7195fa792fcc19e9c064c4e38814c3b46a210b34 test: Tool wallet test coverage for unexpected writes to wallet (Jon Atack)
3bf2b3a37bbd550491d124b77fd7c1b2a7969f66 test: Split tool_wallet.py test into subtests (Jon Atack)
1eb13f09a9d8c2c7dc69f4cdf1b1ccf632543aa0 test: Add log messages to test/functional/tool_wallet.py (Jon Atack)
Pull request description:
This pull request adds test coverage in `test/functional/tool_wallet.py` to reproduce unexpected writes to the wallet as described in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15608 and serve as a benchmark for fixing the issue:
- Wallet tool `info` unexpectedly writes to the wallet file if the wallet file permissions are read/write.
- Wallet tool `info` raises with "Error loading . Is wallet being used by another process?" if the wallet file permissions are read-only.
Goals:
1. Reproduce the reported issue, define the current unexpected behavior, and add test coverage to guide a future fix. Add debug-level logging for sanity checking and commented-out assertions to be uncommented when fixing the issue. Add the same coverage to the wallet tool create test and the getwalletinfo test as regression tests while fixing the issue.
2. Add info log messages as there are currently none in the test file.
3. Split the tests out to separate functions as per review feedback.
Thanks to Marco Falke for pointing me in the right direction.
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
code review ACK 7195fa792fcc19e9c064c4e38814c3b46a210b34
Tree-SHA512: 16a41cce989c8f819cf5b02c6cf8ea84653ede2738fb402f6c36cf4dc075b424dff3e2c73a1cfa1ec9c75f614675baecc71e588845a2596db06ba0957db2df7b
faa1e0fb1712b1f94334e42794163f79988270fd qt: test: Create at most one testing setup (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
It is assumed that ideally only one BasicTestingSetup exists at any point in time for each process (due to use of globals).
This assumption is violated in the GUI tests, as a testing setup is created as the first step of the `main` function and then (sometimes) another one for the following test cases.
So, the gui tests create two testing setups:
* `BasicTestingSetup` in `main` (added in fa4a04a5a942d582c62773d815c7e1e9897975d0)
* a testing setup for individual test cases
Avoid that by destructing the testing setup in main after creation and then move the explicit `ECC_Stop` to the only places where it is needed (before and after `apptests`).
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
code review ACK faa1e0fb1712b1f94334e42794163f79988270fd
Tree-SHA512: b8edceb7e2a8749e1de3ea80bc20b6fb7d4390bf366bb9817206ada3dc8669a91416f4803c22a0e6c636c514e0c858dcfe04523221f8851b10deaf472f107d82
084e17cebd424b8e8ced674bc810eef4e6ee5d3b Remove unused includes (practicalswift)
Pull request description:
As requested by MarcoFalke in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16273#issuecomment-521332089:
This PR removes unused includes.
Please note that in contrast to #16273 I'm limiting the scope to the trivial cases of pure removals (i.e. no includes added) to make reviewing easier.
I'm seeking "Concept ACK":s for this obviously non-urgent minor cleanup.
Rationale:
* Avoids unnecessary re-compiles in case of header changes.
* Makes reasoning about code dependencies easier.
* Reduces compile-time memory usage.
* Reduces compilation time.
* Warm fuzzy feeling of being lean :-)
ACKs for top commit:
ryanofsky:
Code review ACK 084e17cebd424b8e8ced674bc810eef4e6ee5d3b. PR only removes include lines and it still compiles. In the worst case someone might have to explicitly add an include later for something now included implicitly. But maybe some effort was taken to avoid this, and it wouldn't be a tragedy anyway.
Tree-SHA512: 89de56edc6ceea4696e9579bccff10c80080821685b9fb4e8c5ef593b6e43cf662f358788701bb09f84867693f66b2e4db035b92b522a0a775f50b7ecffd6a6d
* modifications to GenerateContributions
* Introduce some benchmarks to ensure there's no regression
* minor fixups
Signed-off-by: pasta <pasta@dashboost.org>
* refactor: introduce MAKE_MSG macro for compile time check to ensure the p2p message name is short enough
I would like this ofc to not be a macro, but to be as non-invasive as possible, I think a macro is best. Arguably these should all be converted to string_view and have a better abstraction layer over it (kinda like we do with sporks) as opposed to needing to place these names in multiple files.
* optional; also use it for bitcoin's NetMsgType's
* use std::size instead of potentiall non-constexpr strlen
Signed-off-by: pasta <pasta@dashboost.org>
* test: Add BRR and DAT unit tests
* test: Drop feature_block_reward_reallocation.py
* change copyright
* remove trivially removable includes
* use constexpr, remove empty statement
* Don't use BOOST_ASSERT, fix bug?
Not sure if this was a bug, as it does an assignment. If this isn't a bug please add a comment / explanation
```
BOOST_ASSERT(::ChainActive().Tip()->nVersion = 536870912);
```
* deduplicate all the things (also test all activation periods)
* use try_emplace, and remove some tempararies
* update threshold to be inline with dynamic
* explicitly include map, vector, remove now unneeded base58.h
* remove unused param, and replace raw loop with range loop
* re: Don't use BOOST_ASSERT, fix bug?
* Make TestChain<smth>Setup in dynamic_activation_thresholds_tests more general
* Specify min level activation tests correctly
Co-authored-by: Pasta <pasta@dashboost.org>
80031045fc6435ef4eb5dd1aee773d938c57a0fd Clarify includeWatching for fundrawtransaction (Steven Roose)
Pull request description:
Might be sufficient to solve https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16396, https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/7879 and https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14405.
ACKs for top commit:
Sjors:
ACK 8003104. This will always be confusing, but at least it gives a bunch more clues for the user to google.
Tree-SHA512: 9b8002c259c50f93d89fc5574105aae6152858d8d45c07b4c3d5b7023adafe73c7a98a290874ff3fbbb7dfad2ac1bdf4acb8769a2a1c14e38484922f44e84e54
fa06bb607da2d3e35723661156d873c8eac1fa50 qa: Do not force overwrite of QT_QPA_PLATFORM on windows for gui tests (MarcoFalke)
faccf5f9c899c40d4da5792629d0714249a4616b doc: Explain QT_QPA_PLATFORM for gui tests (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Closes#17013
ACKs for top commit:
promag:
ACK fa06bb607da2d3e35723661156d873c8eac1fa50.
jonasschnelli:
ACK fa06bb60
ryanofsky:
utACK fa06bb607da2d3e35723661156d873c8eac1fa50
fanquake:
ACK fa06bb607da2d3e35723661156d873c8eac1fa50 - tested on macOS using `QT_QPA_PLATFORM=cocoa src/qt/test/test_bitcoin-qt`.
Tree-SHA512: f257159f6e66b2df7e870ac832ae9ef09eea173c8b7cd766458f87cf22f94681c81dcc54dea030dbc97eab5e3ae5132a4ffe8a343431a4e40f7ee29dc808dcb1
