop_node(wait=wait)
File "/Users/xxx/Projects/bitcoin/test/functional/test_framework/test_node.py", line 318, in stop_node
self.stop(wait=wait)
File "/Users/xxx/Projects/bitcoin/test/functional/test_framework/coverage.py", line 47, in __call__
return_val = self.auth_service_proxy_instance.__call__(*args, **kwargs)
File "/Users/xxx/Projects/bitcoin/test/functional/test_framework/authproxy.py", line 142, in __call__
response, status = self._request('POST', self.__url.path, postdata.encode('utf-8'))
File "/Users/xxx/Projects/bitcoin/test/functional/test_framework/authproxy.py", line 107, in _request
self.__conn.request(method, path, postdata, headers)
File "/Users/xxx/.pyenv/versions/3.5.6/lib/python3.5/http/client.py", line 1107, in request
self._send_request(method, url, body, headers)
File "/Users/xxx/.pyenv/versions/3.5.6/lib/python3.5/http/client.py", line 1152, in _send_request
self.endheaders(body)
File "/Users/xxx/.pyenv/versions/3.5.6/lib/python3.5/http/client.py", line 1103, in endheaders
self._send_output(message_body)
File "/Users/xxx/.pyenv/versions/3.5.6/lib/python3.5/http/client.py", line 936, in _send_output
self.send(message_body)
File "/Users/xxx/.pyenv/versions/3.5.6/lib/python3.5/http/client.py", line 908, in send
self.sock.sendall(data)
OSError: [Errno 41] Protocol wrong type for socket
```
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
ACK 3a7e79478ab41af7c53ce14d9fca9815bffe1f73
Tree-SHA512: fefbe40ce94ab29f18bbbed2a434194b1384ffa5279b1d04db7a3708e3dd422bd9e450f1db3f95a1a851fac5a626ab533c6ebcfd7ede96f8ccae9e6f3e9fff92
fad798be76dd5e330463c837fda768477d536078 test: Default --previous-releases to false if dir is empty (MarcoFalke)
faf1c3cc58d14f86ba5364e6ee5c8ef29cac2e26 test: Replace TEST_PREVIOUS_RELEASES env var with test_framework option (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
The "auto-detection" feature is kept in place, but making it an option allows to properly document it. For example, on my machine I get:
```
$ ./test/functional/wallet_disable.py --help | grep previous-releases
--previous-releases Force test of previous releases (default: False)
ACKs for top commit:
Sjors:
re-tACK fad798b
Tree-SHA512: a7377d0d5378be0a50be278d76396cc403583617b5fc43467773eee706df698acf3f4e67651491183b9b43a8e1816b052e4c17b90272b7ec4b6ac134ad811400
## 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
we should not vote on triggers from the past
## 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)_
e8e48fa82bdce3f0c1da0693148867befa221de7 Converted lint-python-mutable-default-parameters.sh to python (TakeshiMusgrave)
Pull request description:
This converts one of the linter scripts to Python. Reference issue: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/24783
The approach is to just call git grep using subprocess.run.
Alternative approaches could be to use Python instead of git grep (I'm not sure how) or use ```pylint --disable=all --enable=W0102```, though that requires installation of pylint.
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
review ACK e8e48fa82bdce3f0c1da0693148867befa221de7
Tree-SHA512: 7f6f4887dee02c9751b225a6a131fb705868859c4a9af25bb3485cda2358650486b110f17adf89d96a20f212d7d94899922a07aab12c8dc11984cfd5feb7a076
b72925e7cea11522aca65580c136dbacb2753e83 lint: remove qt SIGNAL/SLOT lint (fanquake)
Pull request description:
I think we are past the point where we need to lint for this, the CPU
can probably be better utilized.
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
ACK b72925e7cea11522aca65580c136dbacb2753e83
Tree-SHA512: 3da6e4811cdd16ff64c7e26f641f7b24f0405cc86cec36666de58691d447eca8662c924df31c6c60b3523c13590bdc62205a3237b1b1794dd8cdef35519309b3
17648493df478fa9316cc9ed66fe6bc1c2c820a4 doc: Speed up functional test runs using ramdisk (willcl-ark)
Pull request description:
Using a ramdisk for the functional tests can give noticable speedups for developers and reviewers.
Local testing with an 8GB ramdisk saw a full test run using `test/functional/test_runner.py --jobs=100 --cachedir=/mnt/tmp/cache --tmpdir=/mnt/tmp` reduced from ~280 seconds to ~99 seconds.
Possible bikeshedding opportunity to be had over whether this might best fit into `doc/productivity.md`, but IMO more people will likely see it (and it will therefore be more useful) if it is here.
It seems best to select `tmpfs` over `ramfs` as `ramfs` can grow dynamically (good) but cannot be limited in size and might cause the system to hang if you run out of ram (bad), whereas `tmpfs` is size-limited and will overflow into swap.
ACKs for top commit:
josibake:
ACK 17648493df
jamesob:
ACK 17648493df
Tree-SHA512: b8e0846d4558a7a33fbb7cd190e30c36182db36095e1c1feae8c10a12042cff9d97739964bd9211d8564231dc99b4be5eed806d12a1d11dfa908157d7f26cc67
fadd73037e266edb844f0972e82e9213171ef214 refactor: Remove implicit-integer-sign-change suppressions in validation.cpp (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
A file-wide suppression is problematic because it will wave through future violations, potentially bugs.
Fix that by using per-statement casts.
ACKs for top commit:
shaavan:
ACK fadd73037e266edb844f0972e82e9213171ef214
theStack:
Code-review ACK fadd73037e266edb844f0972e82e9213171ef214
Tree-SHA512: a8a05613be35382b92d7970f958a4e8f4332432056eaa9d72f6719495134b93aaaeea692899d9035654d0e0cf56bcd759671eeeacfd0535582c0ea048ab58a56
c055f6b216659b844c8dcd4ff2a977f181099678 test: Remove false coinstatsindex test (Fabian Jahr)
Pull request description:
This test never actually tested the behavior that it describes in the comments. This was discovered in #21590 which seems to speed up muhash which lead to the test failing.
I can vaguely remember that the described behavior was desired by some reviewers of `coinstatsindex`: That `coinstatsindex` should be aware of stale blocks and able to return statistics on them as well. The index actually does this for blocks that it sees while the index is active, i.e. while running `coinstatsindex` all blocks will be indexed and even when they become stale the index (via `gettxoutsetinfo`) will still return a result for them when given the right hash. But this currently does not work for blocks that the node saw and that became stale _before_ the node activated `coinstatsindex`. While the index syncs initially everything but the active chain is ignored and I don't see any indication that this ever worked differently in the past.
Introducing this behavior seems non-trivial at first glance so, while I will give this a shot, I think the test should be removed so it does not confuse users and does not block #21590.
Top commit has no ACKs.
Tree-SHA512: b05f5dfeea3e453c8bb7c761501d0d896d4412a3f0c08037955951fae9fe388c63402da401792591e18da8fb67734f47f1a297d573cdb66e0ced451698718067
9b85a5e2f7e003ca8621feaac9bdd304d19081b4 tests: Test for dumpwallet lock order issue (Andrew Chow)
25d99e6511d8c43b2025a89bcd8295de755346a7 Reorder dumpwallet so that cs_main functions go first (Andrew Chow)
Pull request description:
When a wallet is loaded which has an unconfirmed transaction in the mempool, it will end up establishing the lock order of cs_wallet -> cs_main -> cs_KeyStore. If `dumpwallet` is used on this wallet, then a lock order of cs_wallet -> cs_KeyStore -> cs_main will be used, which causes a lock order assertion. This PR fixes this by reordering `dumpwallet` and `GetKeyBirthTimes` (only used by `dumpwallet`). Specifically, in both functions, the function calls which lock cs_main are done prior to locking cs_KeyStore. This avoids the lock order issue.
Additionally, I have added a test case to `wallet_dump.py`. Of course testing this requires `--enable-debug`.
Fixes#22489
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
review ACK 9b85a5e2f7e003ca8621feaac9bdd304d19081b4 🎰
ryanofsky:
Code review ACK 9b85a5e2f7e003ca8621feaac9bdd304d19081b4. Nice to reduce lock scope, and good test!
prayank23:
tACK 9b85a5e2f7
lsilva01:
Tested ACK 9b85a5e2f7 under the same conditions reported in issue #22489 and the `dumpwallet` command completed successfully.
Tree-SHA512: d370a8f415ad64ee6a538ff419155837bcdbb167e3831b06572562289239028c6b46d80b23d227286afe875d9351f3377574ed831549ea426fb926af0e19c755
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Platform (in the scope of Withdrawals) need to be aware if a tx isn't in
mempool when requesting status of a tx using RPC `gettxchainlocks`.
cc @markin-io
## What was done?
- mempool is passed to `GetTransaction` and saving the result for
checking latter.
- If the returned tx_ref is nullptr, then the RPC returns null for the
corresponding tx in the array.
Example:
`tx1` is mined and chainlocked, `tx2` is in mempool and `tx3` doesn't
exist.
The result now is:
`[
{
"height": 830,
"chainlock": false,
"mempool": true
},
{
"height": -1,
"chainlock": false,
"mempool": true
},
{
"height": -1,
"chainlock": false,
"mempool": false
}
]`
## 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)_
---------
Co-authored-by: Konstantin Akimov <knstqq@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Platform in the scope of credit withdrawals, need a way to get the
status of an Asset Unlock by index.
## What was done?
A new RPC was created `getassetunlockchainlocks` that accepts Asset
Unlock indexes array as parameter and return corresponding status for
each index.
The possible outcomes per each index are:
- `chainlocked`: If the Asset Unlock index is mined on a Chainlocked
block.
- `mined`: If no Chainlock information is available, and the Asset
Unlock index is mined.
- `mempooled`: If the Asset Unlock index is in the mempool.
- `unknown`: If none of the above are valid.
Note: This RPC is whitelisted for the Platform RPC user.
## How Has This Been Tested?
Inserted on `feature_asset_locks.py` covering cases where Asset Unlock
txs are in mempool, mined and not present.
## Breaking Changes
no
## 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: thephez <thephez@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Konstantin Akimov <knstqq@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: PastaPastaPasta <6443210+PastaPastaPasta@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: pasta <pasta@dashboost.org>
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
old mode 100644
new mode 100755
## What was done?
`chmod +x test/functional/*.py`
## How Has This Been Tested?
can now run these test directly e.g. `./test/functional/rpc_quorum.py`
## 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
`instantlock` and `chainlock` are broken in `getspecialtxes`
kudos to @thephez for finding the issue
## What was done?
pass the hash and also rename the variable to self-describing
## How Has This Been Tested?
run `getspecialtxes` on a node with and without the patch
## Breaking Changes
`instantlock` and `chainlock` will show actual values and not just
`false` all the time now (not sure if that qualifies for "breaking"
though)
## 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
Once Platform is live, there could be an edge case where the CL could
arrive to an EvoNode faster through Platform quorum than regular P2P
propagation.
## What was done?
This PR introduces a new RPC `submitchainlock` with the following 3
mandatory parameters:
- `blockHash`, `signature` and `height`.
Besides some basic tests:
- If the block is unknown then the RPC returns an error (could happen if
the node is stucked)
- If the signature is not verified then the RPC return an error.
- If the node already has this CL, the RPC returns true.
- If the node doesn't have this CL, it inserts it, broadcast it through
the inv system and return true.
## How Has This Been Tested?
`feature_llmq_chainlocks.py` was modified with the following scenario:
1. node0 is isolated from the rest of the network
2. node1 mines a new block and waits for CL
3. Make sure node0 doesn't know the new block/CL (by checking
`getbestchainlock()`)
4. CL is submitted via the new RPC on node0
5. checking `getbestchainlock()` and make sure the CL was processed +
'known_block' is false
6. reconnect node0
## Breaking Changes
no
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [x] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [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: thephez <thephez@users.noreply.github.com>
e4356f6a6c18e5027a064a4d3a5deda27985f584 Testcase for wallet issue with orphaned rewards. (Daniel Kraft)
Pull request description:
This adds a new test case demonstrating the wallet issue when block rewards are orphaned (#14148).
ACKs for top commit:
LarryRuane:
ACK e4356f6a6c18e5027a064a4d3a5deda27985f584
leonardojobim:
reACK e4356f6a6c .
Tree-SHA512: e9a2310ee1b3d52cfa302f431ed3d272bbc1b9195439ff318d9eb1006c0b28968dbe840e1600b6ff185e5d7ea57e4dcc837cef16051b5537445e10bc363b8c22
ff44cae279bef7997f76db18deb1e41b39f05cb6 test: Change feature_config_args.py not to rely on strange regtest=0 behavior (Russell Yanofsky)
Pull request description:
Update test to simply generate a normal mainnet configuration file instead of using a crazy setup where a regtest=1 config file using an includeconf in the [regtest] section includes another config file that specifies regtest=0, retroactively switching the network to mainnet.
This setup was fragile and only worked because the triggered InitError happened early enough that none of the ignored [regtest] options mattered (only affecting log output).
This change was originally made as part of #17493
Top commit has no ACKs.
Tree-SHA512: 3f77305454f04438493dfc2abd78a00434b30869454d1c3f54587b9c1f63239c49c90fb3b4d3a777ad130f2184e0f2dac87cee4cd23c50f1b3496a375943da01
3ddbf22ed179a2db733af4b521bec5d2b13ebf4b util: Disallow negative mocktime (MarcoFalke)
f5f2f9716885e7548809e77f46b493c896a019bf net: Avoid UBSan warning in ProcessMessage(...) (practicalswift)
Pull request description:
Avoid UBSan warning in `ProcessMessage(...)`.
Context: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20380#issuecomment-770427182 (thanks Crypt-iQ!)
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
re-ACK 3ddbf22ed179a2db733af4b521bec5d2b13ebf4b only change is adding patch written by me
ajtowns:
ACK 3ddbf22ed179a2db733af4b521bec5d2b13ebf4b -- code review only
Tree-SHA512: e8d7af0457ca86872b75a4e406c0a93aafd841c2962e244e147e748cc7ca118c56be0fdafe53765f4b291410030b2c3cc8f76f733b37a955d34fc885ab6037b9
ab9c34237ab7b056394e0bd1f7cb131ffd95754c release: remove gitian (fanquake)
Pull request description:
Note that this doesn't yet touch any glibc back compat related code.
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
Code review ACK ab9c34237ab7b056394e0bd1f7cb131ffd95754c
Tree-SHA512: 8e2fe3ec1097f54bb11ab9136b43818d90eab5dbb0a663ad6a552966ada4bdb49cc12ff4e66f0ec0ec5400bda5c81f3a3ce70a9ebb6fe1e0db612da9f00a51a7
e80259f1976545e4f1ab6a420644be0c32261773 Additionally treat Tx.nVersion as unsigned in joinpsbts (Matt Corallo)
970de70bdd3542e75b73c79b06f143168c361494 Dump transaction version as an unsigned integer in RPC/TxToUniv (Matt Corallo)
Pull request description:
Consensus-wise we already treat it as an unsigned integer (the
only rules around it are in CSV/locktime handling), but changing
the underlying data type means touching consensus code for a
simple cleanup change, which isn't really worth it.
See-also, https://github.com/rust-bitcoin/rust-bitcoin/pull/299
ACKs for top commit:
sipa:
ACK e80259f1976545e4f1ab6a420644be0c32261773
practicalswift:
ACK e80259f1976545e4f1ab6a420644be0c32261773
ajtowns:
ACK e80259f1976545e4f1ab6a420644be0c32261773 code review -- checked all other uses of tx.nVersion treat it as unsigned (except for policy.cpp:IsStandard anyway), so looks good.
naumenkogs:
ACK e80259f
Tree-SHA512: 6760a2c77e24e9e1f79a336ca925f9bbca3a827ce02003c71d7f214b82ed3dea13fa7d9f87df9b9445cd58dff8b44a15571d821c876f22f8e5a372a014c9976b
60ed33904cf974e8f3c1b95392a23db1fe2d4a98 tests: implement base58_decode (10xcryptodev)
Pull request description:
implements TODO: def base58_decode
ACKs for top commit:
ryanofsky:
Code review ACK 60ed33904cf974e8f3c1b95392a23db1fe2d4a98. Just suggested changes since last review. Thank you for taking suggestions!
Tree-SHA512: b3c06b4df041a6d88033cd077a093813a688e42d0b9aa777c715e5fd69cfba7b1bf984428bd98417d3c15232d3d48bc9c163317564f9e1d562db6611c21e2c10
e66870c5a4c2adbd30dca67d409fd5cd98697587 zmq: Append address to notify log output (nthumann)
241803da211265444e65f254f24dd184f2457fa9 test: Add zmq test to support multiple interfaces (nthumann)
a0b2e5cb6aa8db0563fac7d67a949b9baefe3a25 doc: Add release notes to support multiple interfaces (nthumann)
b1c3f180ecb63f3960506d202feebaa4271058ae doc: Adjust ZMQ usage to support multiple interfaces (nthumann)
347c94f551c3f144c44e00373e4dd61ff6d908b7 zmq: Add support to listen on multiple interfaces (Nicolas Thumann)
Pull request description:
This PR adds support for ZeroMQ to listen on multiple interfaces, just like the RPC server.
Currently, if you specify more than one e.g. `zmqpubhashblock` paramter, only the first one will be used. Therefore a user may be forced to listen on all interfaces (e.g. `zmqpubhashblock=0.0.0.0:28332`), which can result in an increased attack surface.
With this PR a user can specify multiple interfaces to listen on, e.g.
`-zmqpubhashblock=tcp://127.0.0.1:28332 -zmqpubhashblock=tcp://192.168.1.123:28332`.
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
Code review ACK e66870c5a4c2adbd30dca67d409fd5cd98697587
instagibbs:
reACK e66870c5a4
Tree-SHA512: f38ab4a6ff00dc821e5f4842508cefadb701e70bb3893992c1b32049be20247c8aa9476a1f886050c5f17fe7f2ce99ee30193ce2c81a7482a5a51f8fc22300c7
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
The test is a bit broken and incomplete, some testing scenarios aren't
realistic
## What was done?
pls see individual commits
## How Has This Been Tested?
run it
## Breaking Changes
n/a, tests only
## 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)_
4dca7d0a98 appveyor: Enable multiwallet test (Chun Kuan Lee)
Pull request description:
Based on #14320
This PR enable multiwallet test on appveyor. Also re-enable symlink tests on Windows which is available after Windows Vista.
I disable these tests in #13964 because I suppose that Windows does not support symlink, but I was wrong.
Tree-SHA512: 852cd4dedf36ec9c34aff8926cb34e6a560aea0bb9170c7a2264fc292dbb605622d561568d8df39aeb90d3d2bb700901d218ea7e7c5e21d84827c40d6370b369
92bcd70808b9cac56b184903aa6d37baf9641b37 [wallet] allow transaction without change if keypool is empty (Sjors Provoost)
709f8685ac37510aa145ac259753583c82280038 [wallet] CreateTransaction: simplify change address check (Sjors Provoost)
5efc25f9638866941028454cfa9bae27f1519cb4 [wallet] translate "Keypool ran out" message (Sjors Provoost)
Pull request description:
Extracted from #16944
First this PR simplifies the check when generating a change address, by dropping `CanGetAddresses` and just letting `reservedest.GetReservedDestination` do this check.
Second, when the keypool is empty, instead of immediately giving up, we create a dummy change address and pass that to coin selection. If we didn't need the change address (e.g. when spending the entire balance), then it's all good. If we did need a change address, we throw the original error.
ACKs for top commit:
fjahr:
Code review ACK 92bcd70808b9cac56b184903aa6d37baf9641b37
jonasschnelli:
utACK 92bcd70808b9cac56b184903aa6d37baf9641b37
achow101:
ACK 92bcd70808b9cac56b184903aa6d37baf9641b37
meshcollider:
Code review ACK 92bcd70808b9cac56b184903aa6d37baf9641b37
Tree-SHA512: 07b8c8251f57061c58a85ebf0359be63583c23bac7a2c4cefdc14820c0cdebcc90a2bb218e5ede0db11d1e204cda149e056dfd18614642070b3d56efe2735006
34c80d9eee7d21755f2bb80f7c97fd30d2c7b656 test: Add option to git-subtree-check to do full check, add help (Wladimir J. van der Laan)
Pull request description:
This adds a brief help text to `git-subtree-check.sh` and adds an option to do a full remote check instead of having two different code paths with a successful exit status. Also make it explicit that the CI is not doing this.
ACKs for top commit:
fjahr:
tested ACK 34c80d9eee7d21755f2bb80f7c97fd30d2c7b656
Tree-SHA512: 20f672fd3b3c1d633eccf9998fdd738194cdd7d10cc206691f2dcc28bbbf8187b8d06b87814f875a06145b179f5ca1f4f4f9922972be72759cf5ac6e0c11abd1
a4a3fc4cd2e6f53cdffcc2962fd152a4e40c7413 doc: improve subtree check instructions (Sjors Provoost)
Pull request description:
Running `git-subtree-check.sh` requires adding the subtree repository as a remote. I learned that several years ago and then forgot again.
This PR also improves the error message if the subtree commit can't be found.
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
ACK a4a3fc4cd2e6f53cdffcc2962fd152a4e40c7413
fanquake:
ACK a4a3fc4cd2e6f53cdffcc2962fd152a4e40c7413 - this looks ok.
Tree-SHA512: 959bd923726c172d17f9f97f8a56988bf2df5a94d3131e5152a66150b941394cee9e82fdc6b86e09c0ba91d123a496599f07ca454212168d8d301738394c12c8
487aff421 Check subtree consistency in Travis (Pieter Wuille)
e1d0cc23a Improve git-subtree-check.sh (Pieter Wuille)
Pull request description:
Apparently many of our subtrees get modified by PRs in this repository, without getting noticed.
To improve upon this:
* Make git-subtree-check.sh capable of doing a weaker consistency check (that doesn't need access to external repositories), but which should be sufficient to detect unintended changes. It can be fooled by a fake subtree merge commit, but that would hopefully be obvious to reviewers.
* Make Travis invoke this subtree check for each of our subtrees.
Note that Travis is currently expected to fail on this PR, as 2 out of 4 subtrees (`src/secp156k1` and `src/univalue` have been modified directly in master).
Tree-SHA512: 465b680392d3daf38a8c1dda77d6f74b1d1c23324c378774777fb95aa673e119a8f7e3ccc124e41d97b5ac8975f3d79f3015797d2d309666582394364917ec4e
facef3d4131f9980a4516282f11731361559509c doc: Explain that anyone can work on good first issues, move text to CONTRIBUTING.md (MarcoFalke)
fae2fb2a196ee864e9a13fffc24a0279cd5d17e6 doc: Expand section on Getting Started (MarcoFalke)
100000d1b2c2e38d7a14a31b0af79e0e4316b04c doc: Add headings to CONTRIBUTING.md (MarcoFalke)
fab893e0caf510d4836a20194892ef9c71426c51 doc: Fix unrelated typos reported by codespell (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Some random doc changes:
* Add sections to docs, so that they can be linked to
* Explain that anyone (even maintainers) are allowed to work on good first issues
* Expand section on Getting Started slightly
ACKs for top commit:
hebasto:
ACK facef3d4131f9980a4516282f11731361559509c
fanquake:
ACK facef3d4131f9980a4516282f11731361559509c
Tree-SHA512: 8998e273a76dbf4ca77e79374c14efe4dfcc5c6df6b7d801e1e1e436711dbe6f76b436f9cbc6cacb45a56827babdd6396f3bd376a9426ee7be3bb9b8a3b8e383
aaaaad6ac95b402fe18d019d67897ced6b316ee0 scripted-diff: Bump copyright of files changed in 2019 (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
ACKs for top commit:
practicalswift:
ACK aaaaad6ac95b402fe18d019d67897ced6b316ee0
promag:
ACK aaaaad6ac95b402fe18d019d67897ced6b316ee0 🎉
fanquake:
ACK aaaaad6ac95b402fe18d019d67897ced6b316ee0 - going to merge this now because the year is over and conflicts are minimal.
Tree-SHA512: 58cb1f53bc4c1395b2766f36fabc7e2332e213780a802762fff0afd59468dad0c3265f553714d761c7a2c44ff90f7dc250f04458f4b2eb8eef8b94f8c9891321
d478a472eb0d666e8a762ed8d24fafbabc5f94f3 test: Fix combine_logs.py for AppVeyor build (Martin Zumsande)
Pull request description:
Fixes#16894
This fixes the problem of AppVeyor builds not showing `debug.log` if a functional test fails, because the windows separator `\` doesn't work together with the regex in `combine_logs.py`.
A fix was already attempted in #16896, however, that PR became inactive and was marked "up for grabs", plus it's a really small change.
As suggested by jamesob, this PR uses `pathlib`: For the glob and to convert the path to a posix-style string, it leaves the regex as is (in contrast to #16896 which adjusted the regex).
I tested this locally on Windows and Ubuntu.
Top commit has no ACKs.
Tree-SHA512: 603b4359b6009b6da874c30f69759acda03730ee5747898a0fe957a5fc37ee9ba07858c6aa2169bf4c40521f37e47138e8314d698652ea2760fa0a3f76b890bd
cc556e4a30 Add test for superfluous witness record in deserialization (Gregory Sanders)
25b0786581 Fix missing input template by making minimal tx (Gregory Sanders)
Pull request description:
Adds coverage for changed behavior in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14039
ACKs for commit cc556e:
MarcoFalke:
utACK cc556e4a30b4a32eab6722f590489d89b2875de3
Tree-SHA512: 3404c8f75e87503983fac5ae27d877309eb3b902f2ec993762911c71610ca449bef0ed98bd17e029414828025b2713e1bd012e63b2a06497e34f1056acaa6321
fac4e731a8 test: Run invalid_txs.InputMissing test in feature_block (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Tree-SHA512: 24c3f519ba0cf417b66e0df6f5ddc0430e3f419af4705a9c85096da47ff4d8f51487d65b68f3f993800003b3f936d95d8a0bade846e1b45f95b2bdbecc9ebab7
fafd9165e911bf33d6212ca8a613b71878c82449 test: Add missing sync_all to feature_coinstatsindex (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Sync the blocks before invalidating them to ensure all nodes are on the right tip. Otherwise nodes[0] might stay on the "stale" block and the test fails (intermittently)
ACKs for top commit:
jamesob:
crACK fafd9165e9
Tree-SHA512: ca567b97b839b56c91d52831eaac18d8c843d376be90c9fd8b49d2eb4a46b801a1d2402996d5dfe2bef3e2c9bd75d19ed443e3f42cc4679c5f20043ba556efc8
5353b0c64d32e44fc411464e080d4b00fae7124e Change type definitions for "chain" and "setup_clean_chain" from type comments to Python 3.6+ types. Additionally, set type for "nodes". (Kiminuo)
Pull request description:
### Motivation
When I wanted to understand better https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19145/files#diff-4bebbd3b112dc222ea7e75ef051838ceffcee63b9e9234a98a4cc7251d34451b test, I noticed that navigation in PyCharm/VS Code did not work for `nodes` variable. I think this is frustrating, especially for newcomers.
### Summary
* This PR modifies Python 3.5 [type comments](https://mypy.readthedocs.io/en/stable/cheat_sheet_py3.html#variables) to Python 3.6+ types and adds a proper type for `nodes` [instance attribute](https://mypy.readthedocs.io/en/stable/class_basics.html#instance-and-class-attributes).
* This PR does not change behavior.
* This PR is intentionally very small, if the concept is accepted, a follow-up PRs can be more ambitious.
### End result
1. Open `test/functional/feature_abortnode.py`
2. Move your caret to: `self.nodes[0].generate[caret here](3)`
3. Use "Go to definition" [F12] should work now.
I have tested this on PyCharm (Windows, Ubuntu) and VS Code (Windows, Ubuntu).
Note: Some `TestNode` methods (e.g. `self.nodes[0].getblock(...)` ) use `__call__` mechanism and navigation does not work for them even with this PR.
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
ACK 5353b0c64d32e44fc411464e080d4b00fae7124e
theStack:
ACK 5353b0c64d32e44fc411464e080d4b00fae7124e
Tree-SHA512: 821773f052ab9b2889dc357d38c59407a4af09e3b86d7134fcca7d78e5edf3a5ede9bfb37595ea97caf9ebfcbda372bcf73763b7f89b0677670f21b3e396a12b
55311197c483477b79883da5da09f2bc71acc7cf Added new test for future blocks reacceptance (sanket1729)
511a5af4622915c236cfb11df5234232c2983e45 Fixed inconsistencies between code and comments (sanket1729)
Pull request description:
This Commit does 3 things:
1) Adds a test case for checking reacceptance a previously rejected block which
was too far in the future.
~~2) clean up uses of rehash or calc_sha256 where it was not needed~~
3) While constructing block 44, this commit makes the code consistent with the expected figure in
the comment just above it by adding a transaction to the block.
4) Fix comment describing `sign_tx()` function
ACKs for top commit:
duncandean:
reACK 5531119
brunoerg:
reACK 55311197c483477b79883da5da09f2bc71acc7cf
Tree-SHA512: d40c72fcdbb0b2a0715adc58441eeea08147ee2ec5e371a4ccc824ebfdc6450698bd40aaeecb7ea7bfdb3cd1b264dd821b890276fff8b8d89b7225cdd9d6b546
fad7be584ffaf8099cc099d9378ba831c9483260 test: Fix intermittent p2p_finerprint issue (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
A single sync_with_ping can't be used to drop a block announcement, as the block might be sent *after* the ping has been responded to.
Fix that by waiting for the block.
ACKs for top commit:
theStack:
ACK fad7be584ffaf8099cc099d9378ba831c9483260
Tree-SHA512: d43ba9d07273486858f65a26326cc6637ef743bf7b400e5048ba7eac266fb1893283e6503dd49f179caa1abab2977315fb70ba9fba34be9a817a74259d8e4034
fbeb8c43bc5bce131e15eb9e162ea457bfe2b83e test: add type annotations to util.get_rpc_proxy (fanquake)
Pull request description:
Split out from #22092 while we address the functional test failure.
ACKs for top commit:
instagibbs:
ACK fbeb8c43bc
Tree-SHA512: 031ef8703202ae5271787719fc3fea8693574b2eb937ccf852875de95798d7fa3c39a8db7c91993d0c946b45d9b4d6de570bd1102e0344348784723bd84803a8
f685a13bef0418663015ea6d8f448f075510c0ec doc: GetTransaction()/getrawtransaction follow-ups to #22383 (John Newbery)
abc57e1f0882a1a2bb20474648419979af6e383d refactor: move `GetTransaction(...)` to node/transaction.cpp (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
~This PR is based on #22383, which should be reviewed first~ (merged by now).
In [yesterday's PR review club session to PR 22383](https://bitcoincore.reviews/22383), the idea of moving the function `GetTransaction(...)` from src/validation.cpp to src/node/transaction.cpp came up. With this, the circular dependency "index/txindex -> validation -> index/txindex" is removed (see change in `lint-circular-dependencies.sh`). Thanks to jnewbery for suggesting and to sipa for providing historical background.
Relevant IRC log:
```
17:52 <jnewbery> Was anyone surprised that GetTransaction() is in validation.cpp? It seems to me that node/transaction.cpp would be a more appropriate place for it.
17:53 <raj_> jnewbery, +1
17:53 <stickies-v> agreed!
17:54 <glozow> jnewbery ya
17:54 <jnewbery> seems weird that validation would call into txindex. I wonder if we remove this function, then validation would no longer need to #include txindex
17:54 <sipa> GetTransaction predates node/transaction.cpp, and even the generic index framework itself :)
17:55 <sipa> (before 0.8, validation itself used the txindex)
17:55 <jnewbery> (and GetTransaction() seems like a natural sibling to BroadcastTransaction(), which is already in node/transaction.cpp)
17:55 <jnewbery> sipa: right, this is not meant as a criticism of course. Just wondering if we can organize things a bit more rationally now that we have better separation between things.
17:55 <sipa> jnewbery: sure, just providing background
17:56 <sipa> seems very reasonable to move it elsewhere now
```
The commit should be trivial to review with `--color-moved`.
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
Code review ACK f685a13bef0418663015ea6d8f448f075510c0ec
rajarshimaitra:
tACK f685a13bef
mjdietzx:
crACK f685a13bef0418663015ea6d8f448f075510c0ec
LarryRuane:
Code review, test ACK f685a13bef0418663015ea6d8f448f075510c0ec
Tree-SHA512: 0e844a6ecb1be04c638b55bc4478c2949549a4fcae01c984eee078de74d176fb19d508fc09360a62ad130677bfa7daf703b67870800e55942838d7313246248c
2ebf2fe0e4727a5a57a03f4283bdf1e263855803 test: check for RPC error 'Transaction already in block chain' (-27) (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
This PR adds missing test coverage for the RPC error "Transaction already in block chain" (error code `RPC_VERIFY_ALREADY_IN_CHAIN` = `RPC_TRANSACTION_ALREADY_IN_CHAIN` = -27), which is thrown in the function `BroadcastTransaction` (src/node/transaction.cpp).
ACKs for top commit:
kristapsk:
ACK 2ebf2fe0e4727a5a57a03f4283bdf1e263855803 (ran linter, looked at changes and ran modified test and checked code in `src/node/transaction.cpp`)
darosior:
ACK 2ebf2fe0e4727a5a57a03f4283bdf1e263855803
Tree-SHA512: 8bfbd3ff3da0cb3b8745f69b8ca2377f85fa99f0270750840b60e6ae43b5645c5c59b236993e8b2ad0444ec4171484e4f1ee23fa7e81b79d4222bcb623666fa5
20edf4bcf61e9fa310c3d7f3cac0c80a04df5364 rpc: Return block time in getblockchaininfo (João Barbosa)
Pull request description:
Return tip time in `getblockchaininfo`, for some use cases this can save a call to `getblock`.
ACKs for top commit:
naumenkogs:
ACK 20edf4bcf61e9fa310c3d7f3cac0c80a04df5364
theStack:
re-ACK 20edf4bcf61e9fa310c3d7f3cac0c80a04df5364
0xB10C:
ACK 20edf4bcf61e9fa310c3d7f3cac0c80a04df5364
kristapsk:
ACK 20edf4bcf61e9fa310c3d7f3cac0c80a04df5364
Zero-1729:
re-ACK 20edf4bcf61e9fa310c3d7f3cac0c80a04df5364
Tree-SHA512: 29a920cfff1ef53e0af601c3f93f8f9171f3be47fc84b0fa293cb865b824976e8c1510b17b27d17daf0b8e658dd77d9dc388373395f0919fc4a23cd5019642d5
489ebfd7a16443d8263c048d55622da297df7c39 tests: feature_backwards_compatibility.py test downgrade after upgrade (Andrew Chow)
Pull request description:
After upgrading the node, try to go back to the original version to make sure that using a newer node version does not prevent the wallet file from being downgraded again.
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
ACK 489ebfd7a16443d8263c048d55622da297df7c39
Tree-SHA512: 86231de6514b3657912fd9d6621212166fd2b29b591fc97120092c548babcf1d6f50b5bd103b28cecde395a26809134f01c1a198725596c3626420de3fd1f017
80d4423f997e15780bfa3f91bf4b4bf656b8ea45 Test buffered valid message (Troy Giorshev)
Pull request description:
This PR is a tweak of #19302. This sends a valid message.
Additionally, this test includes logging in the same vein as #19272.
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
tested ACK 80d4423f997e15780bfa3f91bf4b4bf656b8ea45 (added an assert(false) to observe deterministic coverage) 🌦
gzhao408:
ACK 80d4423f99👊
Tree-SHA512: 3b1aa5ec480a1661917354788923d64595e2886448c9697ec0606a81293e8b4a4642b2b3cc9afb2206ce6f74e5c6d687308c5ad19cb73c5b354d3071ad8496f8
Adds missing changes from p2p_invalid_tx.py but one assert is still disabled
fa4c29bc1d2425f861845bae4f3816d9817e622a test: Add various low-level p2p tests (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
ACKs for top commit:
jonatack:
ACK fa4c29bc1d242
Tree-SHA512: 842821b97359d4747c763398f7013415858c18a300cd882887bc812d039b5cbb67b9aa6f68434575dbc3c52f7eb8c43d1b293a59555a7242c0ca615cf44dc0aa
dc12f2e212dfacbe238cf68eb454b9ec71169bbc test: improve error msg on previous release tarball extraction failure (kdmukai)
7121fd8fa7de50ff67157f81f9e0f267b9795dbb test: self-sign previous release binaries for arm64 macOS (kdmukai)
Pull request description:
## The Problem
If you run `test/get_previous_releases.py -b` on an M1 or M2 mac, you'll get an unsigned v23.0 binary in the arm64 tarball. macOS [sets stricter requirements on ARM binaries](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26996578) so the unsigned arm64 binary is apparently completely unusable without being signed/notarized(?).
This means that any test that depends on a previous release (e.g. `wallet_backwards_compatibility.py`) will fail because the v23.0 node cannot launch:
```
TestFramework (ERROR): Assertion failed
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/Users/kdmukai/dev/bitcoin-core/test/functional/test_framework/test_framework.py", line 563, in start_nodes
node.wait_for_rpc_connection()
File "/Users/kdmukai/dev/bitcoin-core/test/functional/test_framework/test_node.py", line 231, in wait_for_rpc_connection
raise FailedToStartError(self._node_msg(
test_framework.test_node.FailedToStartError: [node 2] bitcoind exited with status -9 during initialization
```
This can also be confirmed by downloading bitcoin-23.0-arm64-apple-darwin.tar.gz (https://bitcoincore.org/bin/bitcoin-core-23.0/) and trying to run any of the binaries manually on an M1 or M2 mac.
## Solution in this PR
(UPDATED) Per @ hebasto, we can self-sign the arm64 binaries. This PR checks each binary in the previous release's "bin/" and verifies if the arm64 binary is signed. If not, attempt to self-sign and confirm success.
(note: an earlier version of this PR downloaded the x86_64 binary as a workaround but this approach has been discarded)
## Longer term solution
If possible, produce signed arm64 binaries in a future v23.x tarball?
Note that this same problem affects the new v24.0.1 arm64 tarball so perhaps a signed v24.x.x tarball would also be ideal?
That being said, this PR will check all current and future arm64 binaries and self-sign as needed, so perhaps we need not worry about pre-signing the tarball binaries. And I did test a version of `get_previous_releases.py` that includes the new v24.0.1 binaries and it successfully self-signed both v23.0 and v24.0.1, as expected.
## Further info:
Somewhat related to: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15774#issuecomment-1265164753
And @ fanquake noted on IRC that you can confirm which binaries are or are not signed via:
```
$ codesign -v -d bitcoin-qt
bitcoin-qt: code object is not signed at all
```
ACKs for top commit:
hebasto:
ACK dc12f2e212dfacbe238cf68eb454b9ec71169bbc
Tree-SHA512: 644895f8e97f5ffb3c4754c1db2c48abd77fa100c2058e3c896af04806596fc2b9c807a3f3a2add5be53301ad40ca2b8171585bd254e691f6eb38714d938396b
dba123167236a172d2d33861d58aa94a19729671 test: previous releases: add v23.0 (Sjors Provoost)
Pull request description:
Follows the same pattern as d8b705f1caeb3b4a6790cb26e4e5584ca791d965 (v22.0) and 8a57a06a5062dd8dfdefca4e404d0ddbd2a3da1d (v0.21.0).
Starting from v23.0 there is a separate macOS release for x86_64 and aarch64.
ACKs for top commit:
prusnak:
Approach ACK dba123167236a172d2d33861d58aa94a19729671
Tree-SHA512: 249aeddd5e80e163578581e5c8e9b6579f3694abc3d1fb68dddb7b42d75021ad85266688ec4a365a6631d82a65a19873aff7ba61c0ea59d21f8adbe4b772dc16
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Non-deterministic IS locks aren't used anymore since v18 dip24.
We should drop that support to make code simpler.
## What was done?
Dropped non-deterministic IS code, `evo_instantsend_tests` and
`feature_llmq_is_migration.py` (don't need it anymore), adjusted func
tests.
## How Has This Been Tested?
all tests, synced Testnet
## Breaking Changes
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] 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: Konstantin Akimov <545784+knst@users.noreply.github.com>
511aa4f1c7508f15cab8d7e58007900ad6fd3d5d Add unit test for ChaCha20's new caching (Pieter Wuille)
fb243d25f754da8f01793b41e2d225b917f3e5d7 Improve test vectors for ChaCha20 (Pieter Wuille)
93aee8bbdad808b7009279b67470d496cc26b936 Inline ChaCha20 32-byte specific constants (Pieter Wuille)
62ec713961ade7b58e90c905395558a41e8a59f0 Only support 32-byte keys in ChaCha20{,Aligned} (Pieter Wuille)
f21994a02e1cc46d41995581b54222abc655be93 Use ChaCha20Aligned in MuHash3072 code (Pieter Wuille)
5d16f757639e2cc6e81db6e07bc1d5dd74abca6c Use ChaCha20 caching in FastRandomContext (Pieter Wuille)
38eaece67b1bc37b2f502348c5d7537480a34346 Add fuzz test for testing that ChaCha20 works as a stream (Pieter Wuille)
5f05b27841af0bed1b6e7de5f46ffe33e5919e4d Add xoroshiro128++ PRNG (Martin Leitner-Ankerl)
12ff72476ac0dbf8add736ad3fb5fad2eeab156c Make unrestricted ChaCha20 cipher not waste keystream bytes (Pieter Wuille)
6babf402130a8f3ef3058594750aeaa50b8f5044 Rename ChaCha20::Seek -> Seek64 to clarify multiple of 64 (Pieter Wuille)
e37bcaa0a6dbb334ab6e817efcb609ccee6edc39 Split ChaCha20 into aligned/unaligned variants (Pieter Wuille)
Pull request description:
This is an alternative to #25354 (by my benchmarking, somewhat faster), subsumes #25712, and adds additional test vectors.
It separates the multiple-of-64-bytes-only "core" logic (which becomes simpler) from a layer around which performs caching/slicing to support arbitrary byte amounts. Both have their uses (in particular, the MuHash3072 code can benefit from multiple-of-64-bytes assumptions), plus the separation results in more readable code. Also, since FastRandomContext effectively had its own (more naive) caching on top of ChaCha20, that can be dropped in favor of ChaCha20's new built-in caching.
I thought about rebasing #25712 on top of this, but the changes before are fairly extensive, so redid it instead.
ACKs for top commit:
ajtowns:
ut reACK 511aa4f1c7508f15cab8d7e58007900ad6fd3d5d
dhruv:
tACK crACK 511aa4f1c7
Tree-SHA512: 3aa80971322a93e780c75a8d35bd39da3a9ea570fbae4491eaf0c45242f5f670a24a592c50ad870d5fd09b9f88ec06e274e8aa3cefd9561d623c63f7198cf2c7
## 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
Be more explicit about the fact that spork24 is for non-mainnet only,
enforce it in code.
NOTE: I know we have EHF signalling disabled for mainnet in v20 but I
think it still makes sense to make sure spork24 condition won't slip
into mainnet in some future version accidentally.
## What was done?
pls see individual commits
## 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)_
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
1. we _should not_ skip masternode payments checks below
nSuperblockStartBlock or when governance is disabled
2. we _should_ skip superblock payee checks while we aren't synced yet
(should help recovering from missed triggers)
## What was done?
pls see individual commits.
## How Has This Been Tested?
run tests, sync w/ and w/out `--disablegovernance`, reindexed on testnet
## 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
With DIP29 added to v20, miners include best CL Signature in CbTx.
The purpose of this test, is to ensure that mining is still possible
when CL information isn't available.
In such case, miners are expected to copy best CL Signature from CbTx of
previous block.
## What was done?
Two scenarios are implemented:
- Add dynamically a node, make sure `getbestchainlock()` fails, let it
mine a block.
- Disable `SPORK_19_CHAINLOCKS_ENABLED`, add dynamically a node, make
sure `getbestchainlock()` fails, let it mine a block.
In both tests, we make sure the block is accepted by everyone and that
the `bestCLSignature` in CbTx is copied from previous block.
## How Has This Been Tested?
`feature_llmq_chainlocks.py`
## Breaking Changes
no
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [x] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [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
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
Currently, on functional tests v20 activates at height 1440 which is
later than needed.
## What was done?
Reduced the window size of v20 from 480 to 400 which activates v20 at
1200.
Adjusted tests to this change.
Note regarding the window analysis for MN payments in
`feature_llmq_evo.py` (reduced from 256 to 48 blocks):
48 window is enough to analyse 4 MNs and 5 EvoNodes (Weighted count=24)
On my machine using develop:
`python3 feature_llmq_rotation.py 145.45s user 30.00s system 68% cpu
4:16.93 total`
With this PR:
`python3 feature_llmq_rotation.py 119.26s user 24.61s system 62% cpu
3:50.89 total`
## How Has This Been Tested?
all tests
## Breaking Changes
no
## 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
MNs don't really vote NO on triggers that do not match their local
candidates because:
1. they bail out too early when they see that they are not the payee
2. the hash for objects to vote NO on was picked incorrectly.
## What was done?
Moved voting out of `CreateGovernanceTrigger` and into its own
`VoteGovernanceTriggers`. Refactored related code to use `optional`
while at it, dropped useless/misleading `IsValid()` call. Added some
safety belts, logging, tests.
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run 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
- [ ] 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
https://github.com/dashpay/dash/issues/5640
## What was done?
Tests that `activation_height` projected by `getblockchaininfo` during
locked_in phase.
Now, this test is only possible with v20 activation since v19, dip0024
are buried and mn_rr uses MNEF.
Enabled this test only in `feature_llmq_rotation.py`.
## How Has This Been Tested?
tests
## Breaking Changes
no
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [x] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [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>
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
fixes#5666
kudos to @tinshen for discovering the issue 👍
## What was done?
add missing logic in FundTransaction
## How Has This Been Tested?
implement/run tests, test rpc manually
## 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
```
test/functional/feature_governance.py:205:59: F821 undefined name 'p0_amount'
test/functional/feature_governance.py:205:95: F821 undefined name 'p1_amount'
test/functional/feature_governance.py:205:131: F821 undefined name 'p2_amount'
```
## What was done?
add missing `self.`
## How Has This Been Tested?
run linter and `feature_governance.py`
## 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)_
fea75ad3caa29972db32d3ce7e0fe125ec77a0eb refactor: Drop `boost/algorithm/string/replace.hpp` dependency (Hennadii Stepanov)
857526e8cbb0847a865e9c2509425960d458f535 test: Add test case for `ReplaceAll()` function (Hennadii Stepanov)
Pull request description:
A new implementation of the `ReplaceAll()` seems enough for all of our purposes.
ACKs for top commit:
adam2k:
ACK Tested fea75ad3caa29972db32d3ce7e0fe125ec77a0eb
theStack:
Code-review ACK fea75ad3caa29972db32d3ce7e0fe125ec77a0eb
Tree-SHA512: dacfffc9d2bd1fb9f034baf8c045b1e8657b766db2f0a7f8ef7e25ee6cd888f315b0124c54aba7a29ae59186b176ef9868a8b709dc995ea215c6b4ce58e174d9
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Noticed a couple of things while I was trying to figure out if an
[issue](https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/5627#discussion_r1367153099)
@knst mentioned in #5627 could actually exist:
1. `GetPaymentsLimit()` won't work correctly with historical blocks rn.
We don't use it that way internally but it could be done via rpc and it
should provide correct results.
2. superblock params on regtest are too small to test them properly
3. because of (2) and a huge v20 activation window (comparing to sb
params) `feature_governance.py` doesn't test v20 switching states.
There's also no "sb on v20 activation block" test.
~NOTE: based on #5639 atm~
## What was done?
fix it, pls see individual commits
## How Has This Been Tested?
run 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
- [ ] 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
Small dip0024 related cleanups, regtest only.
## What was done?
pls see individual commits
## 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
sb produced by sentinel:
>"DataString": ... \"payment_amounts\": \"20.00000000|20.00000000\", ...
>...
> "YesCount": 83,
sb produced by core:
>"DataString": ... \"payment_amounts\": \"20.00|20.00\", ...
> "YesCount": 13,
These 2 triggers are for the same block (900552), proposal hashes and
addresses are also the same but the difference in `payment_amounts`
format makes it look like a different trigger for core and this creates
a race.
## What was done?
Use `ValueFromAmount` instead of `FormatMoney` to avoid trimming
## 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)_
fac395e5eb2cd3210ba6345f777a586a9bec84e3 ci: Bump ci/lint/Dockerfile (MarcoFalke)
fa6eb6516727a8675dc6e46634d8343e282528ab test: Use python3.8 pow() (MarcoFalke)
88881cf7ac029aea660c2413ca8e2a5136fcd41b Bump python minimum version to 3.8 (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
There is no pressing reason to drop support for 3.7, however there are several maintenance issues:
* There is no supported operating system that ships 3.7 by default. (debian:buster is EOL and unmaintained to the extent that it doesn't run in the CI environment. See https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27340#issuecomment-1484988445)
* Compiling python 3.7 from source is also unsupported on at least macos, according to https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24017#issuecomment-1107820790
* Recent versions of lief require 3.8, see https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27507#issuecomment-1517561645
Fix all maintenance issues by bumping the minimum.
ACKs for top commit:
RandyMcMillan:
ACK fac395e
fjahr:
ACK fac395e5eb2cd3210ba6345f777a586a9bec84e3
fanquake:
ACK fac395e5eb2cd3210ba6345f777a586a9bec84e3
Tree-SHA512: c198decdbbe29d186d73ea3f6549d8a38479383495d14a965a2f9211ce39637b43f13a4c2a5d3bf56e2d468be4bbe49b4ee8e8e19ec69936ff43ddf2b714c712
96299a9d6c0a6b9125a58a63ee3147e55d1b086b Test: Move common function assert_approx() into util.py (fridokus)
Pull request description:
To reduce code duplication, move `assert_approx` into common framework `util.py`.
`assert_approx()` is used in two functional tests.
ACKs for top commit:
theStack:
ACK 96299a9
practicalswift:
ACK 96299a9d6c0a6b9125a58a63ee3147e55d1b086b -- DRY is good and diff looks correct
fanquake:
ACK 96299a9d6c0a6b9125a58a63ee3147e55d1b086b - thanks for contributing 🍻
Tree-SHA512: 8e9d397222c49536c7b3d6d0756cc5af17113e5af8707ac48a500fff1811167fb2e03f3c0445b0b9e80f34935f4d57cfb935c4790f6f5463a32a67df5f736939
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
The bug was introduced in the original PR #5026 and refactored later
(which is good actually cause we shouldn't mix refactoring and
bug-fixing :) )
## What was done?
fix conditions, add tests
## How Has This Been Tested?
`feature_asset_locks.py`
## 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
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>
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>
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Currently, the `nSubsidyBase` calculation relies on difficulty. This
leads to variable Block Subsidity.
When Platform will be live, it would constantly require blocks
difficulty in order to calculate the `platformReward` (which relies on
Block Subsidy)
cc @QuantumExplorer
## What was done?
Starting from v20 activation, `nSubsidyBase` will no longer rely on
difficulty and will be constant to 5.
## How Has This Been Tested?
## Breaking Changes
Block rewards will differ.
## 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)_
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Fixed a problem forgotten in #5588 in feature_asset_locks.py.
## What was done?
Avoid floating operations when calculating `coinbasevalue`
## 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)_
---------
Co-authored-by: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Historical masternode data returned via rpcs like `protx listdiff` can
be broken because some collaterals might be spent already and
`GetUTXOCoin` wasn't able to get any info.
## What was done?
Use `GetTransaction` as a fallback.
## 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
avoid potential discrepancies in block reward calculations
## What was done?
use integers (int64_t) only when dealing with block rewards, no
float/double
## How Has This Been Tested?
run tests
## Breaking Changes
might fork off on devnets that use previous version
## 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
The block reward calculation logic in `SetTarget` doesn't work on
superblocks.
## What was done?
Move `CreditPoolDiff` checks out of `ProcessSpecialTxsInBlock` to use
correct block reward.
## How Has This Been Tested?
run tests
## Breaking Changes
n/a, sb blocks should now be processed correctly, non-sb blocks
shouldn't be affected
## 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
Implementation of accepted proposal:
https://www.dashcentral.org/p/TREASURY-REALLOCATION-60-20-20
## What was done?
Once Masternode Reward Location Reallocation activates:
- Treasury is bumped to 20% of block subsidy.
- Block reward shares are immediately set to 75% for MN and 25% miners.
(Previous reallocation periods are dropped)
MN reward share should be 75% of block reward in order to represent 60%
of the block subsidy. (according to the proposal)
- `governancebudget` is returned from `getgovernanceinfo` RPC.
## How Has This Been Tested?
`block_reward_reallocation_tests`
## Breaking Changes
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [x] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [x] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [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
Unneeded suppressions were present
## What was done?
Removed them
## How Has This Been Tested?
Running linter
## 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)_
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Requested by @QuantumExplorer for platform needs
## What was done?
New rpc `gettransactionsarelocked` that returns list of txes.
it does less heavy calculations and transfer less data by gRPC.
## How Has This Been Tested?
```
$ src/dash-cli gettransactionsarelocked '["e469de7994b9c1da8efd262fee8843efd7bdcab80c700dc1059c98b28f7c5c1b", "0d9fdf00c9568ff9103742b64e6b8287794633072f8824fa2c475f59e71dbace","0d3f48eebead54d640a7fc5692ddfcba619d8b49347d9a7c04586057c02dec9f"]'
[
{
"height": 907801,
"chainlock": true
},
{
"height": 101,
"chainlock": true
},
{
"height": -1,
"chainlock": false
}
]
```
Limiter tested by this call:
```
src/dash-cli gettransactionsarelocked '["", "","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","",""]' | wc
```
## 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: pasta <pasta@dashboost.org>
Co-authored-by: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
f6e4db27ceb67157dc13d13f34351cb87fec2be5 test: add aarch64-apple-darwin platform entry to get_previous_releases (Zero-1729)
Pull request description:
Over the course of reviewing a PR, I had to edit `test/get_previous_releases.py` (after I ran `git clean -xdff`) to run the backwards compatibility tests (e.g. `wallet_upgradewallet`, `feature_backwards_compatibility`, etc.), as currently on master, running the script as indicated in [`test/README.md`](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/test/README.md), for example, on an M1 machine results in the following error, as the `aarch64-apple-darwin*` platform entry is presently not recognised:
> Output from an M1 machine running macOS v11.5.2
```sh
$ test/get_previous_releases.py -b v0.20.1 v0.19.1 v0.18.1 v0.17.2 v0.16.3 v0.15.2
Releases directory: releases
Not sure which binary to download for aarch64-apple-darwin20.6.0
```
As a quick fix, this PR adds the missing `aarch64-apple-darwin*` platform entry. Running the script now results in fetching the old binaries, as expected:
```sh
$ test/get_previous_releases.py -b v0.20.1 v0.19.1 v0.18.1 v0.17.2 v0.16.3 v0.15.2
Releases directory: releases
Fetching: https://bitcoincore.org/bin/bitcoin-core-0.20.1/bitcoin-0.20.1-osx64.tar.gz
% Total % Received % Xferd Average Speed Time Time Time Current
Dload Upload Total Spent Left Speed
0 20.9M 0 0 0 0 0 0 --:--:-- 0:00:02 --:--:-- 0
% Total % Received % Xferd Average Speed Time Time Time Current
Dload Upload Total Spent Left Speed
100 20.9M 100 20.9M 0 0 136k 0 0:02:37 0:02:37 --:--:-- 95607
Checksum matched
…
Checksum matched
```
After this patch, the backwards compatibility tests also run successfully, as expected.
**Note**: I am open to other possible solutions.
---
Steps to reproduce:
> Ensure you take out the binaries in `releases` if they already exist.
Try running `test/get_previous_releases.py -b v0.15.2` or similar to fetch the old release binaries.
Top commit has no ACKs.
Tree-SHA512: a238d909b70a61be622234bc49b05d2e91a8acfc5ea348d29f2c8a927fb793cb97365e558571e3f46d6a5650c4f3c6e28fa126c6e56b38e1eb98f7c3e3594d0f
fa80e10d94dbf86da84fc761b09fb631155a5b25 test: Add feature_taproot.py --previous_release (MarcoFalke)
85ccffa26686c6c9adbd18bdde37fc1747281bab test: move releases download incantation to README (Sjors Provoost)
29d6b1da2a862bfbb14e7821979c97416c5400e8 test: previous releases: add v0.20.1 (Sjors Provoost)
Pull request description:
Disabling the new consensus code at runtime is fine, but potentially fragile and incomplete. Fix that by giving the option to run with a version that has been compiled without any taproot code.
ACKs for top commit:
Sjors:
tACK fa80e10
NelsonGaldeman:
tACK fa80e10d94dbf86da84fc761b09fb631155a5b25
Tree-SHA512: 1a1feef823f08c05268759645a8974e1b2d39a024258f5e6acecbe25097aae3fa9302c27262978b40f1aa8e7b525b60c0047199010f2a5d6017dd6434b4066f0
179a051704321ba40277a5855d6ac0dbb45689dd util: improves error messages on get_previous_releases script (Nelson Galdeman)
Pull request description:
When previous releases are fetched and the specified version wasn't added to the checksum list we used to get a "Checksum did not match" which isn't true (https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoincore.org/issues/753#issuecomment-879546719).
If the specified version number is not on the list, it now logs cannot do the comparison instead.
ACKs for top commit:
practicalswift:
cr ACK 179a051704321ba40277a5855d6ac0dbb45689dd
theStack:
tACK 179a051704321ba40277a5855d6ac0dbb45689dd, tested on Debian bullseye/sid
Tree-SHA512: 2a07ce75232f853fd311c43581f8faf12d423668946ae6ad784feece5b4d0edd57fc018ba1f0c5a73bfaccb326e0df9a643580d16bf427c1ec3ff34a9cdbc80c
fa1d5e51374bce9607b429836bbd3fe059e3c78c test: Fix get_previous_releases.py for aarch64 (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Otherwise it will fail with "Not sure which binary to download..."
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
Code review ACK fa1d5e51374bce9607b429836bbd3fe059e3c78c
Tree-SHA512: 0db71e898a431665757ce835016a4e05c629a95abc4a2951eac9bd9b5876ec3dc3d6f156d58565e2bcdf918cde4f2649183d4a58038ac13c705a7e914c0094d1
6de942908726480fb2919ed1f1b7906a63ec576d qa: Changes v0.17.1 to v0.17.2 (nthumann)
Pull request description:
As of 0374e821bd v0.17.2 is downloaded instead of v0.17.1 for functional testing. This causes `test/functional/feature_backwards_compatibility.py` to fail, because it [requires](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/test/functional/feature_backwards_compatibility.py#L57) v0.17.1.
Steps to reproduce:
Run `test/get_previous_releases.py -b v0.19.1 v0.18.1 v0.17.1 v0.16.3 v0.15.2`. It cannot be downloaded at all because the sha256sum is missing [here](c1e0c2ad3b/test/get_previous_releases.py (L23)).
Or adjust the command and run `test/get_previous_releases.py -b v0.19.1 v0.18.1 v0.17.2 v0.16.3 v0.15.2`, then run `test/functional/test_runner.py feature_backwards_compatibility`. It´ll fail because the test is missing v0.17.1.
This PR changes v0.17.1 to v0.17.2 in this test and in a few comments.
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
ACK 6de942908726480fb2919ed1f1b7906a63ec576d
fanquake:
ACK 6de942908726480fb2919ed1f1b7906a63ec576d - looks correct. Surprised this wasn't caught/part of #19813. In future you could add any explanations & extra info as part of your commit message as well (even though PR descriptions are included as part of the merge).
Tree-SHA512: bbe50c4fd5c1aedd6dc1cdc3d93ef9005db1c67adca3f263b6b0d869c40b495a3221e706c9389fedea4748e31911dbd591062f60ce9836e58099fbdd9515b4d9
0374e821bd9e9498ce9c03aa8e5435870019978b util: Hard code previous release tarball checksums (Hennadii Stepanov)
bd897ce79f72a44a2e609f95433e251a3fd9eb9c scripted-diff: Move previous_release.py to test/get_previous_releases.py (Hennadii Stepanov)
Pull request description:
#19205 introduced signature verifying for the downloaded `SHA256SUMS.asc`.
This approach is brittle and does not work in CI environment for many reasons:
- https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19812#issuecomment-680760663
- https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19013#discussion_r459590779
This PR:
- implements **Sjors**' [idea](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19205#pullrequestreview-426080048):
> Alternatively we might as well hard code the checksum for each `tar.gz` release in the source code, here.
- is an alternative to 5a2c31e528e6bd60635096f233252f3c717f366d (#19013)
- fixes#19812
- updates v0.17.1 to v0.17.2
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
cr ACK 0374e821bd9e9498ce9c03aa8e5435870019978b
Sjors:
tACK 0374e821bd9e9498ce9c03aa8e5435870019978b
Tree-SHA512: cacdcf9f5209eae7da357abb3445585ad2f980920fd5bf75527ce89974d3f531a4cf8b5b35edfc116b23bfdfb45c0437cb14cbc416d76ed2dc5b9e6d33cdad71
d135c294764add81683ba47575f9a5dde7d7c07f [ci] make list of previous releases to download a setting (Sjors Provoost)
9c246b873c74834a121edba00fcaecf0cba6f9b4 [test] backwards compatibility: bump v0.19.0.1 to v0.19.1 (Sjors Provoost)
89a28e02fa46f3d5eb07ab02aa34aa95c6fcee11 [test] add v0.16.3 backwards compatibility test (Sjors Provoost)
Pull request description:
Thanks to #18774's `adjust_bitcoin_conf_for_pre_17` we can now test backwards compatibility for v0.16.3, both for sync and loading a recent wallet.
This PR bumps v0.19.0.1 to v0.19.1.
I also made the version list consistent for the `contrib/devtools/previous_release.sh` instruction, between both tests.
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
ACK d135c294764add81683ba47575f9a5dde7d7c07f
Tree-SHA512: 5ff137a7a934237fa220f1c2807ce9abeeb75929266558bf3e4045bec7dfcd0a8747fa74d700065c568330b18badf58c60c308eb13d1eed444d4bbfe6decc48b
16d4b3fd6d5aad18ebb731a5006a15180d3661ef test: mempool.dat compatibility between versions (Ivan Metlushko)
Pull request description:
Rationale: Verify mempool.dat compatibility between versions
The format of mempool.dat has been changed in #18038
The tests verifies the fix made in #18807 and ensures that the file format is compatible between current version and v0.19.1
The test verifies both backward and forward compatibility.
This PR also adds a log when we fail to add a tx loaded from mempool.dat.
It was useful when debugging this test and could be potentially useful to debug other scenarios as well.
Closes#19037
ACKs for top commit:
Sjors:
tACK 16d4b3fd6d5aad18ebb731a5006a15180d3661ef
Tree-SHA512: 00a38bf528c6478cb0da467af216488f83c1e3ca4d9166c109202ea8284023e99d87a3d6e252c4d88d08d9b5ed1a730b3e1970d6e5c0aef526fa7ced40de7490
c0c43ae1471347ea93614e9a25989f13b021f8a8 test: skip backwards compat tests if not compiled with wallet (fanquake)
Pull request description:
Top commit has no ACKs.
Tree-SHA512: d9975a1490e69134408b6b724cea26a6c1397d43f59850283b9e338ae38e00fefbcd868fb141e0a4bb55f02076690a99331f29cfa2d0fa66c165032b24a94081
c456145b2c65f580683df03bf10cd39000cf24d5 [test] add 0.19 backwards compatibility tests (Sjors Provoost)
b769cd142deda74fe46e231cc7b687a86514f2f1 [test] add v0.17.1 wallet upgrade test (Sjors Provoost)
9d9390dab716f07057c94e8e21f3c7dd06192f35 [tests] add wallet backwards compatility tests (Sjors Provoost)
c7ca6308968b29a0e0edc485cd06e68e5edb7c7d [scripts] support release candidates of earlier releases (Sjors Provoost)
8b1460dbd1b732f06d4cebe1fa6844286c7a0056 [tests] check v0.17.1 and v0.18.1 backwards compatibility (Sjors Provoost)
ae379cf7d12943fc192d58176673bcfe7d53da53 [scripts] build earlier releases (Sjors Provoost)
Pull request description:
This PR adds binaries for 0.17, 0.18 and 0.19 to Travis and runs a basic block propagation test.
Includes test for upgrading v0.17.1 wallets and opening master wallets with older versions.
Usage:
```sh
contrib/devtools/previous_release.sh -f -b v0.19.0.1 v0.18.1 v0.17.1
test/functional/backwards_compatibility.py
```
Travis caches these earlier releases, so it should be able to run these tests with little performance impact.
Additional scenarios where it might be useful to run tests against earlier releases:
* creating a wallet with #11403's segwit implementation, copying it to an older node and making sure the user didn't lose any funds (although this PR doesn't support `v0.15.1`)
* future consensus changes
* P2P changes (e.g. to make sure we don't accidentally ban old nodes)
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
ACK c456145b2c65f580683df03bf10cd39000cf24d5 🔨
Tree-SHA512: 360bd870603f95b14dc0cd629532cc147344f632b808617c18e1b585dfb1f082b401e5d493a48196b719e0aeaee533ae0a773dfc9f217f704aae898576c19232
## Motivation
CoinJoin's subsystems are initialized by variables and managers that
occupy the global context. The _extent_ to which these subsystems
entrench themselves into the codebase is difficult to assess and moving
them out of the global context forces us to enumerate the subsystems in
the codebase that rely on CoinJoin logic and enumerate the order in
which components are initialized and destroyed.
Keeping this in mind, the scope of this pull request aims to:
* Reduce the amount of CoinJoin-specific entities present in the global
scope
* Make the remaining usage of these entities in the global scope
explicit and easily searchable
## Additional Information
* The initialization of `CCoinJoinClientQueueManager` is dependent on
blocks-only mode being disabled (which can be alternatively interpreted
as enabling the relay of transactions). The same applies to
`CBlockPolicyEstimator`, which `CCoinJoinClientQueueManager` depends.
Therefore, `CCoinJoinClientQueueManager` is only initialized if
transaction relaying is enabled and so is its scheduled maintenance
task. This can be found by looking at `init.cpp`
[here](93f8df1c31/src/init.cpp (L1681-L1683)),
[here](93f8df1c31/src/init.cpp (L2253-L2255))
and
[here](93f8df1c31/src/init.cpp (L2326-L2327)).
For this reason, `CBlockPolicyEstimator` is not a member of `CJContext`
and its usage is fulfilled by passing it as a reference when
initializing the scheduling task.
* `CJClientManager` has not used `CConnman` or `CTxMemPool` as `const`
as existing code that is outside the scope of this PR would cast away
constness, which would be unacceptable. Furthermore, some logical paths
are taken that will grind to a halt if they are stored as `const`.
Examples of such a call chains would be:
* `CJClientManager::DoMaintenance >
CCoinJoinClientManager::DoMaintenance > DoAutomaticDenominating >
CCoinJoinClientSession::DoAutomaticDenominating >
CCoinJoinClientSession::StartNewQueue > CConnman::AddPendingMasternode`
which modifies `CConnman::vPendingMasternodes`, which is non-const
behaviour
* `CJClientManager::DoMaintenance >
CCoinJoinClientManager::DoMaintenance > DoAutomaticDenominating >
CCoinJoin::IsCollateralValid > AcceptToMemoryPool` which adds a
transaction to the memory pool, which is non-const behaviour
* There were cppcheck [linter
failures](https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/5337#issuecomment-1685084688)
that seemed to be caused by the usage of `Assert` in
`coinjoin/client.h`. This seems to be resolved by backporting
[bitcoin#24714](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24714). (Thanks
@knst!)
* Depends on #5546
---------
Co-authored-by: Kittywhiskers Van Gogh <63189531+kittywhiskers@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: PastaPastaPasta <6443210+PastaPastaPasta@users.noreply.github.com>
Move funds from the coinbase, into the Asset Lock Pool. This is to incentivize MNs to upgrade to platform, because only MNs running platform will get these migrated rewards
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
#5564 is a bit too optimistic about incoming triggers
## What was done?
Rework governance logic to only approve triggers that match our
expectations i.e. have the same data hash as our own trigger would have
if we would have to submit it.
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run tests
## Breaking Changes
Voting is done in `CreateGovernanceTrigger` only now meaning that it
only happens on next block for incoming triggers. Tweaked tests
accordingly.
## 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
In case MNs didn't submit their own trigger, should vote for funding yes
when receiving triggers from other nodes.
## What was done?
Check if already submitted theirs and vote accordingly.
## 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)_
## What was done?
- remove dependency of Asset Lock txes on CCreditPool
- new case for functional tests of Asset Locks - more than one output
for Asset Lock tx.
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run unit/functional tests
## Breaking Changes
Slightly changes behaviour of TxMempool. Tx can be accepted in mempool
even if Asset Unlock transaction with same index is already mined. But
final consensus rules are same.
## 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
0306d78cb49d1684cc96ba3512b582a1fdaf78cc Use getbalances in wallet_address_types tests (Jon Atack)
7eacdc5167c8db94df84e206db85817bc64e4921 Shift coverage from getunconfirmedbalance to getbalances in wallet_abandonconflict tests (Jon Atack)
3e6f7377f600e47e5e3d439fc5d6ccf3db210038 Improve getbalances coverage in wallet_balance tests (Jon Atack)
Pull request description:
<strike>This PR updates several tests and then removes the `getunconfirmedbalance` RPC which was deprecated in facfb4111d14a3b06c46690a2cca7ca91cea8a96 a year ago.
Next steps: remove the deprecated `getwalletinfo` fields and the `getbalance` RPC in follow-ups, if there seems to be consensus on those removals.</strike>
Update:
`getunconfirmedbalance` RPC was deprecated in facfb4111d14a3b06c46690a2cca7ca91cea8a96 a year ago, but following the review comments below, this PR now only updates the test coverage to use `getbalances` while still leaving basic coverage for `getunconfirmedbalance` in wallet_balance.py.
That said, I've seen 3 regular contributors confused in the past 10 days by "DEPRECATED" warnings in the code that are not following the deprecation policy in [JSON-RPC-interface.md#versioning](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/JSON-RPC-interface.md#versioning).
ISTM these warnings should either be removed, or the calls deprecated (`-deprecatedrpc`), or the policy updated to describe these warnings as a pre-deprecation practice.
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
utACK 0306d78cb
Tree-SHA512: 692e43e9bed5afa97d905740666e365f0b64e559e1c75a6a398236d9e943894e3477947fc11324f420a6feaffa0c0c1532aa983c50090ca39d06551399e6ddd1
fa4632c41714dfaa699bacc6a947d72668a4deef test: Move boost/stdlib includes last (MarcoFalke)
fa488f131fd4f5bab0d01376c5a5013306f1abcd scripted-diff: Bump copyright headers (MarcoFalke)
fac5c373006a9e4bcbb56843bb85f1aca4d87599 scripted-diff: Sort test includes (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
When writing tests, often includes need to be added or removed. Currently the list of includes is not sorted, so developers that write tests and have `clang-format` installed will either have an unrelated change (sorting) included in their commit or they will have to manually undo the sort.
This pull preempts both issues by just sorting all includes in one commit.
Please be aware that this is **NOT** a change to policy to enforce clang-format or any other developer guideline or process. Developers are free to use whatever tool they want, see also #18651.
Edit: Also includes a commit to bump the copyright headers, so that the touched files don't need to be touched again for that.
ACKs for top commit:
practicalswift:
ACK fa4632c41714dfaa699bacc6a947d72668a4deef
jonatack:
ACK fa4632c41714dfaa, light review and sanity checks with gcc build and clang fuzz build
Tree-SHA512: 130a8d073a379ba556b1e64104d37c46b671425c0aef0ed725fd60156a95e8dc83fb6f0b5330b2f8152cf5daaf3983b4aca5e75812598f2626c39fd12b88b180
fa6c114ae604571435e8c4d25906a8b6d5b9984c test: Add sanitizer suppressions for AMD EPYC CPUs (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Currently the ci system only runs on intel cpus (and some arm devices), but it won't run on CPUs `Using the 'shani(1way,2way)' SHA256 implementation` (excerpt from debug log).
For reference, google cloud CPUs (which is what Cirrus CI uses) print `Using the 'sse4(1way),sse41(4way),avx2(8way)' SHA256 implementation`
The traceback I got:
```
crypto/sha256_shani.cpp:87:18: runtime error: unsigned integer overflow: 0 - 1 cannot be represented in type 'size_t' (aka 'unsigned long')
#0 0x55c0000e95ec in sha256_shani::Transform(unsigned int*, unsigned char const*, unsigned long) /root/bitcoin/ci/scratch/build/bitcoin-x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/src/crypto/sha256_shani.cpp:87:18
#1 0x55bfffb926f8 in (anonymous namespace)::SelfTest() /root/bitcoin/ci/scratch/build/bitcoin-x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/src/crypto/sha256.cpp:517:9
#2 0x55bfffb906ed in SHA256AutoDetect[abi:cxx11]() /root/bitcoin/ci/scratch/build/bitcoin-x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/src/crypto/sha256.cpp:626:5
#3 0x55bfff87ab97 in BasicTestingSetup::BasicTestingSetup(std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > const&, std::vector<char const*, std::allocator<char const*> > const&) /root/bitcoin/ci/scratch/build/bitcoin-x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/src/test/util/setup_common.cpp:104:5
#4 0x55bffe885877 in main /root/bitcoin/ci/scratch/build/bitcoin-x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/src/qt/test/test_main.cpp:52:27
#5 0x7f20c3bf60b2 in __libc_start_main (/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6+0x270b2)
#6 0x55bffe7a5f6d in _start (/root/bitcoin/ci/scratch/build/bitcoin-x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/src/qt/test/test_bitcoin-qt+0x1d00f6d)
SUMMARY: UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer: unsigned-integer-overflow crypto/sha256_shani.cpp:87:18 in
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
Anyhow ACK fa6c114ae604571435e8c4d25906a8b6d5b9984c
Tree-SHA512: 968a1d28eedec58c337b1323862f583cb1bcd78c5f03396940b9ab53ded12f8c6652877909aba05ee5586532137418fd817ff979bd7bef6e07856094f9d7f9b1
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Implementation of issue https://github.com/dashpay/dash-issues/issues/43
## What was done?
Masternode will try to create, sign and submit a Superblock (GovTrigger)
during the `nSuperblockMaturityWindow`.
## How Has This Been Tested?
## Breaking Changes
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] 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>
590bda79e876d9b959083105b8c7c41dd87706eb scripted-diff: Remove setup_clean_chain if default is not changed (Fabian Jahr)
98892f39e3d079c73bff7f2a5d5420fa95270497 doc: Improve setup_clean_chain documentation (Fabian Jahr)
Pull request description:
The first commit improves documentation on setup_clean_chain which is misunderstood quite frequently. Most importantly it fixes the TestShell docs which are simply incorrect.
The second commit removes the instances of `setup_clean_clain` in functional tests where it is not changing the default.
This used to be part of #19168 which also sought to rename`setup_clean_chain`.
ACKs for top commit:
jonatack:
ACK 590bda79e876d9b959083105b8c7c41dd87706eb
Tree-SHA512: a7881186e65d31160b8f84107fb185973b37c6e50f190a85c6e2906a13a7472bb4efa9440bd37fe0a9ac5cd2d1e8559870a7e4380632d9a249eca8980b945f3e
e6fe1c37d0a2f8037996dd80619d6c23ec028729 rpc: Improve avoidpartialspends and avoid_reuse documentation (Fabian Jahr)
8f073076b102b77897e5a025ae555baae3d1f671 wallet: Increase OUTPUT_GROUP_MAX_ENTRIES to 100 (Fabian Jahr)
Pull request description:
Follow-up to #17824.
This increases OUTPUT_GROUP_MAX_ENTRIES to 100 which means that OutputGroups will now be up to 100 outputs large, up from previously 10. The main motivation for this change is that during the PR review club on #17824 [several participants signaled](https://bitcoincore.reviews/17824.html#l-339) that 100 might be a better value here.
I think fees should be manageable for users but more importantly, users should know what they can expect when using the wallet with this configuration, so I also tried to clarify the documentation on `-avoidpartialspends` and `avoid_reuse` a bit. If there are other additional ways how or docs where users can be made aware of the potential consequences of using these parameters, please let me know. Another small upside is that [there seem to be a high number of batching transactions with 100 and 200 inputs](https://miro.medium.com/max/3628/1*sZ5eaBSbsJsHx-J9iztq2g.png)([source](https://medium.com/@hasufly/an-analysis-of-batching-in-bitcoin-9bdf81a394e0)) giving these transactions a bit of a larger anonymity set, although that is probably a very weak argument.
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
ACK e6fe1c37d0
Xekyo:
retACK e6fe1c37d0a2f8037996dd80619d6c23ec028729
rajarshimaitra:
tACK `e6fe1c3`
achow101:
ACK e6fe1c37d0a2f8037996dd80619d6c23ec028729
glozow:
code review ACK e6fe1c37d0
Tree-SHA512: 79685c58bafa64ed8303b0ecd616fce50fc9a2b758aa79833e4ad9f15760e09ab60c007bc16ab4cbc4222e644cfd154f1fa494b0f3a5d86faede7af33a6f2826
fad0ae6bb8e10b5cb82a5ec014e59b5aafc85b5e doc: Rename fuzz seed_dir to corpus_dir (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
The fuzz corpus directory might contain hand-crafted seeds, but generally it is a set of test inputs. See also https://github.com/google/fuzzing/blob/master/docs/glossary.md#corpus
ACKs for top commit:
practicalswift:
cr ACK fad0ae6bb8e10b5cb82a5ec014e59b5aafc85b5e: patch looks correct and "why not?" :)
fanquake:
ACK fad0ae6bb8e10b5cb82a5ec014e59b5aafc85b5e - did not test
Tree-SHA512: 38c952feb07aeeeb038b3261a12c824fab9ce5153d75f0ecf6d3f43db4f50998eeb2b14b11b7155f529189c93783fa2c11c81059021a04398c43f3505b31a2d4
ba7e17e073f833eccd4c7c111ae9058c3f123371 rpc, test: document {previous,next}blockhash as optional (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
This PR updates the result help of the following RPCs w.r.t. the `previousblockhash` and `nextblockhash` fields:
- getblockheader
- getblock
Also adds trivial tests on genesis block (should not contain "previousblockhash") and best block (should not contain "nextblockhash").
Top commit has no ACKs.
Tree-SHA512: ef42c5c773fc436e1b4a67be14e2532e800e1e30e45e54a57431c6abb714d2c069c70d40ea4012d549293b823a1973b3f569484b3273679683b28ed40abf46bb
c7437185589926ec8def2af6bede6a407b3d2e4a test: add further BIP37 size limit checks to p2p_filter.py (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
This is a follow-up PR to #18628. In addition to the hash-functions limit test introduced with commit fa4c29bc1d, it adds checks for the following size limits as defined in [BIP37](https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0037.mediawiki):
ad message type `filterload`:
> The filter itself is simply a bit field of arbitrary byte-aligned size. The maximum size is **36,000 bytes**.
ad message type `filteradd`:
> The data field must be smaller than or equal to **520 bytes** in size (the maximum size of any potentially matched object).
Also introduces new constants for the limits (or reuses the max script size constant in case for the `filteradd` limit).
Also fixes#18711 by changing the misbehaviour check on "filteradd without filterset" (introduced with #18544) below to also use the more commonly used `assert_debug_log` method.
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
ACK c7437185589926ec8def2af6bede6a407b3d2e4a
robot-visions:
ACK c7437185589926ec8def2af6bede6a407b3d2e4a
jonasschnelli:
utACK c7437185589926ec8def2af6bede6a407b3d2e4a. Seems to fix it: https://bitcoinbuilds.org/index.php?build=2524
Tree-SHA512: a03e7639263eb36a381922afb4e1d0ed2ae286f2ad2e7bbd922509a043ddf6cfd08747e01d54d29bfb8f54b66908f653974b9c347e4ca4f43332b586778893be
a9ecbdfcaa15499644d16e9c8ad2c63dfc45b37b test: add more inactive filter tests to p2p_filter.py (Sebastian Falbesoner)
5eae034996b340c19cebab9efb6c89d20fe051ef net: limit BIP37 filter lifespan (active between 'filterload' and 'filterclear') (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
This PR fixes https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18483. On the master branch, there is currently _always_ a BIP37 filter set for every peer: if not a specific filter is set through a `filterload` message, a default match-everything filter is instanciated and pointed to via the `CBloomFilter` default constructor; that happens both initially, when the containing structure `TxRelay` is constructed:
c0b389b335/src/net.h (L812)
and after a loaded filter is removed again through a `filterclear` message:
c0b389b335/src/net_processing.cpp (L3201)
The behaviour was introduced by commit 37c6389c5a (an intentional covert fix for [CVE-2013-5700](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18515), according to gmaxwell).
This default match-everything filter leads to some unintended side-effects:
1. `getdata` request for filtered blocks (i.e. type `MSG_FILTERED_BLOCK`) are always responded to with `merkleblock`s, even if no filter was set by the peer, see issue #18483 (strictly speaking, this is a violation of BIP37) c0b389b335/src/net_processing.cpp (L1504-L1507)
2. if a peer sends a `filteradd` message without having loaded a filter via `filterload` before, the intended increasing of the banscore never happens (triggered if `bad` is set to true, a few lines below) c0b389b335/src/net_processing.cpp (L3182-L3186)
This PR basically activates the `else`-branch code paths for all checks of `pfilter` again (on the master branch, they are dead code) by limiting the pointer's lifespan: instead of always having a filter set, the `pfilter` is only pointing to a `CBloomFilter`-instance after receiving a `filterload` message and the instance is destroyed again (and the pointer nullified) after receiving a `filterclear` message.
Here is a before/after comparison in behaviour:
| code part / scenario | master branch | PR branch |
| --------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------- |
| `getdata` processing for `MSG_FILTERED_BLOCK` | always responds with `merkleblock` | only responds if filter was set via `filterload` |
| `filteradd` processing, no filter was loaded | nothing | peer's banscore increases by 100 (i.e. disconnect) |
On the other code parts where `pfilter` is checked there is no change in the logic behaviour (except that `CBloomFilter::IsRelevantAndUpdate()` is unnecessarily called and immediately returned in the master branch).
Note that the default constructor of `CBloomFilter` is only used for deserializing the received `filterload` message and nowhere else. The PR also contains a functional test checking that sending `getdata` for filtered blocks is ignored by the node if no bloom filter is set.
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
re-ACK a9ecbdfcaa, only change is in test code 🕙
Tree-SHA512: 1a656a6d74ccaf628e7fdca063ba63fbab2089e0b6d0a11be9bbd387c2ee6d3230706ff8ffc1a55711481df3d4547137dd7c9d9184d89eaa43ade4927792d0b6
cd543d9193ac1882c1b4a8a84e3ac7356a8b7ce9 test: check misbehavior more independently in p2p_filter.py (Danny Lee)
Pull request description:
This expands on #18672 in two ways:
- Check positive cases (`filterload` accepted, `filteradd` accepted) in addition to the negative cases added in #18672
- Address MarcoFalke 's [suggestion](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18672#discussion_r412101752) to successfully load a filter before testing `filteradd`
ACKs for top commit:
theStack:
re-ACK cd543d9193
Tree-SHA512: f82402f6287ccddf08b38b6432d5e2b2b2ef528802a981d04c24bac459022f732d9090d4849d72d3d1eb2c757161dcb18c4c036b6e11dc80114e9cd49f21c3bd
By design we can have more and more and more gaps in indexes list so far as
we can not re-sign expired transaction of asset-unlock. CRangesList is protected from this situation
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
## What was done?
Renaming of all classes/variables/functions/rpcs from `hpmn` to `evo`.
## How Has This Been Tested?
All unit and func tests are passing.
Sync of Testnet.
## Breaking Changes
All protx RPCs ending with `_hpmn` were converted to `_evo`.
`_hpmn` RPCs are now deprecated.
Although, they can still be enabled by adding `-deprecatedrpc=hpmn`.
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [x] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [x] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository
code-owners and collaborators only)_
---------
Co-authored-by: thephez <thephez@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Execute command when the best chainlock changes (`%s` in cmd is replaced
by chainlocked block hash). Same as `-blocknotify` but for chainlocks.
Let `-instantsendnotify` replace `%w` with wallet name like
`-walletnotify` does.
## What was done?
## 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
fab46b34f4b13abbb0af276c3fb548f25ccc28bd test: Fix restart node race (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
It is not allowed to start a node before it has been fully stopped. Otherwise it could lead to intermittent issues due to access issues (e.g. cookie file https://cirrus-ci.com/task/6409665024098304?command=ci#L4793)
Fix that by waiting for the node to fully stop.
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
code review ACK fab46b34f4b13abbb0af276c3fb548f25ccc28bd
Tree-SHA512: 7605cac0573a7b04f05ff110d0131e8940d87f7baf6d698505ed16b363d4d15b1e552c5ffd1a187c8fe5639f7e265c3122734c85283275746e46bd789614fd21
fab48da908f3f81135b9163edf5011d1e5f6ef6e test: Fix intermittent wallet_multiwallet issue with got_loading_error (MarcoFalke)
fa8e15f7b75e35846b86e8627a3612e31eb22dcb test: pep8 wallet_multiwallet.py (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Failing the test after 10 iterations without a loading error is problematic because it may take 11 iterations to get a loading error.
Fix that by running until a loading error occurs, which should happen in almost all runs within the first 10 iterations.
ACKs for top commit:
ryanofsky:
Code review ACK fab48da908f3f81135b9163edf5011d1e5f6ef6e. This seems like a good workaround. I think more ideally think load and unload RPCs would not have racy status reporting (suggested previously https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19300#pullrequestreview-435362710 and
Tree-SHA512: 6b80b26d916276efe2a01af93bca7dbf71a3e67db9d3deb15175070719bf7d1325a1410d93e74c0316942e388faa2ba185dc9d3759c82d1c73c3c509b9997f05
fa918dd537fea775c19a590e5f9161bf51a5839b test: Use Popen.wait instead of RPC in assert_start_raises_init_error (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Using RPC (`wait_for_rpc_connection`) has several issue:
* It polls in a loop, which might be slow
* It tries to read the RPC cookie file, which might not be present, thus leading to intermittent issues
Fix both by using `Popen.wait`
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
Code review ACK ~~faf7b05be9c86ee61c39e5314511fe2410128a6b~~ fa918dd537fea775c19a590e5f9161bf51a5839b
darosior:
ACK fa918dd537fea775c19a590e5f9161bf51a5839b
Tree-SHA512: 5368ad0d0ea2deb0af9582a42667c9290efe8f2705f37a236afc2c7908b04265ab342e2dd356a57156e99389f4a27ab6da9fa7bf9161fb7568240aa005e693b9
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Bad naming is noticed in https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/5026 by
thephez
## What was done?
Renamed `assetLockedAmount` in CbTx to `creditPoolBalance`
Renamed also some local variables and functions to make it matched also.
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run functional/unit tests - succeed
Called python's rpc binding `node.getblock(block_hash)['cbTx']`:
Got this result:
```
{'version': 3, 'height': 1556, 'merkleRootMNList': '978b2b4d1b884de62799b9eaee75c7812fea59f98f80d5ff9c963b0f0f195e14', 'merkleRootQuorums': 'bc7a34eb114f4e4bf38a11080b5d8ac41bdb36dd41e17467bae23c94ba06b013', 'bestCLHeightDiff': 0, 'bestCLSignature': '000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000', 'creditPoolBalance': Decimal('7.00141421')}
```
## Breaking Changes
Renamed `assetLockedAmount` in CbTx to `creditPoolBalance`. @shumkov be
informed
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [x] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
NOTE: There is slight difference with original backport due to future changes
in bitcoin#19272, bitcoin#19763 - otherwise functional test p2p_addr_relay.py fails
fa1da3d4bfc0511a89f5b19d5a4d89e55ff7ccde test: Add basic addr relay test (MarcoFalke)
fa1793c1c44a3f75a09f9c636467b8274c541bdd net: Pass connman const when relaying address (MarcoFalke)
fa47a0b003f53708b6d5df1ed4e7f8a7c68aa3ac net: Make addr relay mockable (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
As usual:
* Switch to std::chrono time to be type-safe and mockable
* Add basic test that relies on mocktime to add code coverage
ACKs for top commit:
naumenkogs:
utACK fa1da3d
promag:
ACK fa1da3d4bfc0511a89f5b19d5a4d89e55ff7ccde (fabe56e44b6f683e24e37246a7a8851190947cb3 before https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18454#issuecomment-607866453), fa5bf23d527a450e72c2bf13d013e5393b664ca3 was dropped since last review.
Tree-SHA512: 0552bf8fcbe375baa3cab62acd8c23b2994efa47daff818ad1116d0ffaa0b9e520dc1bca2bbc68369b25584e85e54861fe6fd0968de4f503b95439c099df9bd7
fixup - see #19272, #19763
faede1b293354560317b67f0b4e6874dcac6ef41 test: Properly raise FailedToStartError when rpc shutdown before warmup finished (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Should fix issues such as https://travis-ci.org/github/bitcoin/bitcoin/jobs/671910152#L7034
Top commit has no ACKs.
Tree-SHA512: ac659f29c5ec91985c916b734e24911cbf4e2c5c4b1f1891a7e6c2d2511ec285167550fb03848eee4a7a3cbc9f8cdb0c766f4e881d9e44368c7415d007006368
7a2ecf16df938dd95d3130a46082def7a02338eb Wallet: Change IsMine check in CWallet::DelAddressBook from assert to failure (Luke Dashjr)
2952c46b923042f2de801f319e03ed5c4c4eb735 Wallet: Replace CAddressBookData.name with GetLabel() method (Luke Dashjr)
d7092c392e10889cd7a080b3d22ed6446a59b87a QA: Test that change doesn't turn into non-change when spent in an avoid-reuse wallet (Luke Dashjr)
Pull request description:
Follow-up to #18192, not strictly necessary for 0.20
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
re-ACK 7a2ecf16df, only change is adding an assert_equal in the test 🔰
jnewbery:
utACK 7a2ecf16df938dd95d3130a46082def7a02338eb
Tree-SHA512: e0933ee40f705b751697dc27249e1868ed4874254b174ebdd0a7150125d8c818402e66df2371718c7eeb90e67ee2317215fb260aa9b9d7b9b45ee436de2988ff
It's highly unlikely the test will ever deal with chains with >4500
blocks, so only the subset of the subsidy logic that is needed to
validate `gettxoutsetinfo` output has been included
