## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
1. `scanQuorumsCache` is a special one and we use it incorrectly.
2. Platform doesn't really use anything that calls `ScanQuorums()`
directly, they specify the exact quorum hash in RPCs so it's
`GetQuorum()` that is used instead. The only place `ScanQuorums()` is
used for Platform related stuff is `StartCleanupOldQuorumDataThread()`
because we want to preserve quorum data used by `GetQuorum()`. But this
can be optimised with its own (much more compact) cache.
3. RPCs that use `ScanQuorums()` should in most cases be ok with smaller
cache, for other use cases there is a note in help text now.
## What was done?
pls see individual commits
## How Has This Been Tested?
run tests, run a node (~in progress~ looks stable)
## 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
fabed982ad9143cddaca8346f6b4c243dd84e0c4 fuzz: Re-enable assert in banman again (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Looks like this was accidentally fixed by removing the buggy code in commit efd6f904c78769ad2e93c1f1de43014d284e7561
ACKs for top commit:
hebasto:
ACK fabed982ad9143cddaca8346f6b4c243dd84e0c4
Tree-SHA512: 2dea5dad48ff2050ae7086c1c6306c40f650e9629918e79adc54164a375d777a70b29f5a480566dc6430f07ce33dfe703fc5d45a20125584b4a026c5832198a2
4a1b2a7ba7f804e656a8cd29d5aa80fcbd40904f [GetTransaction] remove unneeded `cs_main` lock acquire (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
This PR is a follow-up to #22383. For reading from the mempool, only `mempool.cs` needs to be locked (see [suggestion by MarcoFalke](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22383#discussion_r675069128)):
b620b2d58a/src/txmempool.h (L554-L558)
`CTxMemPool::get()` acquires this lock:
b620b2d58a/src/txmempool.cpp (L822-L829)
so we don't need to acquire any lock ourselves in `GetTransaction()`, as the other functions called in the remaining parts also don't need to have `cs_main` locked.
ACKs for top commit:
tryphe:
Concept ACK. tested 4a1b2a7ba7f804e656a8cd29d5aa80fcbd40904f but not extensively.
jnewbery:
Code review ACK 4a1b2a7ba7f804e656a8cd29d5aa80fcbd40904f
Tree-SHA512: 60e869f72e65cf72cb144be1900ea7f3d87c12f322756994f6a3ed8cd975230b36c7c90c34b60bbf41f9186f4add36decaac1d4f0d0749fb5451b3938a8aa78c
7b3a20b2602f902c344a615f23f8f0280b6f6bcc mempool: apply rule of 5 to epochguard.h, fix compiler warnings (Jon Atack)
Pull request description:
Apply the rule of five to `src/util/epochguard.h::{Epoch, Marker}` for safety, which also nicely fixes the `-Wdeprecated-copy` compiler warnings with Clang 13.
References:
- https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/rule_of_three
- https://www.stroustrup.com/C++11FAQ.html#default
- https://isocpp.github.io/CppCoreGuidelines/CppCoreGuidelines#Rc-five
<details><summary>Compiler warnings fixed</summary><p>
```bash
In file included from policy/rbf.cpp:5:
In file included from ./policy/rbf.h:8:
In file included from ./txmempool.h:24:
./util/epochguard.h:53:17: warning: definition of implicit copy constructor for 'Marker' is deprecated because it has a user-declared copy assignment operator [-Wdeprecated-copy]
Marker& operator=(const Marker&) = delete;
^
./txmempool.h:81:7: note: in implicit copy constructor for 'Epoch::Marker' first required here
class CTxMemPoolEntry
^
policy/rbf.cpp:29:29: note: in implicit copy constructor for 'CTxMemPoolEntry' first required here
CTxMemPoolEntry entry = *pool.mapTx.find(tx.GetHash());
```
```bash
In file included from txmempool.cpp:6:
In file included from ./txmempool.h:24:
./util/epochguard.h:53:17: warning: definition of implicit copy constructor for 'Marker' is deprecated because it has a user-declared copy assignment operator [-Wdeprecated-copy]
Marker& operator=(const Marker&) = delete;
^
./txmempool.h:81:7: note: in implicit copy constructor for 'Epoch::Marker' first required here
class CTxMemPoolEntry
^
/usr/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/10/../../../../include/c++/10/ext/new_allocator.h:150:23: note: in implicit copy constructor for 'CTxMemPoolEntry' first required here
{ ::new((void *)__p) _Up(std::forward<_Args>(__args)...); }
^
/usr/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/10/../../../../include/c++/10/bits/alloc_traits.h:512:8: note: in instantiation of function template specialization '__gnu_cxx::new_allocator<boost::multi_index::detail::hashed_index_node<boost::multi_index::detail::hashed_index_node<boost::multi_index::detail::ordered_index_node<boost::multi_index::detail::null_augment_policy, boost::multi_index::detail::ordered_index_node<boost::multi_index::detail::null_augment_policy, boost::multi_index::detail::ordered_index_node<boost::multi_index::detail::null_augment_policy, boost::multi_index::detail::index_node_base<CTxMemPoolEntry, std::allocator<CTxMemPoolEntry>>>>>>>>::construct<CTxMemPoolEntry, const CTxMemPoolEntry &>' requested here
__a.construct(__p, std::forward<_Args>(__args)...);
^
/usr/include/boost/multi_index_container.hpp:655:24: note: in instantiation of function template specialization 'std::allocator_traits<std::allocator<boost::multi_index::detail::hashed_index_node<boost::multi_index::detail::hashed_index_node<boost::multi_index::detail::ordered_index_node<boost::multi_index::detail::null_augment_policy, boost::multi_index::detail::ordered_index_node<boost::multi_index::detail::null_augment_policy, boost::multi_index::detail::ordered_index_node<boost::multi_index::detail::null_augment_policy, boost::multi_index::detail::index_node_base<CTxMemPoolEntry, std::allocator<CTxMemPoolEntry>>>>>>>>>::construct<CTxMemPoolEntry, const CTxMemPoolEntry &>' requested here
node_alloc_traits::construct(
^
/usr/include/boost/multi_index/detail/index_base.hpp:108:15: note: in instantiation of member function 'boost::multi_index::multi_index_container<CTxMemPoolEntry, boost::multi_index::indexed_by<boost::multi_index::hashed_unique<mempoolentry_txid, SaltedTxidHasher>, boost::multi_index::hashed_unique<boost::multi_index::tag<index_by_wtxid>, mempoolentry_wtxid, SaltedTxidHasher>, boost::multi_index::ordered_non_unique<boost::multi_index::tag<descendant_score>, boost::multi_index::identity<CTxMemPoolEntry>, CompareTxMemPoolEntryByDescendantScore>, boost::multi_index::ordered_non_unique<boost::multi_index::tag<entry_time>, boost::multi_index::identity<CTxMemPoolEntry>, CompareTxMemPoolEntryByEntryTime>, boost::multi_index::ordered_non_unique<boost::multi_index::tag<ancestor_score>, boost::multi_index::identity<CTxMemPoolEntry>, CompareTxMemPoolEntryByAncestorFee>>>::construct_value' requested here
final().construct_value(x,v);
^
/usr/include/boost/multi_index/detail/ord_index_impl.hpp:770:33: note: (skipping 5 contexts in backtrace; use -ftemplate-backtrace-limit=0 to see all)
final_node_type* res=super::insert_(v,x,variant);
^
/usr/include/boost/multi_index_container.hpp:693:33: note: in instantiation of function template specialization 'boost::multi_index::detail::hashed_index<mempoolentry_txid, SaltedTxidHasher, std::equal_to<uint256>, boost::multi_index::detail::nth_layer<1, CTxMemPoolEntry, boost::multi_index::indexed_by<boost::multi_index::hashed_unique<mempoolentry_txid, SaltedTxidHasher>, boost::multi_index::hashed_unique<boost::multi_index::tag<index_by_wtxid>, mempoolentry_wtxid, SaltedTxidHasher>, boost::multi_index::ordered_non_unique<boost::multi_index::tag<descendant_score>, boost::multi_index::identity<CTxMemPoolEntry>, CompareTxMemPoolEntryByDescendantScore>, boost::multi_index::ordered_non_unique<boost::multi_index::tag<entry_time>, boost::multi_index::identity<CTxMemPoolEntry>, CompareTxMemPoolEntryByEntryTime>, boost::multi_index::ordered_non_unique<boost::multi_index::tag<ancestor_score>, boost::multi_index::identity<CTxMemPoolEntry>, CompareTxMemPoolEntryByAncestorFee>>, std::allocator<CTxMemPoolEntry>>, boost::mpl::vector0<>, boost::multi_index::detail::hashed_unique_tag>::insert_<boost::multi_index::detail::lvalue_tag>' requested here
final_node_type* res=super::insert_(v,x,variant);
^
/usr/include/boost/multi_index_container.hpp:705:12: note: in instantiation of function template specialization 'boost::multi_index::multi_index_container<CTxMemPoolEntry, boost::multi_index::indexed_by<boost::multi_index::hashed_unique<mempoolentry_txid, SaltedTxidHasher>, boost::multi_index::hashed_unique<boost::multi_index::tag<index_by_wtxid>, mempoolentry_wtxid, SaltedTxidHasher>, boost::multi_index::ordered_non_unique<boost::multi_index::tag<descendant_score>, boost::multi_index::identity<CTxMemPoolEntry>, CompareTxMemPoolEntryByDescendantScore>, boost::multi_index::ordered_non_unique<boost::multi_index::tag<entry_time>, boost::multi_index::identity<CTxMemPoolEntry>, CompareTxMemPoolEntryByEntryTime>, boost::multi_index::ordered_non_unique<boost::multi_index::tag<ancestor_score>, boost::multi_index::identity<CTxMemPoolEntry>, CompareTxMemPoolEntryByAncestorFee>>>::insert_<boost::multi_index::detail::lvalue_tag>' requested here
return insert_(v,detail::lvalue_tag());
^
/usr/include/boost/multi_index/detail/index_base.hpp:213:21: note: in instantiation of member function 'boost::multi_index::multi_index_container<CTxMemPoolEntry, boost::multi_index::indexed_by<boost::multi_index::hashed_unique<mempoolentry_txid, SaltedTxidHasher>, boost::multi_index::hashed_unique<boost::multi_index::tag<index_by_wtxid>, mempoolentry_wtxid, SaltedTxidHasher>, boost::multi_index::ordered_non_unique<boost::multi_index::tag<descendant_score>, boost::multi_index::identity<CTxMemPoolEntry>, CompareTxMemPoolEntryByDescendantScore>, boost::multi_index::ordered_non_unique<boost::multi_index::tag<entry_time>, boost::multi_index::identity<CTxMemPoolEntry>, CompareTxMemPoolEntryByEntryTime>, boost::multi_index::ordered_non_unique<boost::multi_index::tag<ancestor_score>, boost::multi_index::identity<CTxMemPoolEntry>, CompareTxMemPoolEntryByAncestorFee>>>::insert_' requested here
{return final().insert_(x);}
^
/usr/include/boost/multi_index/hashed_index.hpp:284:46: note: in instantiation of member function 'boost::multi_index::detail::index_base<CTxMemPoolEntry, boost::multi_index::indexed_by<boost::multi_index::hashed_unique<mempoolentry_txid, SaltedTxidHasher>, boost::multi_index::hashed_unique<boost::multi_index::tag<index_by_wtxid>, mempoolentry_wtxid, SaltedTxidHasher>, boost::multi_index::ordered_non_unique<boost::multi_index::tag<descendant_score>, boost::multi_index::identity<CTxMemPoolEntry>, CompareTxMemPoolEntryByDescendantScore>, boost::multi_index::ordered_non_unique<boost::multi_index::tag<entry_time>, boost::multi_index::identity<CTxMemPoolEntry>, CompareTxMemPoolEntryByEntryTime>, boost::multi_index::ordered_non_unique<boost::multi_index::tag<ancestor_score>, boost::multi_index::identity<CTxMemPoolEntry>, CompareTxMemPoolEntryByAncestorFee>>, std::allocator<CTxMemPoolEntry>>::final_insert_' requested here
std::pair<final_node_type*,bool> p=this->final_insert_(x);
^
txmempool.cpp:363:53: note: in instantiation of member function 'boost::multi_index::detail::hashed_index<mempoolentry_txid, SaltedTxidHasher, std::equal_to<uint256>, boost::multi_index::detail::nth_layer<1, CTxMemPoolEntry, boost::multi_index::indexed_by<boost::multi_index::hashed_unique<mempoolentry_txid, SaltedTxidHasher>, boost::multi_index::hashed_unique<boost::multi_index::tag<index_by_wtxid>, mempoolentry_wtxid, SaltedTxidHasher>, boost::multi_index::ordered_non_unique<boost::multi_index::tag<descendant_score>, boost::multi_index::identity<CTxMemPoolEntry>, CompareTxMemPoolEntryByDescendantScore>, boost::multi_index::ordered_non_unique<boost::multi_index::tag<entry_time>, boost::multi_index::identity<CTxMemPoolEntry>, CompareTxMemPoolEntryByEntryTime>, boost::multi_index::ordered_non_unique<boost::multi_index::tag<ancestor_score>, boost::multi_index::identity<CTxMemPoolEntry>, CompareTxMemPoolEntryByAncestorFee>>, std::allocator<CTxMemPoolEntry>>, boost::mpl::vector0<>, boost::multi_index::detail::hashed_unique_tag>::insert' requested here
indexed_transaction_set::iterator newit = mapTx.insert(entry).first;
```
```bash
In file included from test/fuzz/policy_estimator.cpp:9:
In file included from ./test/fuzz/util.h:27:
In file included from ./txmempool.h:24:
./util/epochguard.h:53:17: warning: definition of implicit copy constructor for 'Marker' is deprecated because it has a user-declared copy assignment operator [-Wdeprecated-copy]
Marker& operator=(const Marker&) = delete;
^
./txmempool.h:81:7: note: in implicit copy constructor for 'Epoch::Marker' first required here
class CTxMemPoolEntry
^
/usr/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/10/../../../../include/c++/10/ext/new_allocator.h:150:23: note: in implicit move constructor for 'CTxMemPoolEntry' first required here
{ ::new((void *)__p) _Up(std::forward<_Args>(__args)...); }
^
/usr/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/10/../../../../include/c++/10/bits/alloc_traits.h:512:8: note: in instantiation of function template specialization '__gnu_cxx::new_allocator<CTxMemPoolEntry>::construct<CTxMemPoolEntry, CTxMemPoolEntry>' requested here
__a.construct(__p, std::forward<_Args>(__args)...);
^
/usr/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/10/../../../../include/c++/10/bits/vector.tcc:115:21: note: in instantiation of function template specialization 'std::allocator_traits<std::allocator<CTxMemPoolEntry>>::construct<CTxMemPoolEntry, CTxMemPoolEntry>' requested here
_Alloc_traits::construct(this->_M_impl, this->_M_impl._M_finish,
^
/usr/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/10/../../../../include/c++/10/bits/stl_vector.h:1204:9: note: in instantiation of function template specialization 'std::vector<CTxMemPoolEntry>::emplace_back<CTxMemPoolEntry>' requested here
{ emplace_back(std::move(__x)); }
^
test/fuzz/policy_estimator.cpp:49:37: note: in instantiation of member function 'std::vector<CTxMemPoolEntry>::push_back' requested here
mempool_entries.push_back(ConsumeTxMemPoolEntry(fuzzed_data_provider, tx));
```
</p></details>
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
Code review ACK 7b3a20b2602f902c344a615f23f8f0280b6f6bcc
vasild:
ACK 7b3a20b2602f902c344a615f23f8f0280b6f6bcc
Tree-SHA512: 0406dfcec180152d4f9ed07cbc2f406ad739b41f9c9cb38f8c75159c15d9d8a9a5c7526765966e40d695d265c178f6a80152e7edf82da344a65e55938dddb63d
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>
## What was done?
Add builder key for @knst
## How Has This Been Tested?
It is the same file with:
https://github.com/dashpay/guix.sigs/blob/master/builder-keys/knst.pgp
Checked a signature of guix.sigs for 20.0.2: `gpg --status-fd 1 --verify
20.0.2/knst/codesigned.SHA256SUMS.asc` - matched.
## 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
Cache population for old quorums is a cpu heavy operation and should be
avoided for inactive quorums _at least_ oin `ScanQuorums`. This issue is
critical for testnet and other small network because every mn
participate in almost every platform quorum and cache population for 2
months of quorums can easily block everything for 15+ minutes on a 4 cpu
node. On mainnet quorum distribution is much better but it's still a
small waste of cpu (or not so small for unlucky nodes).
#5761 follow-up
## What was done?
Do not start cache population for outdated quorums, improve logs in
`StartCachePopulatorThread` to make it easier to see what's going on.
## How Has This Been Tested?
run a mn 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)_
Impossible to drop it completelly right now because:
- net doesn't know any details about chain - can't check status of fork
- the functional test feature_maxuploadtarget.py assume block size 1Mb
- DIP0001 can't be activated from regtest early block2 because big txes are
not allowed after DIP0001
refactor: drop global variable fDIP0001ActiveAtTip - attempt 2
