c5031685bc fix: rename arguments for 'voteraw' (Konstantin Akimov)
3621966f12 feat: add todo to drop Throw() from rpc/util.h (Konstantin Akimov)
b54f03a0c1 fix: wrong name of argument for coinjoin (Konstantin Akimov)
d0163543d9 refactor: use new format CPCCommand for rpc/coinjoin (Konstantin Akimov)
0e1a31159f Merge #19994: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (net, rpcwallet) (MarcoFalke)
af9eb81e56 fix: wrong name of arguments for RPC (Konstantin Akimov)
c30c8f22dd Merge #19849: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (blockchain,rawtransaction) (MarcoFalke)
f525f574b0 fix: follow-up missing changes from Merge #18607: rpc: Fix named arguments in documentation (Konstantin Akimov)
7ac1ee0fb4 Merge #19717: rpc: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (mining,zmq,rpcdump) (MarcoFalke)
860d31f504 Merge #19455: rpc generate: print useful help and error message (Wladimir J. van der Laan)
41c35fd8dc fix: adjust missing arguments and help for misc rpc: debug, echo, mnsync (Konstantin Akimov)
58d923cd5b Merge #19528: rpc: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (misc) (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
This batch of backports asserts that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones.
## What was done?
done backports:
- bitcoin/bitcoin#19994
- bitcoin/bitcoin#19849
- bitcoin/bitcoin#19717
- bitcoin/bitcoin#19455
- bitcoin/bitcoin#19528
Beside that same changes are applied for src/coinjoin's rpc.
There's also applied multiple fixes for various rpcs for cases when RPCArg names are mismatched with CPCCommand
**Please, note, that this PR is not final fix for all RPCArgs**. There's a lot of dash's rpc that is not refactored that.
That it is not easy to implement for `quorum command` because the list of arguments (and even their numbers) are different for each sub-command. This fixes are out-of scope of this PR and should be done before bitcoin#18531 is backported.
See also relevant bitcoin#21035.
## How Has This Been Tested?
I used this helper to see which exactly args are specified wrongly:
```cpp
diff --git a/src/rpc/server.h b/src/rpc/server.h
index d4a7ba60eb..cdfd741f54 100644
--- a/src/rpc/server.h
+++ b/src/rpc/server.h
@@ -16,6 +16,7 @@
#include <string>
#include <univalue.h>
+#include <logging.h>
class CRPCCommand;
@@ -110,6 +111,19 @@ public:
fn().GetArgNames(),
intptr_t(fn))
{
+ if (fn().m_name != name_in || fn().GetArgNames() != args_in) {
+ std::cerr << "names: " << fn().m_name << ' ' << name_in << std::endl;
+ std::cerr << "arg names: " << fn().GetArgNames().size() << std::endl;
+ for (const auto& i : fn().GetArgNames()) {
+ std::cerr << "arg: " << i << std::endl;
+ }
+ std::cerr << "FIASCO FIASCO FIASCO FIASCO FIASCO FIASCO" << std::endl;
+ }
CHECK_NONFATAL(fn().m_name == name_in);
CHECK_NONFATAL(fn().GetArgNames() == args_in);
}
```
## Breaking Changes
N/A
Some arguments are renamed in RPC but they have been broken (used incorrect name not same as in docs)
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
ACKs for top commit:
PastaPastaPasta:
(self)utACK c5031685bc
Tree-SHA512: e885a8f8fa8bc282dae092fe8df65a37e2ab6ca559cd0598d54bfc06cacddb3bd6f3c74fa2d9c1551f8a4fbdfdeabb8d065649df66d5809e792aec6f51d0df14
86dd0eabb4 chore: increase amount of build jobs from 4 to 8 for depends (Konstantin Akimov)
Pull request description:
## What was done?
Bump CI yaml to use 8 threads for build depends
## How Has This Been Tested?
Builds logs says:
```
$ make -j$(nproc) -C depends HOST=$HOST $DEP_OPTS
make: Entering directory '/builds/dashpay/dash/depends'
```
https://gitlab.com/dashpay/dash/-/jobs/6409522172
## Breaking Changes
N/A
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
ACKs for top commit:
PastaPastaPasta:
utACK 86dd0eabb4
Tree-SHA512: dfdcae5473a5315d3fc64721f432d671a14cab9811305334f948a73ddc13e5f3e58be433988030ef6019cddd3f383c87722eaed40d8b3ab570e5c224c20191e0
dfddfd09a4 trivial: remove unneeded header, enumerate circular dependencies (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
Pull request description:
## Additional Information
As found in https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/5929#discussion_r1526663050, `validation.h` is not needed for `specialtxman.cpp` and removing the header uncovers other circular dependencies that were obscured by the shortest circular path (see https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/5929#discussion_r1527594636).
## Breaking Changes
None.
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas **(note: N/A)**
- [x] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests
- [x] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation **(note: N/A)**
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository code-owners and collaborators only)_
ACKs for top commit:
PastaPastaPasta:
utACK dfddfd09a4
Tree-SHA512: c3e74c1a381c0b69985a29f57da3565ec7681548389f09ab8b9907386f0a9f221db92a39409eb46595f3546edffa389774b96b0c9dd8f4fedff46f2d3bd635f1
14b4921a91920df25b19ff420bfe2bff8c56f71e wallet: reuse change dest when recreating TX with avoidpartialspends (Matthew Zipkin)
Pull request description:
Closes https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27051
When the wallet creates a transaction internally, it will also create an alternative that spends using destination groups and see if the fee difference is negligible. If it costs the user the same to send the grouped version, we send it (even if the user has `avoidpartialspends` set to `false` which is default). This patch ensures that the second transaction creation attempt re-uses the change destination selected by the first attempt. Otherwise, the first change address remains reserved, will not be used in the second attempt, and then will never be used by the wallet, leaving gaps in the BIP44 chain.
If the user had `avoidpartialspends` set to true, there is no second version of the created transaction and the change addresses are not affected.
I believe this behavior was introduced in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14582
ACKs for top commit:
achow101:
ACK 14b4921a91920df25b19ff420bfe2bff8c56f71e
Tree-SHA512: a3d56f251ff4b333fc11325f30d05513e34ab0a2eb703fadd0ad98d167ae074493df1a24068298336c6ed2da6b31aa2befa490bc790bbc260ed357c8f2397659
7356292e1d7a44da8a2bd31c02c58d550bf38009 Have zmq reorg test cover mempool txns (Gregory Sanders)
a0f4f9c983e57cc97ecbc56d0177eaf1854c842c Add zmq test for transaction pub during reorg (Gregory Sanders)
2399a0600ca9c4b676fa2f97520b8ecc44642246 Add test case for mempool->block zmq notification (Gregory Sanders)
e70512a83c69bc85e96b08ade725594eda3e230f Make ordering of zmq consumption irrelevant to functional test (Gregory Sanders)
Pull request description:
Tests written to better define what messages are sent when. Also did a bit of refactoring to make sure the exact notification channel ordering doesn't matter.
Confusions below aside, I believe having these more descriptive tests helps describe what behavior we expect from ZMQ notificaitons.
Remaining confusion:
1) Notification patterns seem to vary wildly with the inclusion of mempool transactions being reorg'ed. See difference between "Add zmq test for transaction pub during reorg" and "Have zmq reorg test cover mempool txns" commits for specifics.
2) Why does a reorg'ed transaction get announced 3 times? From what I understand it can get announced once for disconnected block, once for mempool entry. What's the third? It occurs a 4th time when included in a block(not added in test)
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
code review ACK 7356292e1d7a44da8a2bd31c02c58d550bf38009
promag:
Code review ACK 7356292e1d7a44da8a2bd31c02c58d550bf38009.
Tree-SHA512: 573662429523fd6a1af23dd907117320bc68cb51a93fba9483c9a2160bdce51fb590fcd97bcd2b2751d543d5c1148efa4e22e1c3901144f882b990ed2b450038
3e730bf90aaf53c41ff3a778f6aac15d163d1c0c zmq: Fix due to invalid argument and multiple notifiers (João Barbosa)
Pull request description:
ZMQ initialization is interrupted if any notifier fails, and in that case all notifiers are destroyed. The notifier shutdown assumes that the initialization had occurred. This is not valid when there are multiple notifiers and any except the last fails to initialize.
Can be tested by running test/functional/interface_zmq.py from this branch with bitcoind from master.
Closes#17185.
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
Code review ACK 3e730bf90aaf53c41ff3a778f6aac15d163d1c0c, thanks for adding a test
Tree-SHA512: 5da710e97dcbaa94896d019e75162d470f6d381ee07c60e5b3e9db93d11e8f7ca9bf2c509efa4486199e88c96c3e720cc96b4e35b62725d4c7db8e8e9bf6e09d
72ae20fc142457a200278cb2fedc5e32a3766b58 tests: add sync_all to fix race condition in wallet groups test (Karl-Johan Alm)
Pull request description:
This most likely fixes#19749, the intermittent CI issues with wallet_groups.
This fix is also included in #19743.
Top commit has no ACKs.
Tree-SHA512: dd6ef7f89829483e2278191c21fe0912b51fd2187c10a0fa158339c5ab9f22d93b733ae10f17ef25d8b64f44e596e66dba8d7db5c009343472f422ce4cd67d8f
7f13dfb587dd6a7a5b7dfbfe689ae0ce818fe5c9 test: test the implicit avoid partial spends functionality (Karl-Johan Alm)
b82067bf696c53f22536f9ca2e51949c164f6b06 wallet: try -avoidpartialspends mode and use its result if fees are below threshold (Karl-Johan Alm)
Pull request description:
The `-avoidpartialspends` feature is normally disabled, as it may affect the optimal fee for payments. This PR introduces a new parameter `-maxapsfee` (max avoid partial spends fee) which acts on the following values:
* -1: disable partial spend avoidance completely (do not even try it)
* 0: only do partial spend avoidance if fees are the same or better as the regular coin selection
* 1..∞: use APS variant if the absolute fee difference is less than or equal to the max APS fee
For values other than -1, the code will now try partial spend avoidance once, and if that gives a value within the accepted range, it will use that.
Example: -maxapsfee=0.00001000 means the wallet will do regular coin select, APS coin select, and then pick AKS iff the absolute fee difference is <= 1000 satoshi.
Edit: updated this to reflect the fact we are now using a max fee.
ACKs for top commit:
fjahr:
tested ACK 7f13dfb587dd6a7a5b7dfbfe689ae0ce818fe5c9
achow101:
ACK 7f13dfb587dd6a7a5b7dfbfe689ae0ce818fe5c9
jonatack:
ACK 7f13dfb58, code review, debug build, verified the test fails with `AssertionError: not(2 == 1)` for the number of vouts when `-maxapsfee=0.0001` is changed to 0, and verified the new logging with an added assertion.
meshcollider:
Code review ACK 7f13dfb587dd6a7a5b7dfbfe689ae0ce818fe5c9
Tree-SHA512: 475929df57f6191bb4e36bfbcad5a280a64bb0ecd8767b76cb2e44e2301235d0eb294a3f2fac5bbf15d35d7ecfba47acb2285feadb883c9ce31c08377e3afb3c
772ea4844c34ad70d02fd0bd6c0945baa8fff85c wallet: Avoid recursive lock in IsTrusted (João Barbosa)
819f10f6718659eeeec13af2ce831df3a0984090 wallet, refactor: Immutable CWalletTx::pwallet (João Barbosa)
Pull request description:
This change moves `CWalletTx::IsTrusted` to `CWallet` in order to have TSAN. So now `CWallet::IsTrusted` requires `cs_wallet` and the recursive lock no longer happens.
Motivated by https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19289/files#r473308226.
ACKs for top commit:
meshcollider:
utACK 772ea4844c34ad70d02fd0bd6c0945baa8fff85c
hebasto:
ACK 772ea4844c34ad70d02fd0bd6c0945baa8fff85c, reviewed and tested on Linux Mint 20 (x86_64).
Tree-SHA512: 702ffd928b2f42a8b90de398790649a5fd04e1ac3877558da928e94cdeb19134883f06c3a73a6826c11c912facf199173375a70200737e164ccaea1bec515b2a
0cdf2a77ddfa1d53c6fbd830d557a3f20d7fc365 ci: add tsan debug symbols option (Russell Yanofsky)
9a2f12680b3f00a207f1cdd4e0c50a3c7613aefc ci: Add tsan suppression for race in DatabaseBatch (Hennadii Stepanov)
Pull request description:
Since #19325 was merged, the corresponding change in TSan suppression file gets required.
This PR is:
- an analogous to #19226 and #19450, and
- a temporary workaround for CI fail like https://cirrus-ci.com/task/5741795508224000?command=ci#L4993
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
ACK 0cdf2a77ddfa1d53c6fbd830d557a3f20d7fc365
Tree-SHA512: 7832f143887c8a0df99dea03e00694621710378fbe923e3592185fcd3658546a590693b513abffc5ab96e9ef76c9c4bff3330eeee69a0c5dbe7574f34c417220
fa14f57fbc3c1fa2b9eea5df687f0fb36d452bd5 Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (net, rpcwallet) (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
This is the last part split out from #18531 to just touch some RPC methods. Description from the main pr:
### Motivation
RPCArg names in the rpc help are currently only used for documentation. However, in the future they could be used to teach the server the named arguments. Named arguments are currently registered by the `CRPCCommand`s and duplicate the RPCArg names from the documentation. This redundancy is fragile, and has lead to errors in the past (despite having linters to catch those kind of errors). See section "bugs found" for a list of bugs that have been found as a result of the changes here.
### Changes
The changes here add an assert in the `CRPCCommand` constructor that the RPCArg names are identical to the ones in the `CRPCCommand`.
### Future work
> Here or follow up, makes sense to also assert type of returned UniValue?
Sure, but let's not get ahead of ourselves. I am going to submit any further works as follow-ups, including:
* Removing the CRPCCommand arguments, now that they are asserted to be equal and thus redundant
* Removing all python regex linters on the args, now that RPCMan can be used to generate any output, including the cli.cpp table
* Auto-formatting and sanity checking the RPCExamples with RPCMan
* Checking passed-in json in self-check. Removing redundant checks
* Checking returned json against documentation to avoid regressions or false documentation
* Compile the RPC documentation at compile-time to ensure it doesn't change at runtime and is completely static
### Bugs found
* The assert identified issue #18607
* The changes itself fixed bug #19250
ACKs for top commit:
fjahr:
tACK fa14f57fbc3c1fa2b9eea5df687f0fb36d452bd5
ryanofsky:
Code review ACK fa14f57fbc3c1fa2b9eea5df687f0fb36d452bd5. Just straightforward replacements except code moved in `addnode`, and displatching updated in `bumpfee_helper`
Tree-SHA512: e07af150f1d95a88e558256ce197a6b7dc6cd722a6d6c13c75d944c49c2e2441f8b8237e9f94b03db69fa18f9bda627b0781d5e1da70bf5415e09b38728a8cb1
fa6bb0ce5dba33970e2c1e47ea4d0d2c0718eccb Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (rawtransaction) (MarcoFalke)
fa80c814874a2893e4323ba5148fba21d7f421cd Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (blockchain) (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
This is split out from #18531 to just touch some RPC methods. Description from the main pr:
### Motivation
RPCArg names in the rpc help are currently only used for documentation. However, in the future they could be used to teach the server the named arguments. Named arguments are currently registered by the `CRPCCommand`s and duplicate the RPCArg names from the documentation. This redundancy is fragile, and has lead to errors in the past (despite having linters to catch those kind of errors). See section "bugs found" for a list of bugs that have been found as a result of the changes here.
### Changes
The changes here add an assert in the `CRPCCommand` constructor that the RPCArg names are identical to the ones in the `CRPCCommand`.
### Future work
> Here or follow up, makes sense to also assert type of returned UniValue?
Sure, but let's not get ahead of ourselves. I am going to submit any further works as follow-ups, including:
* Removing the CRPCCommand arguments, now that they are asserted to be equal and thus redundant
* Removing all python regex linters on the args, now that RPCMan can be used to generate any output, including the cli.cpp table
* Auto-formatting and sanity checking the RPCExamples with RPCMan
* Checking passed-in json in self-check. Removing redundant checks
* Checking returned json against documentation to avoid regressions or false documentation
* Compile the RPC documentation at compile-time to ensure it doesn't change at runtime and is completely static
### Bugs found
* The assert identified issue #18607
* The changes itself fixed bug #19250
ACKs for top commit:
fjahr:
utACK fa6bb0ce5dba33970e2c1e47ea4d0d2c0718eccb
tryphe:
utACK fa6bb0ce5dba33970e2c1e47ea4d0d2c0718eccb. Reducing data duplication is nice. Code changes are minimal and concise.
Tree-SHA512: deb0edc3f999baf055526eaa199b98c500635e12502dece7aa3cad5319db330eb5ee7459a5c8f040a83671a7f20c560c19a2026fb76c8416f138aa332727cbce
fa3d9ce3254882c545d700990fe8e9a678f31eed rpc: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (rpcdump) (MarcoFalke)
fa32c1d5ec25bc53bf989a8ae68e688593d2859d rpc: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (zmq) (MarcoFalke)
faaa46dc204d6d714f71dbc6f0bf02215dba0f0f rpc: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (mining) (MarcoFalke)
fa93bc14c7411a108dd024d391344fabf0f76369 rpc: Remove unused return type from appendCommand (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
This is split out from #18531 to just touch the RPC methods in misc. Description from the main pr:
### Motivation
RPCArg names in the rpc help are currently only used for documentation. However, in the future they could be used to teach the server the named arguments. Named arguments are currently registered by the `CRPCCommand`s and duplicate the RPCArg names from the documentation. This redundancy is fragile, and has lead to errors in the past (despite having linters to catch those kind of errors). See section "bugs found" for a list of bugs that have been found as a result of the changes here.
### Changes
The changes here add an assert in the `CRPCCommand` constructor that the RPCArg names are identical to the ones in the `CRPCCommand`.
### Future work
> Here or follow up, makes sense to also assert type of returned UniValue?
Sure, but let's not get ahead of ourselves. I am going to submit any further works as follow-ups, including:
* Removing the CRPCCommand arguments, now that they are asserted to be equal and thus redundant
* Removing all python regex linters on the args, now that RPCMan can be used to generate any output, including the cli.cpp table
* Auto-formatting and sanity checking the RPCExamples with RPCMan
* Checking passed-in json in self-check. Removing redundant checks
* Checking returned json against documentation to avoid regressions or false documentation
* Compile the RPC documentation at compile-time to ensure it doesn't change at runtime and is completely static
### Bugs found
* The assert identified issue #18607
* The changes itself fixed bug #19250
ACKs for top commit:
fjahr:
tested ACK fa3d9ce3254882c545d700990fe8e9a678f31eed
promag:
Code review ACK fa3d9ce3254882c545d700990fe8e9a678f31eed.
Tree-SHA512: 068ade4b55cc195868d53b7f9a27151d45b440857bb069e261a49d102a49a38fdba5d68868516a1d66a54a73ba34681362f934ded7349e894042bde873b75719
f0aa8aeea5a183ea44a877255d12db7732f2e0a8 test: add rpc_generate functional test (Jon Atack)
92d94ffb8d07cc0d2665c901de5903a3a90d5fd0 rpc: print useful help and error message for generate (Jon Atack)
8d32d2011d3f4e1d9e587d6f80dfa4a3e9f9393d test: consider generate covered in _get_uncovered_rpc_commands() (Jon Atack)
Pull request description:
This was a requested follow-up to #19133 and #17700 to alleviate confusion and head-scratching by people following tutorials that use `generate`. See https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19455#issuecomment-668172916 below, https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19133#issuecomment-636860943 and https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/17700#issuecomment-566159096.
before
```
$ bitcoin-cli help generate
help: unknown command: generate
$ bitcoin-cli generate
error code: -32601
error message:
Method not found
```
after
```
$ bitcoin-cli help generate
generate ( nblocks maxtries ) has been replaced by the -generate cli option. Refer to -help for more information.
$ bitcoin-cli generate
error code: -32601
error message:
generate ( nblocks maxtries ) has been replaced by the -generate cli option. Refer to -help for more information.
```
In the general help it remains hidden, as requested by laanwj.
```
$ bitcoin-cli help
== Generating ==
generateblock "output" ["rawtx/txid",...]
generatetoaddress nblocks "address" ( maxtries )
generatetodescriptor num_blocks "descriptor" ( maxtries )
```
ACKs for top commit:
adamjonas:
utACK f0aa8aeea5a183ea44a877255d12db7732f2e0a8
pinheadmz:
ACK f0aa8aeea5a183ea44a877255d12db7732f2e0a8
Tree-SHA512: d083652589ad3e8228c733455245001db22397559c3946e7e573cf9bd01c46e9e88b72d934728ec7f4361436ae4c74adb8f579670b09f479011924357e729af5
fa77de2baa40ee828c850ef4068c76cc3619e87b rpc: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (misc) (MarcoFalke)
fa50bdc755489b2e291ea5ba0e39e44a20c6c6de rpc: Limit echo to 10 args (MarcoFalke)
fa89ca9b5bd334813fd7e7edb202c56b35076e8d refactor: Use C++11 range based for loops to simplify rpc code (MarcoFalke)
fa459bdc87bbb050ca1c8d469023a96ed798540e rpc: Treat all args after a hidden arg as hidden as well (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
This is split out from #18531 to just touch the RPC methods in misc. Description from the main pr:
### Motivation
RPCArg names in the rpc help are currently only used for documentation. However, in the future they could be used to teach the server the named arguments. Named arguments are currently registered by the `CRPCCommand`s and duplicate the RPCArg names from the documentation. This redundancy is fragile, and has lead to errors in the past (despite having linters to catch those kind of errors). See section "bugs found" for a list of bugs that have been found as a result of the changes here.
### Changes
The changes here add an assert in the `CRPCCommand` constructor that the RPCArg names are identical to the ones in the `CRPCCommand`.
### Future work
> Here or follow up, makes sense to also assert type of returned UniValue?
Sure, but let's not get ahead of ourselves. I am going to submit any further works as follow-ups, including:
* Removing the CRPCCommand arguments, now that they are asserted to be equal and thus redundant
* Removing all python regex linters on the args, now that RPCMan can be used to generate any output, including the cli.cpp table
* Auto-formatting and sanity checking the RPCExamples with RPCMan
* Checking passed-in json in self-check. Removing redundant checks
* Checking returned json against documentation to avoid regressions or false documentation
* Compile the RPC documentation at compile-time to ensure it doesn't change at runtime and is completely static
### Bugs found
* The assert identified issue #18607
* The changes itself fixed bug #19250
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
Code review ACK fa77de2baa40ee828c850ef4068c76cc3619e87b
fjahr:
tested ACK fa77de2baa40ee828c850ef4068c76cc3619e87b
theStack:
ACK fa77de2baa
ryanofsky:
Code review ACK fa77de2baa40ee828c850ef4068c76cc3619e87b. Pretty straightfoward changes
Tree-SHA512: badae1606518c0b55ce2c0bb9025d14f05556532375eb20fd6f3bfadae1e5e6568860bff8599d037e655bf1d23f1f464ca17f4db10a6ab3d502b6e9e61c7b3d3
9c54cb16de Merge #19405: rpc, cli: add network in/out connections to `getnetworkinfo` and `-getinfo` (Wladimir J. van der Laan)
19aba38cab Merge #19200: rpc: remove deprecated getaddressinfo fields (Samuel Dobson)
f5642281cc Merge #20282: wallet: change upgradewallet return type to be an object (Samuel Dobson)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Bitcoin backports with breaking changes
## What was done?
- bitcoin/bitcoin#20282
- bitcoin/bitcoin#19200
- bitcoin/bitcoin#19405
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run unit/functional tests
## Breaking Changes
### RPC:
- `upgradewallet` now returns object for future extensibility (#20282)
- `getnetworkinfo` now returns fields `connections_in`, `connections_out`,
`connections_mn_in`, `connections_mn_out`, `connections_mn`
that provide the number of inbound and outbound peer
connections. These new fields are in addition to the existing `connections`
field, which returns the total number of peer connections. Old fields
`inboundconnections`, `outboundconnections`, `inboundmnconnections`,
`outboundmnconnections` and `mnconnections` are removed (#19405)
- Backwards compatibility has been dropped for two `getaddressinfo` RPC
deprecations, as notified in the 19.1.0 and 19.2.0 release notes.
The deprecated `label` field has been removed as well as the deprecated `labels` behavior of
returning a JSON object containing `name` and `purpose` key-value pairs. Since
20.1, the `labels` field returns a JSON array of label names. (#19200)
### CLI
- The `connections` field of `bitcoin-cli -getinfo` is expanded to return a JSON
object with `in`, `out` and `total` numbers of peer connections and `mn_in`,
`mn_out` and `mn_total` numbers of verified mn connections. It previously
returned a single integer value for the total number of peer connections. (#19405)
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
ACKs for top commit:
PastaPastaPasta:
utACK 9c54cb16de
Tree-SHA512: 9710cdd062d02d64e2eebcecca1b5c2e6ccda5ca6d9bd6d1833700f4273fcfb206ae99134f71bbc8b0843cb8ebba208c72139f5a624d79ec7362bd73b117bfb2
581b343d5bf517510ab0236583ca96628751177d Add in/out connections to cli -getinfo (Jon Atack)
d9cc13e88d096c1a171159c01cbb96444f7f8d7f UNIX_EPOCH_TIME fixup in rpc getnettotals (Jon Atack)
1ab49b81cf32b6ef9e312a0a8ac45c68a3262f0d Add in/out connections to rpc getnetworkinfo (Jon Atack)
Pull request description:
This is basic info that is present in the GUI that I've been wishing to have exposed via the RPC and CLI without needing a bash workaround or script. For human users it would also be useful to have it in `-getinfo`.
`bitcoin-cli getnetworkinfo`
```
"connections": 15,
"connections_in": 6,
"connections_out": 9,
```
`bitcoin-cli -getinfo`
```
"connections": {
"in": 6,
"out": 9,
"total": 15
},
```
Update the tests, RPC help, and release notes for the changes. Also fixup the `getnettotals` timemillis help while touching `rpc/net.cpp`.
-----
Reviewers can manually test this PR by [building from source](https://jonatack.github.io/articles/how-to-compile-bitcoin-core-and-run-the-tests), launching bitcoind, and then running `bitcoin-cli -getinfo`, `bitcoin-cli getnetworkinfo`, `bitcoin-cli help getnetworkinfo`, and `bitcoin-cli help getnettotals` (for the UNIX epoch time change).
ACKs for top commit:
eriknylund:
> tACK [581b343](581b343d5b) on master at [a0a422c](a0a422c34c), ran unit & functional tests and and confirmed changes on an existing datadir ✌️
benthecarman:
tACK `581b343`
willcl-ark:
tACK for 581b343d5bf517510ab0236583ca96628751177d, this time rebased onto master at 862fde88be706adb20a211178253636442c3ae00.
shesek:
tACK `581b343`. This provides what I needed, thanks!
n-thumann:
tACK 581b343 on master at a0a422c, ran unit & functional tests and and confirmed changes on an existing datadir ✌️
Tree-SHA512: 08dd3ac8fefae401bd8253ff3ac027603c528eeccba53cedcb127771316173a7052fce44af8fa33ac98ebc4cf2a2b11cdefd949995d55e9b9a5942b876d00dc5
BACKPORT NOTICE:
These backports #17578 and #17585 are included to 19.1 and 19.2. That's long enough!
------------------------------------------
bc01f7ae0538d3c647ce8dfbc29f7914d5df3fbb doc: release note for rpc getaddressinfo removals (Jon Atack)
90e989390ee50633fff0e4f210a1ea23ff00e012 rpc: getaddressinfo RPCResult fixup (Jon Atack)
a8507c99da10791aa69ca277128e06753942e976 rpc: remove deprecated getaddressinfo `labels: purpose` (Jon Atack)
645a8653c895e4fc7717e9e5ac045612b5deaa60 rpc: remove deprecated getaddressinfo `label` field (Jon Atack)
Pull request description:
These were deprecated in #17578 and #17585, with expected 0.21 removal notified in the 0.20 release notes.
```
- The `getaddressinfo` RPC has had its `label` field deprecated
(re-enable for this release using the configuration parameter
`-deprecatedrpc=label`). The `labels` field is altered from returning
JSON objects to returning a JSON array of label names (re-enable
previous behavior for this release using the configuration parameter
`-deprecatedrpc=labelspurpose`). Backwards compatibility using the
deprecated configuration parameters is expected to be dropped in the
0.21 release. (#17585, #17578)
```
ACKs for top commit:
Sjors:
utACK bc01f7a
adamjonas:
utACK bc01f7a
meshcollider:
utACK bc01f7ae0538d3c647ce8dfbc29f7914d5df3fbb
Tree-SHA512: ae1af381e32c4c3bde8b061a56382838513a9a82c88767843cdeae3a2ab8aa7d8c2e66e106d2b31ea07d74bb80c191a2f842c9aaecc7c5438ad9a9bc66d1b251
a93de8690b refactor: s/governanceManager/govman/g (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
0aa08ba80d refactor: remove CGovernanceManager global, move to NodeContext (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
405b8c669a refactor: s/sporkManager/sporkman/g (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
60fd1aa774 refactor: remove CSporkManager global, move to NodeContext (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
24ba2f027c refactor: remove redundant condition check in `IsOldBudgetBlockValueValid` (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
e2405e67fb refactor: move MasternodePayments::* functions into helper class (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
Pull request description:
## Additional Information
* `PeerManager`'s initialization has been moved downwards (it used to be initialized _after_ `CGovernanceManager`) to now _after_ `CMasternodeSync`. This is to avoid having to pass `CSporkManager`'s `unique_ptr` container and instead pass the its dereferenced pointer.
* `CChainstateHelper` is just proxy for helper classes meant to hold references to managers that would be needed by functions that are called by `CChainState`. It's the alternative to passing every single manager into `CChainState` through `ChainstateManager`.
Instead, they're all bunched up via `CChainstateHelper` and is accessible to `CChainState` through passing it as an argument. For this reason, it should ideally initialized _after_ all relevant managers are setup but _before_ the chain is validated. We would want to avoid deferred dereferencing if we can help it.
* Internal/private functions have been marked as `[[nodiscard]]`.
## Breaking Changes
None. Changes are limited to refactoring, no logical changes have been made.
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas **(note: N/A)**
- [x] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests
- [x] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation **(note: N/A)**
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository code-owners and collaborators only)_
ACKs for top commit:
PastaPastaPasta:
utACK a93de8690b
Tree-SHA512: b576ca61a94b86b8a6fa8909379d156ff902198b5824fcfb4665e5eb9d1d5e250db737f84a877de634a490146b82759c2350370903f430997423fd71142106d1
85fa6e4585 Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#22446: test: Fix wallet_listdescriptors.py if bdb is not compiled (fanquake)
9a02f7da94 fix: drop requirement of HD in CanGetAddresses for watch-only wallets (Konstantin Akimov)
d04c1a703e fix: unify ScriptPubKeyMan implementation with bitcoin's (Konstantin Akimov)
953b6706f4 Merge #18788: tests: Update more tests to work with descriptor wallets (Wladimir J. van der Laan)
da2a7ed6d7 Merge #21049: Add release notes for listdescriptors RPC (MarcoFalke)
56d9fe9510 Merge #20226: wallet, rpc: add listdescriptors command (Samuel Dobson)
59c30e610b fix: add missing dashification for bitcoin#18067 (Konstantin Akimov)
3575a6c4b1 Merge #19568: Wallet should not override signing errors (fanquake)
9600f9ca35 Merge #19441: walletdb: don't reinitialize desc cache with multiple cache entries (Samuel Dobson)
a1e3885a68 Merge #19239: tests: move generate_wif_key to wallet_util.py (MarcoFalke)
eaf31ad2be Merge #19230: [TESTS] Move base58 to own module to break circular dependency (MarcoFalke)
6668e21e1f Merge #18974: test: Check that invalid witness destinations can not be imported (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
This PR continues supporting of Descriptor Wallets, see https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/5579 for prior work.
See https://github.com/dashpay/dash-issues/issues/59 for Check-list issue
## What was done?
Particularly:
- bitcoin/bitcoin#18974
- bitcoin/bitcoin#19230
- bitcoin/bitcoin#19239
- bitcoin/bitcoin#19441
- bitcoin/bitcoin#19568
- bitcoin/bitcoin#20226
- bitcoin/bitcoin#21049
- bitcoin/bitcoin#18788
- bitcoin/bitcoin#22446
Beside that fixed:
- drop requirement of HD in CanGetAddresses for watch-only wallets
- unify ScriptPubKeyMan implementation for KeyOrigin with bitcoin's
- minor dashification for bitcoin/bitcoin#18067
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run unit + functional test. Backport bitcoin#18788 enables descriptor wallets for multiple functional tests.
## Breaking Changes
N/A
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
ACKs for top commit:
PastaPastaPasta:
utACK 85fa6e4585
Tree-SHA512: 4759e834c04d0f66e765399e3941afcaad2b63503d79a5cef2c04393bbeccaa8e85c06ae3633504c74ad7854180d4d7f3d4eb11c1c3a27ab9ac166a9811b90df
We're already checking if the block height is after the budget payment
start block and fast-failing if it isn't. There's no need to check again
a few lines later (consensus params are expected to be constant).
Reported by linter in CI build, https://gitlab.com/dashpay/dash/-/jobs/6281174570#L99
afbae06520 fix: check if message can be handled before attempting to deserialize (thephez)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Currently `message-capture-parser.py` crashes when encountering certain messages (e.g. mnauth). This at least makes it possible to run the script without crashing. There may be better options for solving this.
## What was done?
Check if the dictionary is going to return `None` before we attempt to do something further with it. Hide whitespace changes to see the few lines that were added: https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/5927/files?diff=unified&w=1
## How Has This Been Tested?
Running script locally
## Breaking Changes
N/A
## 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
- [ ] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository code-owners and collaborators only)_
Top commit has no ACKs.
Tree-SHA512: 041af57afcfd1d93487fd41d34a50e3a99f7fa129563dfe1e1cf2498974c8e658bd6acb9c810887c841160074056ba999e9b6607ac9336b98b9d42806682c607
d1f881d7b4 ci: fail clang-diff-format on failure (pasta)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
I have it now where CI marks this as not-required; but this will better inform us when someone should run clang-diff-format :) Should be ignored for backports or other instances where a diff would be annoying.
## What was done?
Fail CI
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run script locally
## 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)_
Top commit has no ACKs.
Tree-SHA512: dd915f509bd8fc89bd22a5875210eb99a67a96151573c058e52c2fb900c77757a89031b0e872e8f06f5be98b6a12f11543f753b5b1fd8ad06553452456db1414
