As creating the socket is now the last step, we don't need
`m_init` anymore. We can just see if a socket is successfully
constructed and take that as our validity indicator.
We'll also move it out of the inner `send` function so we can bail out
before we bother with all the string processing and manipulation.
We can skip the computationally expensive dice-roll if our sample rate
is zero as that means we should never send it. Also get rid of the
`FastRandomContext::operator()` that isn't used anywhere else in the
codebase.
- Use `uint16_t` instead of `short`, `int64_t` instead of `size_t`
- Get rid of the `errmsg` buffer and use `LogPrintf` to report errors
- Use `strprintf` instead of `snprintf`
- Rephrase networking error logs to allow inclusion of error strings
0c5179462e test: rework feature_governance_cl.py (UdjinM6)
11ac0819da feat: bump_mocktime also bumps schedulers now (UdjinM6)
1937f503fe feat: regtest-only: do not auto-reset mnsync after 1h (UdjinM6)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
1. The original idea behind forced reset was to help desktop clients which go into sleep/hibernation mode from time to time to sync with no issues once they are online again. For regtest however it doesn't do anything good and only causes issues.
2. We rely on schedulers a lot, bumping them should let nodes behave more like on a real network.
3. Forcing mnsync to skip governance votes doesn't always work as we'd expect cause we don't control connection creation. To make it more deterministic create a proposal that should get into one superblock only. This way both the proposal and the trigger will expire/be deleted after another superblock meaning we can be 100% sure the isolated node never gets any of them and can only sync thanks to chainlock.
## 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
- [ ] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository code-owners and collaborators only)_
ACKs for top commit:
knst:
utACK 0c5179462e
Tree-SHA512: 9a40eeaba880f3f27f86736e92afa19a4ecb2a2d157bc42b65dd9da0d4109c9cd1d83a5abdf1ec16be2f8a8b31821fb700a7f0d2265c094fd4fdff7f18bc6ec7
We can reduce the diff by keeping the name `MAX_HEADERS_RESULTS` for
`MAX_HEADERS_RESULTS_NEW` as `MAX_HEADERS_RESULTS_OLD` is only
referenced once (in `GetHeadersLimit()`)
57fb0874ef feat: broadcast dsq messages using the inventory system (pasta)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
DSQ messages are 142 bytes.
Previously, assuming a relatively highly connected masternode hosting 100 connection, each round of coinjoin will result in 14.2KB (100*142) of inbound and outbound traffic each.
## What was done?
Now, using the inventory system, a message will first use 36 bytes per peer (sending and receiving), plus the size of a `getdata` message and the actual message itself. As a result, bandwidth usage for 1 round of mixing would be closer to 36 * 100 + 142 (dsq) + 36 (getdata) = ~3.8KB, a reduction of around ~73%
## How Has This Been Tested?
Has not been; @UdjinM6 especially please review well :)
## Breaking Changes
Does introduce a new protocol version, but in a backwards compatible way. I don't think this would need to be delayed to v22 for any reason.
## 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)_
Top commit has no ACKs.
Tree-SHA512: 3dc39a339cba29d8cf207cec76ecace5ad0e11d1892ca0f65f9253a2b1d90313da21c6c178c2476756c5566ece0fab777006cd609b7984df906a9206c25d921d
DSQ messages are 142 bytes.
Previously, assuming a relatively highly connected masternode hosting 100 connection, each round of coinjoin will result in 14.2KB (100*142) of inbound and outbound traffic each.
Now, using the inventory system, a message will first use 36 bytes per peer (sending and receiving), plus the size of a `getdata` message and the actual message itself. As a result, bandwidth usage for 1 round of mixing would be closer to 36 * 100 + 142 (dsq) + 36 (getdata) = ~3.8KB, a reduction of around ~73%
ea98d9c2eff86e6537f35ac4381ac169daacde36 rpc: fix/add missing RPCExamples for "Util" RPCs (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
Similar to https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18398, this PR gives the RPCExamples in the RPC category "Util" (that currently contains `createmultisig`, `deriveaddresses`, `estimatesmartfee`, `getdescriptorinfo`, `signmessagewithprivkey`, `validateaddress`, `verifymessage`) some love by fixing one broken and adding three missing examples:
- fixed `HelpExampleRpc` for `createmultisig` (disturbing escape characters and quotation marks)
- added missing `HelpExampleRpc` for
- `deriveaddresses` (also put descriptor in a new string constant)
- `estimatesmartfee`
- `getdescriptorinfo` (also put descriptor in a new string constant)
Output for `createmultisig` example on the master branch:
```
$ curl --user __cookie__ --data-binary '{"jsonrpc": "1.0", "id": "curltest", "method": "createmultisig", "params": [2, "[\"03789ed0bb717d88f7d321a368d905e7430207ebbd82bd342cf11ae157a7ace5fd\",\"03dbc6764b8884a92e871274b87583e6d5c2a58819473e17e107ef3f6aa5a61626\"]"]}' -H 'content-type: text/plain;' http://127.0.0.1:8332/
Enter host password for user '__cookie__':
{"result":null,"error":{"code":-1,"message":"JSON value is not an array as expected"},"id":"curltest"}
```
Output for `createmultisig` example on the PR branch:
```
$ curl --user __cookie__ --data-binary '{"jsonrpc": "1.0", "id": "curltest", "method": "createmultisig", "params": [2, ["03789ed0bb717d88f7d321a368d905e7430207ebbd82bd342cf11ae157a7ace5fd","03dbc6764b8884a92e871274b87583e6d5c2a58819473e17e107ef3f6aa5a61626"]]}' -H 'content-type: text/plain;' http://127.0.0.1:8332/
Enter host password for user '__cookie__':
{"result":{"address":"3QsFXpFJf2ZY6GLWVoNFFd2xSDwdS713qX","redeemScript":"522103789ed0bb717d88f7d321a368d905e7430207ebbd82bd342cf11ae157a7ace5fd2103dbc6764b8884a92e871274b87583e6d5c2a58819473e17e107ef3f6aa5a6162652ae","descriptor":"sh(multi(2,03789ed0bb717d88f7d321a368d905e7430207ebbd82bd342cf11ae157a7ace5fd,03dbc6764b8884a92e871274b87583e6d5c2a58819473e17e107ef3f6aa5a61626))#4djp057k"},"error":null,"id":"curltest"}
```
ACKs for top commit:
jonatack:
ACK ea98d9c2eff86e6537f35ac4381ac169daacde36 looked at the code, rebased to master, ran the helps, did not try running the added json-rpc examples
Tree-SHA512: d6ecb6da66f19517065453357d210102e2cc9f1f8037aeb6a9177ff036d0c21773dddf5e0acdbc71edbbde3026e4d1e7ce7c0935cd3e023c60f34e1b173b3299
23812555b1 fix: possible deadlock during calculation of signals for historical blocks during re-index (Konstantin Akimov)
1087489fd4 feat: bury v20 deployment (Konstantin Akimov)
64cedb30bd feat: actually test something EHF unit tests (Konstantin Akimov)
762a808b8c chore: drop irrelevant bip9 code from feature_llmq_rotation.py (Konstantin Akimov)
7735631aad fix: remove v20 from test feature_llmq_evo as far as mn_rr used (Konstantin Akimov)
ca83b26815 fix: crash in CreditPool: it meant to check that DIP0003 is activated (Konstantin Akimov)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
V20 is activated on mainnet: time to bury it!
https://github.com/dashpay/dash/issues/6186
## What was done?
Hard-fork v20 is buried and it requires to implement multiple fixes, simplifications, refactoring:
- some tests for EHF moved from functional tests to unit tests
- fixed crash in Credit Pool if DIP3 is not activated yet
- added a requirement for v20 activation for `CMNHFManager::GetSignalsStage`
- removed useless code from functional test feature_llmq_rotation
- renamed variables "v20" to "mn_rr" in feature_llmq_evo.py so far as actually used fork is mn_rr
## How Has This Been Tested?
Some unit and functional tests to succeed.
Done reindex (just in case):
src/qt/dash-qt -reindex -assumevalid=0
src/qt/dash-qt -reindex -assumevalid=0 -testnet
## Breaking Changes
N/A
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [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
ACKs for top commit:
UdjinM6:
ACK 23812555b1
PastaPastaPasta:
utACK 23812555b1
Tree-SHA512: eec35745baa695f3f286d39b6a61fa0a9f34820b13d1dd4cfbd1efe707850283892c39bf7fe49c49c812e0c02465d64df11480b3f12aa7f21b59a71eeae7260e
fb92a8ef7b ci: fix, in github actions CI, we don't actually check out the PR, but the base (pasta)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Actually check out the PR for GitHub actions CI. I knew this was an issue for a lil bit since we implemented it. Time to fix it.
Note: Github Actions based CI is experimental, and we still primarily use GitLab. Functionals tests don't even run on GitHub Actions CI yet.
## What was done?
Check out the actual PR commit
## How Has This Been Tested?
## Breaking Changes
None
## Checklist:
- [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository code-owners and collaborators only)_
ACKs for top commit:
UdjinM6:
utACK fb92a8ef7b
Tree-SHA512: 31b3737328ac66217c66c99efce6a3ccfe9e8b9a2453a8b226c12c394e2433828d20165a9dfa4c9463ae4fa5015a7d07f451dde98e937a230e04087383230a02
There's little sense in passing a ref to `ArgsManager` just to set a few
values because we'll be `const`-ing them in an upcoming commit.
Arguments supplied are expected to last the lifetime of the program's
instance and there's little reason to keep re-fetching those values.
2e8f9f9f08 refactor: better readability (UdjinM6)
9ad537380b ci: less api calls when checking potential conflicts (UdjinM6)
9f3d5b08c7 ci: improve conflicts checker to skip PRs which are a draft (pasta)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Currently, CI will report a lot of conflicts on most normal PRs. This is because a lot of times a WIP PR will be opened which depends on another. This will result in both being unhappy.
## What was done?
Instead, skip any PR which is considered a draft.
## How Has This Been Tested?
Hasn't, wish us luck!
## 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)_
ACKs for top commit:
UdjinM6:
utACK 2e8f9f9f08
Tree-SHA512: 3c498d406244bf288df21dc57b28120d2f50c409c1cf1311e3681647bc76d435910e7bb81e9bf6441c057644602324b8be451e66a9fc19a28be30100a7c70087
e92aad7cff test: make sure MNs don't vote twice even when they are allowed to (UdjinM6)
3d75390e4e fix: correct conditions for YES voting (UdjinM6)
ec1392c6de chore: make clang-format and linter happy (UdjinM6)
a6320865c4 fix: avoid voting for the same trigger multiple times (UdjinM6)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
We just had a sb voting period and I noticed that the network is way too spammy and produces too many votes (10x+ the expected numbers). It turns out that relying on `ProcessVoteAndRelay` on mainnet is not enough because rate-check expires too soon and MNs are able to vote again and again. On testnet it was never an issue because the voting period there is really short.
## What was done?
Check known votes to make sure we never voted earlier.
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run tests, run a MN on mainnet and check logs.
## 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
- [ ] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository code-owners and collaborators only)_
ACKs for top commit:
PastaPastaPasta:
utACK e92aad7cff
Tree-SHA512: 142e23d3a19fa9527fa5257eb790e558d3507a7a857f17c6e02fd58eeb5643fcfb48d824d227e0ea7cd3dae6a6d7d871b3af88b13077f5af074ed1911e42bb28
