## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
fix a couple of issues in helpers, extend feature_dip3_v19.py to check
more after v19 fork
## What was done?
pls see individual PRs
## 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
Currently, Chainlocks are either enabled or disabled. This PR adds a
third state: enabled but we will not sign new ones.
Should probably backport this to v19.x
## What was done?
Spork state != 0 but active will now result in chain locks being
enforced but not created.
## How Has This Been Tested?
## Breaking Changes
None
## 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>
0ed2d8e07d3806d78d03a77d2153f22f9d733a07 test: add BIP37 remote crash bug [CVE-2013-5700] test to p2p_filter.py (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
Integrates the missing message type `filteradd` to the test framework and checks that the BIP37 implementation is not vulnerable to the "remote crash bug" [CVE-2013-5700](https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2013-5700) anymore. Prior to v.0.8.4, it was possible to trigger a division-by-zero error on the following line in the function `CBloomFilter::Hash()`:
f0d6487e29/src/bloom.cpp (L45)
By setting a zero-length filter via `filterload`, `vData.size()` is 0, so the modulo operation above, called on any .insert() or .contains() operation then crashed the node. The test uses the approach of just sending an arbitrary `filteradd` message after, which calls `CBloomFilter::insert()` (and in turn `CBloomFilter::Hash()`) on the node. The vulnerability was fixed by commit 37c6389c5a (an intentional covert fix, [according to gmaxwell](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18483#issuecomment-608224095)), which introduced flags `isEmpty`/`isFull` that wouldn't call the `Hash()` member function if `isFull` is true (set to true by default constructor).
To validate that the test fails if the implementation is vulnerable, one can simply set the flags to false in the member function `UpdateEmptyFull()` (that is called after a filter received via `filterload` is constructed), which activates the vulnerable code path calling `Hash` in any case on adding or testing for data in the filter:
```diff
diff --git a/src/bloom.cpp b/src/bloom.cpp
index bd6069b..ef294a3 100644
--- a/src/bloom.cpp
+++ b/src/bloom.cpp
@@ -199,8 +199,8 @@ void CBloomFilter::UpdateEmptyFull()
full &= vData[i] == 0xff;
empty &= vData[i] == 0;
}
- isFull = full;
- isEmpty = empty;
+ isFull = false;
+ isEmpty = false;
}
```
Resulting in:
```
$ ./p2p_filter.py
[...]
2020-04-03T14:38:59.593000Z TestFramework (INFO): Check that division-by-zero remote crash bug [CVE-2013-5700] is fixed
2020-04-03T14:38:59.695000Z TestFramework (ERROR): Assertion failed
[...]
[... some exceptions following ...]
```
ACKs for top commit:
naumenkogs:
utACK 0ed2d8e07d3806d78d03a77d2153f22f9d733a07
Tree-SHA512: 02d0253d13eab70c4bd007b0750c56a5a92d05d419d53033523eeb3ed80318bc95196ab90f7745ea3ac9ebae7caee3adbf2a055a40a4124e0915226e49018fe8
4670006762ffce654bb12edb5a7e64ad004122a7 test: remove redundant sync_with_ping after add_p2p_connection (Jon Atack)
Pull request description:
Now that #18247 is merged, these calls are redundant.
ACKs for top commit:
vasild:
utACK 4670006
Tree-SHA512: bdbfe8bcf9dbdde0a8115e3a62bfe359910798d7a3010d920ffca07049cb5f97bf8fb9b6f70079b0607105192b61a6d665774e59a2b678597b47ad6237595ad5
6112a209828c43930f677c45461339cdf68a56e9 test: replace (send_message + sync_with_ping) with send_and_ping (Jon Atack)
Pull request description:
This is a follow-up to faf1d047313e71658fb31f6b94fdd5d37705ab85 yesterday.
ACKs for top commit:
vasild:
utACK 6112a20
MarcoFalke:
ACK 6112a209828c43930f677c45461339cdf68a56e9 🎞
Tree-SHA512: 749644ac9a1ef0e1aa6c3ac5e899eb3fa7fb9c0909352f922a80412df2bc0e539692a7757af550eff4d4914cbe57b0c75ce3948f569acc7a52852e91a55ad457
00559229588feb19de2a0cb7506f70c483a1f433 test: add BIP37 'filterclear' test to p2p_filter.py (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
Integrates the message type `filterclear` to the test framework and adds a simple test to `p2p_filter.py`, checking that arbitrary txs get relayed again after deleting the filter.
ACKs for top commit:
naumenkogs:
utACK 00559229588feb19de2a0cb7506f70c483a1f433
Tree-SHA512: fe64e99a526865770707d8077b9968d3923f248045ec7fa56cd380dba85ac77a71a473d244ef3aede2fc0d287b8d7c6bc0156b6033b0c949c2058cc08e255697
83e1d92413e262e6a876336ec433a6fbc335223a test: listsinceblock block height checks (Jon Atack)
Pull request description:
This is the second commit of #17535.
This PR extends a listsinceblock test to check the new transaction 'blockheight' field recently added in #17437. It also cleans up code in the test function without changing or removing existing checks.
ACKs for top commit:
fjahr:
tested ACK 83e1d92413e262e6a876336ec433a6fbc335223a
ryanofsky:
Code review ACK 83e1d92413e262e6a876336ec433a6fbc335223a. Nice test improvements!
Tree-SHA512: 92874b49a3bc0236500495f32dfcf683e1971ca3d4c51702c69ed4ce7dfce21273754f02f93d1243d73793701d9fdf49e14b149477cd249cbbd9e4e8d5bd49f8
fad0867d6ab9430070aa7d60bf7617a6508e0586 Cleanup -includeconf error message (MarcoFalke)
fa9f711c3746ca3962f15224285a453744cd45b3 Fix crash when parsing command line with -noincludeconf=0 (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
The error message has several issues:
* It may crash instead of cleanly shutting down, when `-noincludeconf=0` is passed
* It doesn't quote the value
* It includes an erroneous trailing `\n`
* It is redundantly mentioning `"-includeconf cannot be used from commandline;"` several times, when once should be more than sufficient
Fix all issues by:
* Replacing `get_str()` with `write()` to fix the crash and quoting issue
* Remove the `\n` and only print the first value to fix the other issues
Before:
```
$ ./src/bitcoind -noincludeconf=0
terminate called after throwing an instance of 'std::runtime_error'
what(): JSON value is not a string as expected
Aborted (core dumped)
$ ./src/bitcoind -includeconf='a b' -includeconf=c
Error: Error parsing command line arguments: -includeconf cannot be used from commandline; -includeconf=a b
-includeconf cannot be used from commandline; -includeconf=c
```
After:
```
$ ./src/bitcoind -noincludeconf=0
Error: Error parsing command line arguments: -includeconf cannot be used from commandline; -includeconf=true
$ ./src/bitcoind -includeconf='a b' -includeconf=c
Error: Error parsing command line arguments: -includeconf cannot be used from commandline; -includeconf="a b"
```
Hopefully fixes https://bugs.chromium.org/p/oss-fuzz/issues/detail?id=34493
Testcase: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/files/6515429/clusterfuzz-testcase-minimized-system-6328535926046720.log
```
FUZZ=system ./src/test/fuzz/fuzz ./clusterfuzz-testcase-minimized-system-6328535926046720.log
```
See https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/fuzzing.md
ACKs for top commit:
sipa:
utACK fad0867d6ab9430070aa7d60bf7617a6508e0586
Tree-SHA512: b44af93be6bf71b43669058c1449c4c6999f03b5b01b429851b149b12d77733408cb207e9a3edc6f0bffd6030c4c52165e8e23a1c2718ff5082a6ba254cc94a4
9053b88b1c15f57cdcff2fc1c761efebb2ebfefe update docstring in feature_csv_activation.py (Pierre K)
Pull request description:
These changes in the test documentation reflect the changes introduced in #17921.
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
review ACK 9053b88
Tree-SHA512: 17fb954baded8dab1c869dd48b76b516150bae616c792c573e4114d4adfdd40195745c56570aa3050cc0015ee496acd7ec178df8ba14831dd22f9722fda84da2
e09c701e0110350f78366fb837308c086b6503c0 scripted-diff: Bump copyright of files changed in 2020 (MarcoFalke)
6cbe6209646db8914b87bf6edbc18c6031a16f1e scripted-diff: Replace CCriticalSection with RecursiveMutex (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
`RecursiveMutex` better clarifies that the mutex is recursive, see also the standard library naming: https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/thread/recursive_mutex
For that reason, and to avoid different people asking me the same question repeatedly (e.g. https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15932#pullrequestreview-339175124 ), remove the outdated alias `CCriticalSection` with a scripted-diff
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Speed thing up: 8075fc0c61
Unify things: ff1a390224 (and _probably_
fix issues like https://gitlab.com/dashpay/dash/-/jobs/4304343867),
876f5c3a9f,
ed58cdda13
Let tsan tests finish on smaller/slower machines:
ba1e3360f9
## What was done?
pls see individual commits
## How Has This Been Tested?
run tests locally and my in gitlab ci
https://gitlab.com/UdjinM6/dash/-/jobs/4319419014
## 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
- [ ] 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
This changes are follow up for backport bitcoin/bitcoin#16060
## What was done?
Buried all hardened dash deployments
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run unit/functional tests.
Run dash with option `-reindex` for both mainnet/testnet - both succeed.
## Breaking Changes
No breaking changes, it should be fully compatible.
## 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
Implementation of Randomness Beacon Part 2.
This PR is the next step of #5262.
Starting from v20 activation fork, members for quorums are sorted using
(if available) the best CL signature found in Coinbase.
If no CL signature is present yet, then the usual way is used (By using
Blockhash instead)
## What was done?
## How Has This Been Tested?
Test `feature_llmq_rotation.py` was updated to cover both rotated and
non-rotated quorums.
2 quorums are mined first to ensure Chainlock are working earlier.
Then dip_24 activation is replaced by v20 activation.
The only direct way to test this change is to make sure that all
expected quorums after v20 activation are properly formed.
Note: A `wait_for_chainlocked_block_all_nodes` is called between every
rotation cycle to ensure that Coinbase will use a different Chainlock
signature.
## Breaking Changes
Yes, quorum members will be calculated differently.
## 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>
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
We had forgotten to harden dip20 and dip24 activation
## What was done?
Hardened dip20 and dip24 activation
## How Has This Been Tested?
Hasn't yet; should do an assumevalid=0 reindex
## Breaking Changes
Hopefully none
## 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
- [ ] 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
I think the logic in activate_by_name is broken
## What was done?
fix it
## 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
`feature_pruning.py` is failing atm
## What was done?
pls see individual commits
## How Has This Been Tested?
run `feature_pruning.py` locally
gitian for this branch with `INTEGRATION_TESTS_ARGS` set to `--extended
--exclude feature_dbcrash --timeoutscale=4 --jobs=4`:
https://gitlab.com/dashpay/dash/-/pipelines/852044104
NOTE:
[`linux64_tsan-test`](https://gitlab.com/dashpay/dash/-/jobs/4197383660)
failed because tsan build binaries are super slow and we hit 30 minutes
timeout for 1 single test because of that. This is not an actual test
failure.
## 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
## What was done?
- Bumped version of `CbTx`. Added fields `bestCLHeightDiff`,
`bestCLSignature`
- Miner starting from v20 fork, includes best CL signature in `CbTx` (if
available) or null signature.
- All nodes should verify included CL signature before accepting the
block.
## How Has This Been Tested?
Basically, activated v20 on in the beginning of
`feature_llmq_chainlocks.py`
## Breaking Changes
Yes, new version of CbTx
## 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
**For repository code-owners and collaborators only**
- [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
Functional tests in CI and locally often fails without a good reason
(pretty randomly)
## What was done?
It was re-implemented `get_recovered_sig` and updated `create_raw_tx`
for better selection/change output.
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run functional times with bug amount of parrallel jobs:
```
test/functional/test_runner.py -j 20 feature_llmq_is_cl_conflicts.py feature_llmq_is_cl_conflicts.py feature_llmq_is_cl_conflicts.py feature_llmq_is_cl_conflicts.py feature_llmq_is_cl_conflicts.py feature_llmq_is_cl_conflicts.py feature_llmq_is_cl_conflicts.py feature_llmq_is_cl_conflicts.py feature_llmq_is_cl_conflicts.py feature_llmq_is_cl_conflicts.py feature_llmq_is_cl_conflicts.py feature_llmq_is_cl_conflicts.py feature_llmq_is_cl_conflicts.py feature_llmq_is_cl_conflicts.py feature_llmq_is_cl_conflicts.py feature_llmq_is_cl_conflicts.py feature_llmq_is_cl_conflicts.py feature_llmq_is_cl_conflicts.py feature_llmq_is_cl_conflicts.py feature_llmq_is_cl_conflicts.py feature_llmq_is_cl_conflicts.py
```
Without these changes usually 2-3 instance fails.
With these changes all failures happened only for `p2p_addrv2_relay.py`
and `mempool_unbroadcast.py`. Beside feature_llmq_is_conflicts.py
improved stability of `interface_zmq_dash.py` also.
## Breaking Changes
No 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
---------
Co-authored-by: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
e78aaf41f43d0e2ad78fa6d8dad61032c8ef73d0 [docs] Add release notes for burying bip 9 soft fork deployments (John Newbery)
8319e738f9f118025b332e4fa804d4c31e4113f4 [tests] Add coverage for the content of getblockchaininfo.softforks (James O'Beirne)
0328dcdcfcb56dc8918697716d7686be048ad0b3 [Consensus] Bury segwit deployment (John Newbery)
1c93b9b31c2ab7358f9d55f52dd46340397c906d [Consensus] Bury CSV deployment height (John Newbery)
3862e473f0cb71a762c0306b171b591341d58142 [rpc] Tidy up reporting of buried and ongoing softforks (John Newbery)
Pull request description:
This hardcodes CSV and segwit activation heights, similar to the BIP 90 buried deployments for BIPs 34, 65 and 66.
CSV and segwit have been active for over 18 months. Hardcoding the activation height is a code simplification, makes it easier to understand segwit activation status, and reduces technical debt.
This was originally attempted by jl2012 in #11398 and again by me in #12360.
ACKs for top commit:
ajtowns:
ACK e78aaf41f43d0e2ad78fa6d8dad61032c8ef73d0 ; checked diff to previous acked commit, checked tests still work
ariard:
ACK e78aaf4, check diff, run the tests again and successfully activated csv/segwit heights on mainnet as expected.
MarcoFalke:
ACK e78aaf41f43d0e2ad78fa6d8dad61032c8ef73d0 (still didn't check if the mainnet block heights are correct, but the code looks good now)
Tree-SHA512: 7e951829106e21a81725f7d3e236eddbb59349189740907bb47e33f5dbf95c43753ac1231f47ae7bee85c8c81b2146afcdfdc11deb1503947f23093a9c399912
fa3c6575cac5e3841797980fe60b8368ae579dba lint: Add false positive to python dead code linter (MarcoFalke)
fa25668e1c8982548f1c6f94780709c625811469 test: Test p2sh-witness and bech32 in wallet_import_rescan (MarcoFalke)
fa79af298917d501cee26370fdf9d44d05133d15 test: Replace fragile "rng" with call to random() (MarcoFalke)
fac3dcf7d052586548f2100a0d576618a85741f9 test: Generate one block for each send in wallet_import_rescan (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
This adds test coverage for segwit in the `wallet_import_rescan` test, among other cleanups.
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
ACK fa3c6575cac5e3841797980fe60b8368ae579dba
Tree-SHA512: 877741763c62c1bf9d868864a1e3f0699857e8c028e9fcd65c7eeb73600c22cbe97b7b51093737743d9e87bcb991c1fe1086f673e18765aef0fcfe27951402f0
9c23ebd6b18fb1058a8d3e8aae9e0595d3a57ad5 qa: Fix service flag comparison check in rpc_net test (Luke Dashjr)
Pull request description:
Rebase of #16936
ACKs for top commit:
darosior:
ACK 9c23ebd6b18fb1058a8d3e8aae9e0595d3a57ad5
Tree-SHA512: 74f287740403da1040ab1e235ef6eba4e304f3ee5d57a3b25d1e2e1f2f982d256528d398a4d6cb24ba393798e680a8f46cd7dae54ed84ab2c747e96288f1f884
8925df86c4df16b1070343fef8e4d238f3cc3bd1 doc: update release notes (Jon Atack)
8bb405bbadf11391ccba7b334b4cfe66dc85b390 test: getaddressinfo labels purpose deprecation test (Jon Atack)
60aba1f2f11529add115d963d05599130288ae28 rpc: simplify getaddressinfo labels, deprecate previous behavior (Jon Atack)
7851f14ccf2bcd1e9b2ad48e5e08881be06d9d21 rpc: incorporate review feedback from PR 17283 (Jon Atack)
Pull request description:
This PR builds on #17283 (now merged) and is followed by #17585.
It modifies the value returned by rpc getaddressinfo `labels` to an array of label name strings and deprecates the previous behavior of returning an array of JSON hash structures containing label `name` and address `purpose` key/value pairs.
before
```
"labels": [
{
"name": "DOUBLE SPEND",
"purpose": "receive"
}
```
after
```
"labels": [
"DOUBLE SPEND"
]
```
The deprecated behavior can be re-enabled by starting bitcoind with `-deprecatedrpc=labelspurpose`.
For context, see:
- https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/17283#issuecomment-554458001
- http://www.erisian.com.au/bitcoin-core-dev/log-2019-12-13.html#l-425 (lines 425-427)
- http://www.erisian.com.au/bitcoin-core-dev/log-2019-11-22.html#l-622
Reviewers: This PR may be tested manually by building, then running bitcoind with and without the `-deprecatedrpc=labelspurpose` flag while verifying the rpc getaddressinfo help text and `labels` output.
Next steps: deprecate the rpc getaddressinfo `label` field (EDIT: done in #17585) and add support for multiple labels per address. This PR will unblock those.
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
reACK 8925df8
promag:
Code review ACK 8925df86c4df16b1070343fef8e4d238f3cc3bd1.
meshcollider:
Code review ACK 8925df86c4df16b1070343fef8e4d238f3cc3bd1
Tree-SHA512: c2b717209996da32b6484de7bb8800e7048410f9ce6afdb3e02a6866bd4a8f2c730f905fca27b10b877b91cf407f546e69e8c4feb9cd934325a6c71c166bd438
3bd8db80d8d335ab63ece4f110b0fadd562e80b7 [validation] fix comments in CheckInputScripts() (John Newbery)
6f6465cefcd599c89c00f7b51f42a4b87a5ffb0b scripted-diff: [validation] Rename CheckInputs to CheckInputScripts (John Newbery)
Pull request description:
CheckInputs() used to check no double spends, scripts & sigs and amounts. Since
832e074, the double spend and amount checks
have been moved to CheckTxInputs(), and CheckInputs() now just validates
input scripts. Rename the function to CheckInputScripts().
Also fix incorrect comments.
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
re-ACK 3bd8db80d8d335ab63ece4f110b0fadd562e80b7, did the rebase myself, checked the scripted diff 👡
promag:
ACK 3bd8db80d8d335ab63ece4f110b0fadd562e80b7 :trollface:
Tree-SHA512: 7b3f8597d210492798fb784ee8ea47ea6377519111190161c7cc34a967509013f4337304f52e9bedc97b7710de7b0ff8880e08cd7f867754567f82e7b02c794c
e2ff385e138562fb3e1cc63bdd58715a2d8bad98 test: check for invalid `-prune` parameters (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
This small PR adds missing test coverage for invalid `-prune` parameter values / combinations:
77e23ca945/src/init.cpp (L926-L928)77e23ca945/src/init.cpp (L935-L937)77e23ca945/src/init.cpp (L844-L849)
Not sure if the tests fit into `feature_config_args.py` or should rather be moved into `feature_pruning.py`; the latter though seems to be run less often due to being very memory-hungry.
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
Code review ACK e2ff385e138562fb3e1cc63bdd58715a2d8bad98
Tree-SHA512: bb0db98090058ecac9f8a01301634e9dba9a65fd56b6a0b770f88da28c4f01e240e22b1225f0d231e28bdd4b5b51bff0e6853cccc46ed0190e91b84f7954a9db
c5bb142817c53c6a217163958b5d511f12171004 test: resolve bug in test/functional/interface_bitcoin_cli.py - Test -getinfo with -rpcwallet=unloaded wallet returns no balances (klementtan)
Pull request description:
I think there is a bug in this test case where the new value of `cli_get_info` is not asserted.
ACKs for top commit:
jonatack:
ACK c5bb142817c53c6a217163958b5d511f12171004
Tree-SHA512: 50c0c2c8fe63c95f951dee892fbacedf92208f47efe5ed481fbb255f15137c799d9200fa3ff31a442df0691248d7ff04d899842722c3032cd7f35553622ba38c
eadd1304c81e0b89178e4cc7630bd31650850c85 tests: Add a test for funding with sufficient preset inputs and subtractFeeFromOutputs (Andrew Chow)
ff330badd45067cb520b1cfa1844f60a4c9f2031 Default to bnb_used = false as there are many cases where BnB is not used (Andrew Chow)
Pull request description:
#17290 introduced a bug where, when we had preset inputs that covered the amount being sent and subtractFeeFrromOutputs was being used, transaction funding would result in a `Fee exceeds maximum configured by -maxtxfee` error. This was happening because we weren't setting `bnb_used = false` when the preset inputs were used as it should have been. This resulted in a too high fee because the change would go to fees accidentally.
Apparently this particular case doesn't have a test, so I've added one as well.
ACKs for top commit:
Sjors:
ACK eadd130. I can't get this new test to fail on macOS (without this PR). It passes whether or not I compile with `--enable-debug`. It does fail on Ubuntu. Yay undefined behavior... Anyway, it's a useful test.
fanquake:
ACK eadd1304c81e0b89178e4cc7630bd31650850c85
instagibbs:
utACK eadd1304c8
Tree-SHA512: 7286c321f78666eea558cc591174630d210263594df41cab1065417510591ee514ade0e1d0cec8af09a785757da68de82592b013e8fe8d4966cec3254368706e
33f5fc32e5bfbe1e89c4d20ce455bcc6dc194151 test: add rpc getaddressinfo labels test coverage (Jon Atack)
0f3539ac6d772fc646b5f184fa1efe77bf632f6a test: add listlabels test in wallet_labels.py (Jon Atack)
1388de83900eaced906d369fe9e8887ae74b2dcf rpc: add getaddressinfo code documentation (Jon Atack)
2ee0cb3330ccf70f0540cb42370796e32eff1569 rpc: update getaddressinfo RPCExamples to bech32 (Jon Atack)
8d1ed0c263f8cdff7189f02040b5d02238d93da0 rpc: clarify label vs labels in getaddressinfo RPCHelpman (Jon Atack)
5a0ed850700dfb19167d40b38f80313bd5e427ca rpc: improve getaddressinfo RPCHelpman content (Jon Atack)
70cda342cd20d0e0cd9f28405457544036968f2d rpc: improve getaddressinfo RPCHelpman formatting (Jon Atack)
Pull request description:
This PR is a continuation of the work in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12892.
Main motivations:
- There is currently no test coverage for the getaddressinfo `labels` response. Coverage here is a prerequisite before deprecating the `label` response or adding multiple labels per address.
- `bitcoin-cli help getaddressinfo` returns a few content errors, difficult-to-read formatting, and no explanation why it returns both `label` and `labels` and how they relate, which can be confusing for application developers.
Changes by order of commits:
- [x] improve/fix getaddressinfo RPCHelpman layout formatting
- [x] improve/fix getaddressinfo RPCHelpman content
- [x] clarify the `label` and `labels` fields in getaddressinfo RPCHelpman
- [x] update getaddressinfo RPCExamples addresses to bech32
- [x] add getaddressinfo code docs
- [x] add a `listlabels` test assertion in wallet_labels.py
- [x] add missing getaddressinfo `labels` test coverage and improve the existing `label` tests
Here are gists of the CLI help output:
[`bitcoin-cli help getaddressinfo` before this PR](https://gist.github.com/jonatack/022af5221a85c069780359a22643c810)
[`bitcoin-cli help getaddressinfo` after this PR](https://gist.github.com/jonatack/4ee5f6abc62a3d99269570206a5f90ba)
It seems we ought to begin a deprecation process for the getaddressinfo `label` field? If yes, I have a follow-up ready. _--> EDIT: Deprecation follow-ups #17578 and #17585 now build on this PR._
ACKs for top commit:
fjahr:
Re-ACK 33f5fc32e5bfbe1e89c4d20ce455bcc6dc194151
jnewbery:
ACK 33f5fc32e5bfbe1e89c4d20ce455bcc6dc194151.
Tree-SHA512: a001aa863090ec2566a31059477945b1c303ebeb430b33472f8b150e420fa5742fc33bca9d95571746395b607f43f6078dd5b53e238ac1f3fc648b51c8f79a07
fabd71076cd9493bd2d30a198467f5ea621b27aa ci: Print free disk space (MarcoFalke)
fad9fdbea5dfb19328282afda9588edc6f1d0ddf test: Properly deserialize integers in little-endian (MarcoFalke)
fa94fc10c881e502e6c9a71f3b7719aa955900f9 ci: Run functional tests on s390x (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Top commit has no ACKs.
Tree-SHA512: 98ba77eb56f283131fdaeb393fda86cc308f1bf9781e1e0e5736b8d616528dc8ff2e494d55ba107c138083025c66a59e382fcfa9962d4349a5fd6cbbc52484c3
4671fc3d9e669da8b8781f0cbefee43cb9acd527 Expand on wallet_balance.py comment from https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16766\#issuecomment-527563982 (Jeremy Rubin)
91f3073f08aff395dd813296bf99fd8ccc81bb27 Update release notes to mention changes to IsTrusted and impact on wallet (Jeremy Rubin)
8f174ef112199aa4e98d756039855cc561687c2e Systematize style of IsTrusted single line if (Jeremy Rubin)
b49dcbedf79613f0e0f61bfd742ed265213ed280 update variable naming conventions for IsTrusted (Jeremy Rubin)
5ffe0d144923f365cb1c2fad181eca15d1668692 Update comment in test/functional/wallet_balance.py (Jeremy Rubin)
a550c58267f50c59c2eea1d46edaa5019a8ad5d8 Update wallet_balance.py test to reflect new behavior (Jeremy Rubin)
5dd7da4ccd1354f09e2d00bab29288db0d5665d0 Reuse trustedParents in looped calls to IsTrusted (Jeremy Rubin)
595f09d6de7f1b94428cdd1310777aa6a4c584e5 Cache tx Trust per-call to avoid DoS (Jeremy Rubin)
dce032ce294fe0d531770f540b1de00dc1d13f4b Make IsTrusted scan parents recursively (Jeremy Rubin)
Pull request description:
This slightly modifies the behavior of IsTrusted to recursively check the parents of a transaction. Otherwise, it's possible that a parent is not IsTrusted but a child is. If a parent is not trusted, then a child should not be either.
This recursive scan can be a little expensive, so ~it might be beneficial to have a way of caching IsTrusted state, but this is a little complex because various conditions can change between calls to IsTrusted (e.g., re-org).~ I added a cache which works per call/across calls, but does not store the results semi-permanently. Which reduces DoS risk of this change. There is no risk of untrusted parents causing a resource exploitation, as we immediately return once that is detected.
This is a change that came up as a bug-fix esque change while working on OP_SECURETHEBAG. You can see the branch where this change is important here: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/master...JeremyRubin:stb-with-rpc?expand=1. Essentially, without this change, we can be tricked into accepting an OP_SECURETHEBAG output because we don't properly check the parents. As this was a change which, on its own, was not dependent on OP_SECURETHEBAG, I broke it out as I felt the change stands on its own by fixing a long standing wallet bug.
The test wallet_balance.py has been corrected to meet the new behavior. The below comment, reproduced, explains what the issue is and the edge cases that can arise before this change.
# Before `test_balance()`, we have had two nodes with a balance of 50
# each and then we:
#
# 1) Sent 40 from node A to node B with fee 0.01
# 2) Sent 60 from node B to node A with fee 0.01
#
# Then we check the balances:
#
# 1) As is
# 2) With transaction 2 from above with 2x the fee
#
# Prior to #16766, in this situation, the node would immediately report
# a balance of 30 on node B as unconfirmed and trusted.
#
# After #16766, we show that balance as unconfirmed.
#
# The balance is indeed "trusted" and "confirmed" insofar as removing
# the mempool transactions would return at least that much money. But
# the algorithm after #16766 marks it as unconfirmed because the 'taint'
# tracking of transaction trust for summing balances doesn't consider
# which inputs belong to a user. In this case, the change output in
# question could be "destroyed" by replace the 1st transaction above.
#
# The post #16766 behavior is correct; we shouldn't be treating those
# funds as confirmed. If you want to rely on that specific UTXO existing
# which has given you that balance, you cannot, as a third party
# spending the other input would destroy that unconfirmed.
#
# For example, if the test transactions were:
#
# 1) Sent 40 from node A to node B with fee 0.01
# 2) Sent 10 from node B to node A with fee 0.01
#
# Then our node would report a confirmed balance of 40 + 50 - 10 = 80
# BTC, which is more than would be available if transaction 1 were
# replaced.
The release notes have been updated to note the new behavior.
ACKs for top commit:
ariard:
Code Review ACK 4671fc3, maybe extend DoS protection in a follow-up PR.
fjahr:
Code review ACK 4671fc3d9e669da8b8781f0cbefee43cb9acd527
ryanofsky:
Code review ACK 4671fc3d9e669da8b8781f0cbefee43cb9acd527. Changes since last review: 2 new commits adding suggested release note and python test comment, also a clean rebase with no changes to the earlier commits. The PR description is more comprehensive now, too. Looks good!
promag:
Code review ACK 4671fc3d9e669da8b8781f0cbefee43cb9acd527.
Tree-SHA512: 6b183ff425304fef49724290053514cb2770f4a2350dcb83660ef24af5c54f7c4c2c345b0f62bba60eb2d2f70625ee61a7fab76a7f491bb5a84be5c4cc86b92f
bd52684508ca2964e6a3af503d21ff99675380c7 test: rest /tx with an invalid/unknown txid (brunoerg)
Pull request description:
This PR adds test coverage to the endpoint `/tx` (rest) passing an invalid and an unknown txid to test its return.
Invalid -> should return status code 400 (bad request)
Unknown -> should return status code 404 (not found)
ACKs for top commit:
kallewoof:
ACK bd52684508ca2964e6a3af503d21ff99675380c7
Tree-SHA512: a7fbb63f30d06fc0855133a36e8317c7930ba13aa2b4a2dd1fc35079d59eacace72e1ffe7ae1b3e067066fe51792415940d72d923e83a659a0d5965e4110b32a
0754e9c01bd3d57aa241e313ba34c18c4897ba98 test: run feature_pruning.py without wallet compiled (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
Only one small part of the pruning test (sub-test `wallet_test`) is wallet-related, hence we can run all other parts without wallet compiled.
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
cr ACK 0754e9c01bd3d57aa241e313ba34c18c4897ba98
Tree-SHA512: 856856903d21d64953ed0102cc2a96f55975c4b7d8e93e57b82c266024967160df64df2b6068be089efc05e883e8d6d12e7327053420d4c640b9d8cc5bcb1c58
3004d5a12d09d94bfc4dee2a8e8f2291996a4aaf [validation] Remove fMissingInputs from AcceptToMemoryPool() (John Newbery)
c428622a5bb1e37b2e6ab2c52791ac05d9271238 [validation] Remove unused first_invalid parameter from ProcessNewBlockHeaders() (John Newbery)
7204c6434b944f6ad51b3c895837729d3aa56eea [validation] Remove useless ret parameter from Invalid() (John Newbery)
1a37de4b3174d19a6d8691ae07e92b32fdfaef11 [validation] Remove error() calls from Invalid() calls (John Newbery)
067981e49246822421a7bcc720491427e1dba8a3 [validation] Tidy Up ValidationResult class (John Newbery)
a27a2957ed9afbe5a96caa5f0f4cbec730d27460 [validation] Add CValidationState subclasses (John Newbery)
Pull request description:
Carries out some remaining tidy-ups remaining after PR 15141:
- split ValidationState into TxValidationState and BlockValidationState (commit from ajtowns)
- various minor code style tidy-ups to the ValidationState class
- remove the useless `ret` parameter from `ValidationState::Invalid()`
- remove the now unused `first_invalid` parameter from `ProcessNewBlockHeaders()`
- remove the `fMissingInputs` parameter from `AcceptToMemoryPool()`, and deal with missing inputs the same way as other errors by using the `TxValidationState` object.
Tip for reviewers (thanks ryanofsky!): The first commit ("[validation] Add CValidationState subclasses" ) is huge and can be easier to start reviewing if you revert the rote, mechanical changes:
Substitute the commit hash of commit "[validation] Add CValidationState subclasses" for <CommitHash> in the commands below.
```sh
git checkout <CommitHash>
git grep -l ValidationState | xargs sed -i 's/BlockValidationState\|TxValidationState/CValidationState/g'
git grep -l ValidationResult | xargs sed -i 's/BlockValidationResult\|TxValidationResult/ValidationInvalidReason/g'
git grep -l MaybePunish | xargs sed -i 's/MaybePunishNode\(ForBlock\|ForTx\)/MaybePunishNode/g'
git diff HEAD^
```
After that it's possible to easily see the mechanical changes with:
```sh
git log -p -n1 -U0 --word-diff-regex=. <CommitHash>
```
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
ACK 3004d5a12d09d94bfc4dee2a8e8f2291996a4aaf
amitiuttarwar:
code review ACK 3004d5a12d09d94bfc4dee2a8e8f2291996a4aaf. Also built & ran tests locally.
fjahr:
Code review ACK 3004d5a12d09d94bfc4dee2a8e8f2291996a4aaf . Only nit style change and pure virtual destructor added since my last review.
ryanofsky:
Code review ACK 3004d5a12d09d94bfc4dee2a8e8f2291996a4aaf. Just whitespace change and pure virtual destructor added since last review.
Tree-SHA512: 511de1fb380a18bec1944ea82b513b6192df632ee08bb16344a2df3c40811a88f3872f04df24bc93a41643c96c48f376a04551840fd804a961490d6c702c3d36
9075d13153ce06cd59a45644831ecc43126e1e82 [docs] Add release notes for removal of REJECT reasons (John Newbery)
04a2f326ec0f06fb4fce1c4f93500752f05dede8 [validation] Fix REJECT message comments (John Newbery)
e9d5a59e34ff2d538d8f5315efd9908bf24d0fdc [validation] Remove REJECT code from CValidationState (John Newbery)
0053e16714323c1694c834fdca74f064a1a33529 [logging] Don't log REJECT code when transaction is rejected (John Newbery)
a1a07cfe99fc8cee30ba5976dc36b47b1f6532ab [validation] Fix peer punishment for bad blocks (John Newbery)
Pull request description:
We no longer send BIP 61 REJECT messages, so there's no need to set
a REJECT code in the CValidationState object.
Note that there is a minor bug fix in p2p behaviour here. Because the
call to `MaybePunishNode()` in `PeerLogicValidation::BlockChecked()` only
previously happened if the REJECT code was > 0 and < `REJECT_INTERNAL`,
then there are cases were `MaybePunishNode()` can get called where it
wasn't previously:
- when `AcceptBlockHeader()` fails with `CACHED_INVALID`.
- when `AcceptBlockHeader()` fails with `BLOCK_MISSING_PREV`.
Note that `BlockChecked()` cannot fail with an 'internal' reject code. The
only internal reject code was `REJECT_HIGHFEE`, which was only set in
ATMP.
This reverts a minor bug introduced in 5d08c9c579.
ACKs for top commit:
ariard:
ACK 9075d13, changes since last reviewed are splitting them in separate commits to ease understanding and fix nits
fjahr:
ACK 9075d13153ce06cd59a45644831ecc43126e1e82, confirmed diff to last review was fixing nits in docs/comments.
ryanofsky:
Code review ACK 9075d13153ce06cd59a45644831ecc43126e1e82. Only changes since last review are splitting the main commit and updating comments
Tree-SHA512: 58e8a1a4d4e6f156da5d29fb6ad6a62fc9c594bbfc6432b3252e962d0e9e10149bf3035185dc5320c46c09f3e49662bc2973ec759679c0f3412232087cb8a3a7
ea4cc3a7b36a9c77dbf0aff439da3ef0ea58e6e4 Truly decouple wallet from chainparams for -fallbackfee (Jorge Timón)
Pull request description:
Before it was 0 by default for main and 20000 for test and regtest.
Now it is 0 by default for all chains, thus there's no need to call Params().
Also now the default for main is properly documented.
Suggestion for release notes:
-fallbackfee was 0 (disabled) by default for the main chain, but 20000 by default for the test chains. Now it is 0 by default for all chains. Testnet and regtest users will have to add fallbackfee=20000 to their configuration if they weren't setting it and they want it to keep working like before.
Should I propose them to the wiki for the release notes or only after merge?
For more context, see https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16402#issuecomment-515701042
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
ACK ea4cc3a7b36a9c77dbf0aff439da3ef0ea58e6e4
Tree-SHA512: fdfaba5d813da4221e405e0988bef44f3856d10f897a94f9614386d14b7716f4326ab8a6646e26d41ef3f4fa61b936191e216b1b605e9ab0520b0657fc162e6c
----
Co-Authored-By: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] ~~I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand
areas~~ N/A
- [ ] ~~I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests~~ N/A
- [ ] ~~I have made corresponding changes to the documentation~~ N/A
- [ ] 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>
8dd5946c0b7aa8f3976b14a5de4ce84b80a9c32a add functional test (Larry Ruane)
b5a80fa7e487c37b7ac0e3874a2fabade41b9ca8 util: Handle HTTP_SERVICE_UNAVAILABLE in bitcoin-cli (Hennadii Stepanov)
Pull request description:
If `bitcoind` is processing 16 RPC requests, attempting to submit another request using `bitcoin-cli` produces this less-than-helpful error message: `error: couldn't parse reply from server`. This PR changes the error to: `error: server response: Work queue depth exceeded`.
ACKs for top commit:
fjahr:
tACK 8dd5946c0b7aa8f3976b14a5de4ce84b80a9c32a
luke-jr:
utACK 8dd5946c0b7aa8f3976b14a5de4ce84b80a9c32a (no changes since previous utACK)
hebasto:
re-ACK 8dd5946c0b7aa8f3976b14a5de4ce84b80a9c32a, only suggested changes since my [previous](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18335#pullrequestreview-460621350) review.
darosior:
ACK 8dd5946c0b7aa8f3976b14a5de4ce84b80a9c32a
Tree-SHA512: 33e25f6ff05d9b56fae2bdb68b132557bb8e995f5438ac4fbbc53c304c5152a98aa43c43600c31d8a6a2830cbd48bf8ec7d89dce50190b29ec00a43830126913
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
the problem with retries implemented in #4793 is that they don't really
do anything besides fetching results of a failed job multiple times 🙈
## What was done?
partially reverted changes done in #4793, implemented actual job
restart. dropped `--sleep` and `--retries` and added `--attempts`
instead.
## How Has This Been Tested?
Pick any test, add some randomly failing expression somewhere and run it
with some high number of retries.
For example:
```diff
diff --git a/test/functional/feature_dip0020_activation.py b/test/functional/feature_dip0020_activation.py
index 471e4fdc66..b56a954b78 100755
--- a/test/functional/feature_dip0020_activation.py
+++ b/test/functional/feature_dip0020_activation.py
@@ -69,6 +69,7 @@ class DIP0020ActivationTest(BitcoinTestFramework):
# Should be spendable now
tx0id = self.node.sendrawtransaction(tx0_hex)
assert tx0id in set(self.node.getrawmempool())
+ assert int(tx0id[0], 16) < 4
if __name__ == '__main__':
```
On develop:
```
./test/functional/test_runner.py feature_dip0020_activation.py --retries=100 --sleep=0
```
if this fails on the first run, it keeps "failing" (simply fetching the
same results actually) till the end.
With this patch:
```
./test/functional/test_runner.py feature_dip0020_activation.py --attempts=100
```
if this fails on the first run, it can actually succeed after a few
attempts now, unless you are extremely unlucky ofc 😄
Also, check [ci results in my repo
](https://cdn.artifacts.gitlab-static.net/93/b4/93b4f8b17e5dcccab1afee165b4d74d90f05800caf65d6c48a83a1a78c979587/2023_04_08/4081291268/4478867166/job.log?response-content-type=text%2Fplain%3B%20charset%3Dutf-8&response-content-disposition=inline&Expires=1680945516&KeyName=gprd-artifacts-cdn&Signature=2d4mHCJBbgRaTDiSQ6kKIy1PdIM=).
Note:
```
...
feature_dip3_v19.py failed at attempt 1/3, Duration: 159s
...
4/179 - [1mfeature_dip3_v19.py[0m passed, Duration: 244 s
...
feature_llmq_hpmn.py failed at attempt 1/3, Duration: 284s
...
feature_llmq_hpmn.py failed at attempt 2/3, Duration: 296s
...
11/179 - [1mfeature_llmq_hpmn.py[0m failed, Duration: 233 s
...
```
An example with 2 tests failing initially and then passing:
https://gitlab.com/dashpay/dash/-/jobs/4089689970
## 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
**For repository code-owners and collaborators only**
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
This was reported/requested by @HashEngineering:
> Older versions of our App won't sync due to if (obj.nVersion ==
BASIC_BLS_VERSION) . Older versions don't know what version a SML Entry
is. As such, they will never read the type field. On the android client
this causes an offset problem when reading the mnlistdiff and it will
throw an exception that bans the peer that supplied it. Soon enough, no
peers will be left to connect to because they will all give the android
client bad data.
## What was done?
With this PR, SML will serialise the new v19 fields (`nType`,
`platformHTTPPort`, `platformNodeID`) if the client's version is at
least equal to `70227`.
Note: Serialisation for hashing skips the above rule.
Also, functional test mininode protocol version is set to `70227`.
## 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
- [x] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
**For repository code-owners and collaborators only**
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
During reviewing TODO were found some TODOes that can be done now.
## What was done?
- fix: follow-up dash#3467 - replaced commented code to disabled code
- follow-up bitcoin#16394 - uncommented code related to `watchonly`
feature
- removed out-dated TODO in `rpc/masternode.cpp` (already done)
- fix: renamed name of clean up test_unittests: removed TODO and updated
name of variable TRAVIS
- rewritten todo inside `.travis.yml`
- fix: adds a missing description for result of rpc `mnsync`
Last commit (`mnsync`) is an only candidate for backport to v19, other
changes are non significant.
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run functional/unit tests
## Breaking Changes
No 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 made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
should hopefully fix some sporadic ci test failures (like
https://gitlab.com/dashpay/dash/-/jobs/4052206622#L1962)
## What was done?
tweaked dynamically_add/update functions to make checks more consistent
and avoid some edge cases, pls see individual commits
## How Has This Been Tested?
`feature_llmq_hpmn.py` and `feature_dip3_v19.py` still work locally,
let's see if ci is now (constantly) happy about these too...
## 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
- [x] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
**For repository code-owners and collaborators only**
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
fa6af312277bb1b7e57d9b764d411c5b0873829f test: Document why syncwithvalidationinterfacequeue is needed in tests (MarcoFalke)
fa135a13b8ddaa117bd090ec43a3eab3a95755c1 Revert "test: Add missing sync_all to wallet_balance test" (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
syncwithvalidationinterfacequeue is a hidden test-only RPC, so it should not be used when it is not needed. Thus, either remove it or explain why it is needed.
ACKs for top commit:
fjahr:
Code review ACK fa6af312277bb1b7e57d9b764d411c5b0873829f
Tree-SHA512: de30db4ab521184091ee5beeab02989138cf7cf05088f766a2fb106151b239310b63d5380cb79e2a072f72c5ae9513aecae8eb9c1c7be713771585c3cb04d63a
3ebde2143aa98af213872b98b474d904e55056f7 [test] Fix wait condition in disconnect_p2ps (Amiti Uttarwar)
Pull request description:
#19315 currently has a [test failure](https://cirrus-ci.com/task/4545582645641216) because of a race. `disconnect_p2ps` is intended to have a `wait_until` clause that prevents this race, but the conditional doesn't match since its comparing two different object types. `MY_SUBVERSION` is defined in messages.py as a byte string, but is compared to the value returned by the RPC. This PR simply converts types to ensure they match, which should prevent the race from occurring.
HUGE PROPS TO jnewbery for discovering the issue 🔎
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
ACK 3ebde2143aa98af213872b98b474d904e55056f7
glozow:
Code review ACK 3ebde2143a
Tree-SHA512: ca096b80a3e4d757a645f38846d6dc89d6a3d35c3435513a72d278e305faddd4aff9e75a767941b51b2abbf59c82679bac1e9a0140d6f285efe3053e51bcc2a8
638441928a446726ce3a7fb20433a5478e7585bb test: add parameterized constructor for msg_sendcmpct() (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
While working on the test for #19776 I noticed that creating a `sendcmpct` message is quite cumbersome -- due to the lack of a parameterized constructor, one needs to create an empty (that is, initialized with default values) object and then set the two fields one by one. This PR replaces the default constructor with a parameterized constructor and uses it in the test `p2p_compactblocks.py`, reducing LOC. No need to pollute the namespace with temporary throw-away message objects anymore.
ACKs for top commit:
guggero:
Code review ACK 638441928a446726ce3a7fb20433a5478e7585bb.
epson121:
Code review ACK 638441928a446726ce3a7fb20433a5478e7585bb
Tree-SHA512: 3b58d276d714b73abc6cc98d1d52dec5f6026b33f03faaeb7dcbc5d83ac377555179f98b159b2b9ecc8957999c35a1dc082e3c69299c5fde4e35f1bd0587ce9d
637d8bce741213295bd9b9d1982cae663c701ba1 Change FILE_CHAR_BLOCKLIST to FILE_CHARS_DISALLOWED (Benoit Verret)
Pull request description:
Blocklist is ambiguous. It could mean a list of blocks.
Example: "blocknotify" in the same file refers to Bitcoin blocks.
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
ACK 637d8bce741213295bd9b9d1982cae663c701ba1
laanwj:
ACK 637d8bce741213295bd9b9d1982cae663c701ba1 — this is a clear variable name improvement
theStack:
ACK 637d8bce741213295bd9b9d1982cae663c701ba1
jonatack:
ACK 637d8bce741213295bd9b9d1982cae663c701ba1
eriknylund:
ACK 637d8bce741213295bd9b9d1982cae663c701ba1
promag:
ACK 637d8bce741213295bd9b9d1982cae663c701ba1.
Tree-SHA512: 028e7102eeaf61105736c55c119a7f5c05411f2b6715a7939c41cb9e8f13afb757bbb6e7a302b3aae21722e69dab91f6eff8099e5884d248299905b4c7687c02
854382885f18aa9a95cdde3d11591b05c305ad3f refactor: test: improve wait_for{header,merkleblock} interface (Sebastian Falbesoner)
1356a45ef042e7bd3d539fbb606d6b1be547d00f test: complete impl. of msg_merkleblock and wait_for_merkleblock (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
Implements the missing initialization/serialization methods for `msg_merkleblock`, based on the already present class `CMerkleBlock`. Also changes the method `wait_for_merkleblock()` to be more precise by waiting for a merkleblock with a specified blockhash instead of an arbitrary one.
In the BIP37 test `p2p_filter.py`, this new method is used to make the test of receiving merkleblock and tx if a filter is set to be more precise, by checking if they also arrive in the right order.
In the course of this PR, also the interface for the methods `wait_for_merkleblock()` and `wait_for_header()` are improved to take a hex string instead of an integer, which is more typesafe and less of a burden to the caller.
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
ACK 854382885f18aa9a95cdde3d11591b05c305ad3f
Tree-SHA512: adaf0ac728ef0b9929cb417a7a7b4c1346c400b2d365bf6914515c67b6cfe8f4a7ecc62fb514afdce9792f0bed833416f6bca6b9620f3d5dcdc66e4d5b0b7ea3
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
1. we need to move time forward to let invs being relayed
2. nNextInvSend in SendMessages can be bumped up to 30+ seconds into the
future in rare cases
make sure timeouts in tests are high enough to relay tx inv/wait for
corresponding islock
## What was done?
tl;dr: bump mocktime while waiting, wait longer
extracted fixes from https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/5288 but I
expect this to fix other sporadic test failures too
## How Has This Been Tested?
tests are ok locally and in https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/5288
## 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
**For repository code-owners and collaborators only**
- [ ] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
## Motivation
Dash Core has a series of functional tests that do not behave in a
deterministic fashion and have a higher chance of failure, especially on
resource limited systems. This results in a lot of false-negatives
during CI runs, prompting the need to re-run them, which is annoying at
best and generates apathy towards CI failure at worst.
## History
The first approach was to isolate non-deterministic tests into their own
distinct GItLab runner, making it such that if a test failed, only that
one runner had to be restarted, instead of the multiple runners that
failed due to these tests.
One problem with this was that this approach effectively omitted these
tests from TSan and UBSan coverage as attempting to combine TSan and
UBSan would cause significant resource exhaustion.
## Description
An alternative approach is to introduce a new flag, `--retries`,
applicable only on non-deterministic tests, that allow a failed test to
be repeated up to a set number of times (default: 3), only reporting
failure once the limit is exhausted.
A limitation of this is that only the log dump from the last attempt
will be available.
---------
Co-authored-by: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
- updated data file with dash addresses
- removed witness/bench32 support from rpc_createmultisig.py
- other specific changes, such as wallet balances after N mined blocks
- updated descriptors for multisort sign (fixes for bitcoin#17056)
19a354b11f85a3c6c81ff83bf702bf7a40cf5046 Output a descriptor in createmultisig and addmultisigaddress (Andrew Chow)
Pull request description:
Give a descriptor from `createmultisig` and `addmultisigaddress`.
Extracted from #16528 with `addmultisgaddress` and tests added.
ACKs for top commit:
Sjors:
tACK 19a354b11f85a3c6c81ff83bf702bf7a40cf5046
MarcoFalke:
ACK 19a354b11f85a3c6c81ff83bf702bf7a40cf5046
promag:
Code review ACK 19a354b11f85a3c6c81ff83bf702bf7a40cf5046.
meshcollider:
utACK 19a354b11f85a3c6c81ff83bf702bf7a40cf5046
Tree-SHA512: e813125fbbc358ea8d45b1748de16a29a94efd83175b748fb8fa3b0bfc8e783ed36b6c554d84f5d4ead1ba252a83a3e937b6c3f75da7b8d3b4e55f94d6013771
4bb660be90a2811b53855bf1fd33a8dd9ba3db47 Add release note (Andrew Chow)
ed96b295d747738334459490c79b7360ab85aaf7 Update descriptors.md to include sortedmulti (Andrew Chow)
80be78ea75ac9833ee3db3d468ed09fc4fe6274c Test sortedmulti descriptor using BIP 67 tests (Andrew Chow)
6f588fd2276e5b713c6d36e3b01288484ddb59c0 Add sortedmulti descriptor and unit tests (Andrew Chow)
Pull request description:
Adds a `sortedmulti()` descriptor as mentioned in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/17023#issuecomment-537596416.
`sortedmulti()` works in the same way as `multi` does but sorts the pubkeys in the resulting scripts in lexicographic order as described in [BIP67](https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0067.mediawiki). Note that this does not add support for BIP67 nor is BIP67 fully supported by this descriptor (which is why it is not named `multi67()`) as it does not require compressed pubkeys.
Tests from BIP67 were added and documentation was updated.
ACKs for top commit:
instagibbs:
re-ACK 4bb660be90
Sjors:
re-ACK 4bb660be90a2811b53855bf1fd33a8dd9ba3db47
Tree-SHA512: 93b21112a74ebe0bf316d8f3e0291f69fd975cf0a29332f9728e7b880cad312b8b14007e86adcd7899f117b9303cbcf4cb35f3bb2f2f648d1a446f83f75a70a5
ec4c79326bb670c2cc1757ecfb1900f8460c5257 signrawtransaction*: improve error for partial signing (Anthony Towns)
3c481f8921bbc587cf287329f39243abe703b868 signrawtransactionwithkey: better error messages for bad redeemScript/witnessScript (Anthony Towns)
Pull request description:
Two fixes for `signrawtransactionwith{key,wallet}` (in addition to #16250): one that checks redeemScript/witnessScript matches scriptPubKey (and if both are provided that they match each other sanely), and the other changes the warning when some-but-not-all the signatures for a CHECKMULTISIG are provided to something that suggests more signatures may be all that's required.
Fixes: #13218Fixes: #14823
ACKs for top commit:
instagibbs:
utACK ec4c79326b
achow101:
Code Review ACK ec4c79326bb670c2cc1757ecfb1900f8460c5257
meshcollider:
utACK ec4c79326bb670c2cc1757ecfb1900f8460c5257
Tree-SHA512: 0c95c91d498e85b834662b9e5c83f336ed5fd306be7701ce1dbfa0836fbeb448a267a796585512f7496e820be668b07c2a0a2f45e52dc23f09ee7d9c87e42b35
01174596e69568c434198a86f54cb9ea6740e6c2 signrawtransactionwithkey: report error when missing redeemScript/witnessScript param (Anthony Towns)
Pull request description:
Adding support for "witnessScript" as an alternative to "redeemScript" when using "signrawtransactionwithkey" meant that the `RPCTypeCheckObj()` call in `SignTransaction` can't error out just because either parameter is missing -- it's only a problem if both are missing, which isn't a state `RPCTypeCheckObj()` tests for. This results in the regression described in #16249. This patch adds some code to test for this case and give a similar error, namely:
error code: -8
error message:
Missing redeemScript/witnessScript
Fixes: #16249
ACKs for top commit:
meshcollider:
utACK 01174596e6
promag:
ACK 01174596e. Could also write test without `dict`/`del`:
Tree-SHA512: cf51346b7dea551b7f18f2a93c2a336a293b2535c62c03a5263cd2be8c58cf0cc302891da659c167e88ad1a68a756472c3c07e99f71627c61d32886fc5a3a353
fab6a0a659 test: Add test that addmultisigaddress fails for watchonly addresses (MarcoFalke)
fad81d870a test: Fixup creatmultisig documentation and whitespace (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Just to make sure this is not regressed on accidentally in the future
ACKs for commit fab6a0:
jonatack:
ACK fab6a0a659
Tree-SHA512: bf8dcbc752f8910902a995e55ce486621156aa01f112990344815c4aab980298dfecc108e78245a8986a00c3871338ad16fc818a1bce9dfc6b37b9c88851e39d
f40b3b82df [tests] functional test for createmultisig RPC (Anthony Towns)
b9024fdda3 segwit support for createmultisig RPC (Anthony Towns)
d58055d25f Move AddAndGetDestinationForScript from wallet to outputype module (Anthony Towns)
9a44db2e46 Add outputtype module (Anthony Towns)
Pull request description:
Adds an "address_type" parameter that accepts "legacy", "p2sh-segwit", and "bech32" to choose the type of address created. Defaults to "legacy" rather than the value of the `-address-type` option for backwards compatibility.
As part of implementing this, OutputType is moved from wallet into its own module, and `AddAndGetDestinationForScript` is changed to apply to a `CKeyStore` rather than a wallet, and to invoke `keystore.AddCScript(script)` itself rather than expecting the caller to have done that.
Fixes#12502
Tree-SHA512: a08c1cfa89976e4fd7d29caa90919ebd34a446354d17abb862e99f2ee60ed9bc19d8a21a18547c51dc3812cb9fbed86af0bef2f1e971f62bf95cade4a7d86237
1b41c2c8a126ef4be183e1d800a17d85cab8837b test: improve gettransaction test coverage (Jon Atack)
0f34f54888f680bfbe7a29ac278636d7178a99bb rpc: fix regression in gettransaction (Jon Atack)
Pull request description:
Closes#16872.
PR #16866 renamed the `decode` argument in gettransaction to `verbose` to make it more consistent with other RPC calls like getrawtransaction. However, it inadvertently overloaded the "details" field when `verbose` is passed. The result is that the original "details" field is no longer returned correctly, which seems to be a breaking API change.
This PR:
- takes the simplest path to restoring the "details" field by renaming the decoded one back to "decoded" while leaving the `verbose` argument for API consistency, which was the main intent of #16866,
- addresses [this comment](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16185#discussion_r320740413) by mentioning in the RPC help that the new decoded field is equivalent to decoderawtransaction, and
- updates the help, functional test, and release note.
Reviewers, to test this manually, build and run `bitcoin-cli help gettransaction` and `bitcoin-cli gettransaction <wallet txid> false true`, and verify that the command returns both `details` and `decoded` fields.
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
tACK 1b41c2c8a126ef4be183e1d800a17d85cab8837b
Tree-SHA512: 287edd5db7ed58fe8b548975aba58628bd45ed708b28f40174f10a35a455d89f796fbf27430aa881fc376f47aabda8803f74d4d100683bd86577a02279091cf3
7dee8f48088c75ab0e51be60679505f8ce570919 [wallet] Rename 'decode' argument in gettransaction method to 'verbose' (John Newbery)
Pull request description:
This makes the RPC method consistent with other RPC methods that have a
'verbose' option.
Change the name of the return object from 'decoded' to details.
Update help text.
ACKs for top commit:
promag:
ACK 7dee8f48088c75ab0e51be60679505f8ce570919.
meshcollider:
Code review ACK 7dee8f48088c75ab0e51be60679505f8ce570919
0xB10C:
ACK 7dee8f48088c75ab0e51be60679505f8ce570919: reviewed code
Tree-SHA512: a3a62265c8e6e914591f3b3b9f9dd4f42240dc8dab9cbac6ed8d8b8319b6cc847db2ad1689d5440c162e0698f31e39fc6b868ed918b2f62879d61b9865cae66b
/**
* Dash specific comment
*
* Seems as event on_getdata works in our P2PInterface.
* But somehow it's never called for test 'test_in_flight_max',
* it may be due to bug in net_processing.
* Due to that, part of functional tests is disabled
*/
fab365835639a3da03f8ad9a58a0db6c6c4c2314 [qa] Test that getdata requests work as expected (Suhas Daftuar)
fa883ab35ad2d4328e35b1e855d0833740a6b910 net: Use mockable time for tx download (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Two commits:
* First commit changes to mockable time for tx download (refactoring, should only have an effect on regtest)
* Second commit adds a test that uses mocktime to test tx download
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
code review ACK 16197/commits/fab365835639a3da03f8ad9a58a0db6c6c4c2314
jamesob:
ACK fab3658356
Tree-SHA512: 3a64a3e283ec4bab1f6e506404b11f0a564a5b61d2a7508ae738a61f035e57220484c66e0ae47d847fe9f7e3ff5cc834909d7b34a9bbcea6abe01f8742806908
Co-authored-by: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
9965940e35c445ccded55510348af228ff22f0e9 doc: Add release note for the new gettransaction argument (darosior)
b8b3f0435a2837d3897e9e232ef6ca839ce74eb8 tests: Add a new functional test for gettransaction (darosior)
7f3bb247a811582d1aa4805d8e601c19808dc7ba gettransaction: add an argument to decode the transaction (darosior)
Pull request description:
This PR adds a new parameter to the `gettransaction` call : `decode`. If set to `true`, it will add a new `decoded` field to the response. This mimics the behavior of `getrawtransaction`'s `verbose` argument to avoid using 2 calls if we want to decode a wallet transaction (`gettransaction` then `decoderawtransaction`).
Fix#16181 .
ACKs for top commit:
meshcollider:
re-utACK 9965940e35c445ccded55510348af228ff22f0e9
Tree-SHA512: bcb6b4bd252b3488d6afc77659c499c2ad99fd58661eb24b6a2e17014c74f22e47fde70e00fedb4f4754915786622ad02483b2cf2c4dea0ab0eb4ac8276dbeee
0fb2e69815 CreateTransaction: Assume minimum p2sh-p2wpkh spend size for unknown change (Gregory Sanders)
b06483c96a Remove stale comment in CalculateMaximumSignedInputSize (Gregory Sanders)
Pull request description:
This is triggered anytime a fundraw type call(psbt or legacy) is used with a change output address that the wallet doesn't know how to sign for.
This regression was added in 6a34ff5335 since BnB coin selection actually cares about this.
The fix is to assume the smallest typical spend, a P2SH-P2WPKH, which is calculated using a "prototype" dummy signature flow. Future work could generalize this infrastructure to get estimated sizes of inputs for a variety of types.
I also removed a comment which I believe is stale and misleading.
Tree-SHA512: c7e2be189e524f81a7aa4454ad9370cefba715e3781f1e462c8bab77e4d27540191419029e3ebda11e3744c0703271e479dcd560d05e4d470048d9633e34da16
5eb20f81d9 Consistently use ParseHashV to validate hash inputs in rpc (Ben Woosley)
Pull request description:
ParseHashV validates the length and encoding of the string and throws
an informative RPC error on failure, which is as good or better than
these alternative calls.
Note I switched ParseHashV to check string length first, because
IsHex tests that the length is even, and an error like:
"must be of length 64 (not 63, for X)" is much more informative than
"must be hexadecimal string (not X)" in that case.
Split from #13420
Tree-SHA512: f0786b41c0d7793ff76e4b2bb35547873070bbf7561d510029e8edb93f59176277efcd4d183b3185532ea69fc0bbbf3dbe9e19362e8017007ae9d51266cd78ae
cbf2d75d8f49b7b1e32acb5373b312b484f3fa6a qa: Add getdescriptorinfo functional test (João Barbosa)
Pull request description:
The `getdescriptorinfo` RPC was added in #15368, this PR adds some tests.
Top commit has no ACKs.
Tree-SHA512: 5bf3fb5842b975089821c7ac52202ecb23df255f655862646eb532e38e335ff963f8973bcf5b8bba386183281dc9bfe7279ba1cf25fd518c9a45fb45a9243e4d
d484279a46fe2cd5e133b6c18a1e00f802084772 test: add logging to wallet_listsinceblock.py (Jon Atack)
Pull request description:
This is the first commit from #17535.
Top commit has no ACKs.
Tree-SHA512: bb4f527a41bca3ffbf69e910311ce7f85dcc7a2be41350b3c653a27f4044f392b7e528f330e9691f497212469f6b16ce263230bb7a919548dd4e3e21cc72142f
54be4e71d898de8f14e3269550d56097c023d1cc test: check specific reject reasons in feature_csv_activation.py (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
This is kind of a prequel to #17921: increases the general quality of the functional test `feature_csv_activation.py` by checking for the specific reject reasons whenever the sending of a block fails. To get the reason, we have to limit the script threads to 1 via the parameter `-par=1`, like it is also done in `feature_cltv.py`:
a654626f07/test/functional/feature_cltv.py (L57-L61)
The commit also fixes a bug that was uncovered with this checks: for the BIP112 version 1 tx tests, txs from `bip112txs_vary_OP_CSV_v1` have been add twice to the list `failed_txs`:
a654626f07/test/functional/feature_csv_activation.py (L396-L397)
leading also to a block rejection as expected but for the wrong reason. It seems one of those two tx lists was meant to be `bip112txs_vary_OP_CSV_v1` (without the `_9`) and it was a typo.
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
ACK 54be4e71d898de8f14e3269550d56097c023d1cc 📶
Tree-SHA512: 9aac11aee3f53f1ae95ddb346a2f268872038f4d118c8dcf81b8201dee869774c9f3c3f1c326e370b8fd4eaf8e0673371689a96d9b1cb91be4286c88824725c3
e4f4ea47ebf7774fb6f445adde7bf7ea71fa05a1 lint: Catch use of [] or {} as default parameter values in Python functions (practicalswift)
25dd86715039586d92176eee16e9c6644d2547f0 Avoid using mutable default parameter values (practicalswift)
Pull request description:
Avoid common Python default parameter gotcha when mutable `dict`/`list`:s are used as default parameter values.
Examples of this gotcha caught during review:
* https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16673#discussion_r317415261
* https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14565#discussion_r241942304
Perhaps surprisingly this is how mutable list and dictionary default parameter values behave in Python:
```
>>> def f(i, j=[], k={}):
... j.append(i)
... k[i] = True
... return j, k
...
>>> f(1)
([1], {1: True})
>>> f(1)
([1, 1], {1: True})
>>> f(2)
([1, 1, 2], {1: True, 2: True})
```
In contrast to:
```
>>> def f(i, j=None, k=None):
... if j is None:
... j = []
... if k is None:
... k = {}
... j.append(i)
... k[i] = True
... return j, k
...
>>> f(1)
([1], {1: True})
>>> f(1)
([1], {1: True})
>>> f(2)
([2], {2: True})
```
The latter is typically the intended behaviour.
This PR fixes two instances of this and adds a check guarding against this gotcha going forward :-)
ACKs for top commit:
Sjors:
Oh Python... ACK e4f4ea47ebf7774fb6f445adde7bf7ea71fa05a1. Testing tip: swap the two commits.
Tree-SHA512: 56e14d24fc866211a20185c9fdb274ed046c3aed2dc0e07699e58b6f9fa3b79f6d0c880fb02d72b7fe5cc5eb7c0ff6da0ead33123344e1a872209370c2e49e3f
403e372407db1d020eedede4d322ee79d4a85dfc qa: Relax so that the subscriber is ready before publishing zmq messages (João Barbosa)
Pull request description:
Prevents the syndrome "slow joiner" - see http://zguide.zeromq.org/py:all#sockets-and-patterns - by relaxing before publishing messages.
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
unsigned ACK 403e372407db1d020eedede4d322ee79d4a85dfc
Tree-SHA512: 0e856accbc450a9b09160bdce5112b2103dc9436cc317d31fb1c9634ebd76823a300a2e727818057fb4d0a615271772ff23e80553a13e9aa1935500de5eeec5f
37f2784952cb6f598f82922f9ce71d40c9d74e26 tests: Use colors and dots in test_runner.py output only if standard output is a terminal -- allows for using the test runner output as input to other programs (practicalswift)
Pull request description:
Use colors and dots in `test_runner.py` output only if standard output is a terminal -- allows for using the test runner output as input to other programs.
I found the need for this when parsing `test_runner.py` output while investigating intermittent functional test failures.
Before:
```
$ test/functional/test_runner.py wallet_hd.py > output 2>&1
$ less output
Temporary test directory at /tmp/test_runner_₿_🏃_20190807_074115
ESC[1mWARNING!ESC[0m There is already a bitcoind process running on this system. Tests may fail unexpectedly due to resource contention!
Remaining jobs: [wallet_hd.py]
.......................................^M ^M1/1 - ESC[1mwallet_hd.pyESC[0m passed, Duration: 20 s
ESC[1mTEST | STATUS | DURATION
ESC[0mESC[0;32mwallet_hd.py | ✓ Passed | 20 s
ESC[0mESC[1m
ALL | ✓ Passed | 20 s (accumulated)
ESC[0mRuntime: 20 s
```
After:
```
$ test/functional/test_runner.py wallet_hd.py > output 2>&1
$ less output
Temporary test directory at /tmp/test_runner_₿_🏃_20190807_074244
1/1 - wallet_hd.py passed, Duration: 20 s
WARNING! There is already a bitcoind process running on this system. Tests may fail unexpectedly due to resource contention!
Remaining jobs: [wallet_hd.py]
TEST | STATUS | DURATION
wallet_hd.py | ✓ Passed | 20 s
ALL | ✓ Passed | 20 s (accumulated)
Runtime: 20 s
```
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
ACK 37f2784952cb6f598f82922f9ce71d40c9d74e26
Tree-SHA512: f15d95f9e07de2954c326d63d7a4bcd2971faeaa00386600dec2fb915ec89475aeef1dbc968b2c12aa5e988d4b3ed1974d6da0b6a3f1e1a105cfd90e8cb97cf6
afc0966d725aeeb8842dc264bd48f0e9c41f6a34 Moved and renamed hash256 from util.py to zmq_interface.py (Elichai Turkel)
Pull request description:
Right now there are two `hash256(bytes)` in the test framework:
first: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/test/functional/test_framework/util.py#L186
second: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/test/functional/test_framework/messages.py#L60
While they have the same name they're actually doing different things, one just does a sha256d and the other sha256d and reverses the bytes.
so I renamed the second one to be `hash256r` to signify that it's hash256 reversed.
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
unsigned ACK afc0966d725aeeb8842dc264bd48f0e9c41f6a34
fanquake:
ACK afc0966d725aeeb8842dc264bd48f0e9c41f6a34
Tree-SHA512: fb0e2db6f09c0248d92f2fd72d05a78cec1bebb44449239dbeecefa62cf4bd01d180b2e6dbcee48a8a9cea79a909e224256cabdd0739f334c2943647fe0c5fe4
fa76285fddac613c518e73b35a7486ad2ab4b992 test: Explain why -whitelist is used in feature_fee_estimation (MarcoFalke)
faff85a69a5eb0fdfd8d9a24bc27d1812e49a152 test: Format feature_fee_estimation with pep8 (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
ACKs for top commit:
practicalswift:
ACK fa76285fddac613c518e73b35a7486ad2ab4b992 -- diff looks correct
Sjors:
ACK fa76285, every bit of clarification helps. It's clear that without `-whitelist` the test becomes extremely slow (it does pass).
Tree-SHA512: 13ec7e4cd0409e7bb76cbcd344e31c0f612c8ce4a1f1ec6ceaedf345f634bc09786ed38d38920c3469b2862c856ee3e5e42534ef90f531bd8dc83c3db3c06417
8a22fd01140bd957036fc00419b147e4268ae9b1 avoided os-dependant path (Ferdinando M. Ametrano)
Pull request description:
The current code fails on windows because of the forward slashes; using os.path.join solves the problem and it is in general more robust
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
ACK 8a22fd01140bd957036fc00419b147e4268ae9b1
Tree-SHA512: 813f27aea33f97c8afac52e716a55fc5d7fb69621023aba99d40df7e1d145e0ec8d1eee49ddd403b219bf0e0e168e0e987b05c78eaef611f744d99bf2fc8bc91
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
fix `p2p_quorum_data.py` test broken by #5276
## What was done?
adjust data request expiration timeout in tests
## How Has This Been Tested?
`./test/functional/test_runner.py p2p_quorum_data.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
- [x] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
**For repository code-owners and collaborators only**
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
bf3be5297a746982cf8e83f45d342121e5665f80 [qa] Ensure we don't generate a too-big block in p2sh sigops test (Suhas Daftuar)
Pull request description:
There's a bug in the loop that is calculating the block size in the p2sh sigops test -- we start with the size of the block when it has no transactions, and then increment by the size of each transaction we add, without regard to the changing size of the encoding for the number of transactions in the block.
This might be fine if the block construction were deterministic, but the first transaction in the block has an ECDSA signature which can be variable length, so we see intermittent failures of this test when the initial transaction has a 70-byte signature and the block ends up being one byte too big.
Fix this by double-checking the block size after construction.
ACKs for top commit:
jonasschnelli:
utACK bf3be5297a746982cf8e83f45d342121e5665f80
jnewbery:
tested ACK bf3be5297a746982cf8e83f45d342121e5665f80
Tree-SHA512: f86385b96f7a6feafa4183727f5f2c9aae8ad70060b574aad13b150f174a17ce9a0040bc51ae7a04bd08f2a5298b983a84b0aed5e86a8440189ebc63b99e64dc
e263a343d4b6a2622df6bb734cd9d51a0d20a663 test: rpc_users: Make variable names more clear. (Carl Dong)
830dc2dd0fccb7f3ec49ff7233a188d92c541e7e test: rpc_users: Also test rpcauth.py with specified password. (Carl Dong)
c73d871799982ca29c29cef90e1a78814cf34019 test: rpc_users: Add function for testing auth params. (Carl Dong)
604e2a997ff26202dd0fa1932d60dc14cc53ac6d test: rpc_users: Add function for auth'd requests. (Carl Dong)
Pull request description:
Fixes#14758
First two commits are tidy-ups which I feel are worthwhile as they are very straightforward, cut down the file by 50%, and made the final diff more minimal. Happy to squash after review.
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
ACK e263a343d4b6a2622df6bb734cd9d51a0d20a663
Tree-SHA512: aa75c48570a87060238932d4c68e17234e158077f6195fb4917367e1ecc565e3cd8dd0ae51f9159ddd3d03742739680391bc1246454302db22d4a608c0633e80
e13fea975d Add regression test for PSBT signing bug #14473 (Glenn Willen)
565500508a Refactor PSBTInput signing to enforce invariant (Glenn Willen)
0f5bda2bd9 Simplify arguments to SignPSBTInput (Glenn Willen)
53e6fffb8f Add bool PSBTInputSigned (Glenn Willen)
65166d4cf8 New PartiallySignedTransaction constructor from CTransction (Glenn Willen)
4f3f5cb4b1 Remove redundant txConst parameter to FillPSBT (Glenn Willen)
fe5d22bc67 More concise conversion of CDataStream to string (Glenn Willen)
Pull request description:
As discussed in the comments on #14473, I think that bug was caused primarily by failure to adhere to the invariant that a PSBTInput always has exactly one of the two utxo fields present -- an invariant that is already enforced by PSBTInput::IsSane, but which we were temporarily suspending during signing.
This refactor repairs the invariant, also fixing the bug. It also simplifies some other code, and removes redundant parameters from some related functions.
fixes#14473
Tree-SHA512: cbad3428175e30f9b7bac3f600668dd1a8f9acde16b915d27a940a2fa6d5149d4fbe236d5808fd590fb20a032274c99e8cac34bef17f79a53fdf69a5948c0fd0
<!--
*** Please remove the following help text before submitting: ***
Provide a general summary of your changes in the Title above
Pull requests without a rationale and clear improvement may be closed
immediately.
Please provide clear motivation for your patch and explain how it
improves
Dash Core user experience or Dash Core developer experience
significantly:
* Any test improvements or new tests that improve coverage are always
welcome.
* All other changes should have accompanying unit tests (see
`src/test/`) or
functional tests (see `test/`). Contributors should note which tests
cover
modified code. If no tests exist for a region of modified code, new
tests
should accompany the change.
* Bug fixes are most welcome when they come with steps to reproduce or
an
explanation of the potential issue as well as reasoning for the way the
bug
was fixed.
* Features are welcome, but might be rejected due to design or scope
issues.
If a feature is based on a lot of dependencies, contributors should
first
consider building the system outside of Dash Core, if possible.
-->
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
<!--- Why is this change required? What problem does it solve? -->
<!--- If it fixes an open issue, please link to the issue here. -->
Before this fix, uniqueness of HPMN `platformNodeID` was checked only
while processing a block containing a `ProRegTx` or a `ProUpServTx`.
This is not enough as a `ProRegTx` or `ProUpServTx` containing duplicate
HPMN `platformNodeID` must be rejected at tx broadcast level.
## What was done?
<!--- Describe your changes in detail -->
Checking uniqueness when calling respective RPC and when receiving such
txs.
## How Has This Been Tested?
<!--- Please describe in detail how you tested your changes. -->
<!--- Include details of your testing environment, and the tests you ran
to -->
<!--- see how your change affects other areas of the code, etc. -->
## Breaking Changes
<!--- Please describe any breaking changes your code introduces -->
## 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
**For repository code-owners and collaborators only**
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
`CDeterministicMNList` stores internally a map containing the hashes of
all properties that needed to be unique.
`pubKeyOperator` don't differ between the two schemes (legacy and
basic(v19)) but their serialisation do: hence their hash.
Because this internal map stores only hashes, then we need to
re-calculate hashes and repopulate.
So when we tried to revoke a masternode after the fork, the `ProUpRevTx`
couldn't be mined because the hash of the `pubKeyOperator` differed.
## What was done?
When retrieving a `CDeterministicMNList` for a given block, if v19 is
active for that block, then we repopulate the internal map.
## How Has This Been Tested?
Without this fix, `feature_dip3_v19.py` is failing with
`failed-calc-cb-mnmerkleroot` (Error encountered on 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
- [x] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
**For repository code-owners and collaborators only**
- [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>
c4027e735072c3de4b4ffb20eecd7187ff36bad7 refactor: test: use wait_for_getdata() in p2p_compactblocks.py (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
The method `wait_for_getdata()` was recently changed to be more precise by waiting for a specified list of hashes, instead of only matching _any_ `getdata` message (see Issue #18614 and PR #18690). This PR replaces the remaining occurences of manual inspection of `last_messages` with this call.
ACKs for top commit:
robot-visions:
ACK c4027e735072c3de4b4ffb20eecd7187ff36bad7
Tree-SHA512: e10b346742f235b6ee2ef1f32f7fd74406c1a277389f020fb9913a93e94cc9530e1e9414872b83c9d2ae652ebce2b09b2c8c8372260c1afb4e0e54fbf7a935b0
faff9e4bb431919a4bc7e4dc4a9ca188e2d18113 test: Remove unused, undocumented and misleading CScript.__add__ (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
See the corresponding pull #18612
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
ACK faff9e4bb431919a4bc7e4dc4a9ca188e2d18113 provided it passes Travis
Tree-SHA512: 5d9c4d5b6453c70b24a6960d3b42834e9b31f6dbb99ac47a6abfd85f2739d5372563e7188c22aceabeee1c37eb218bf580848356f4a77268d65f178a9419b269
9e1cb1adf1800efe429e348650931f2669b0d2c0 [trivial/doc] Fix comment type (Amiti Uttarwar)
8f30260a67166a6ab7c0f33f7ec1990d3c31761e [doc] Update unbroadcast description in RPC results (Amiti Uttarwar)
750456d6f29c63d57af05bfbdd6035bb9c965de2 [trivial] Remove misleading 'const' (Amiti Uttarwar)
fa32e676e5833a5c5fc735ef00c0a80f5fab7a2c [test] Manage node connections better in mempool persist test (Amiti Uttarwar)
1f94bb0c744a103b633c1051e8fbc01e612097dc [doc] Provide rationale for randomization in scheduling. (Amiti Uttarwar)
9c8a55d9cb0ec73f10b196e79b637aa601c0a6b7 [mempool] Don't throw expected error message when upgrading (Amiti Uttarwar)
ba5498318233ab81decbc585e9619d8ffe2df1b0 [test] Test that wallet transactions aren't rebroadcast before 12 hours (Amiti Uttarwar)
00d44a534b4e5ae249b8011360c6b0f7dc731581 [test] P2P connection behavior should meet expectations (Amiti Uttarwar)
bd093ca15de762fdaf0937a0877d17b0c2bce16e [test] updates to unbroadcast test (Amiti Uttarwar)
dab298d9ab5a5a41685f437db9081fa7b395fa73 [docs] add release notes (Amiti Uttarwar)
Pull request description:
This PR is a follow up to #18038 which introduced the idea of an unbroadcast set & focuses mostly on documentation updates and test fixes. One small functionality update to not throw an expected error in `LoadMempool` when you upgrade software versions.
#18895 is another follow up to that addresses other functionality updates.
Background context:
The unbroadcast set is a mechanism for the mempool to track locally submitted transactions (via wallet or RPC). The node does a best-effort of delivering the transactions to the network via retries every 10-15 minutes until either a `GETDATA` is received or the transaction is removed from the mempool.
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
ACK 9e1cb1adf1 👁
gzhao408:
ACK [`9e1cb1a`](9e1cb1adf1)
Tree-SHA512: 0cd51c4ca368b9dce92d50d73ec6e9df278a259e609eef2858f24cb8595ad07acc3db781d9eb0c351715f18fca5a2b4526838981fdb34a522427e9dc868bdaa6
651f1d816f054cb9c637f8a99c9360bba381ef58 [test] wait for inital broadcast before comparing mempool entries (gzhao408)
9d3f7eb9860254eb787ebe2734fd6a26bcf365c1 [mempool] sanity check that all unbroadcast txns are in mempool (gzhao408)
a7ebe48b94c5a9195c8eabd193204c499cb4bfdb [rpc] add unbroadcast info to mempool entries and getmempoolinfo (gzhao408)
d16006960443c2efe37c896e46edae9dca86c57d [wallet] remove nLastResend logic (gzhao408)
Pull request description:
Followup to #18038 by amitiuttarwar which introduces the unbroadcast set: "a mechanism for the mempool to track locally submitted transactions" and decreases the frequency of rebroadcast from 10-15 minutes to 12-36 hours.
This PR addresses some of the outstanding TODOs building on top of it:
- remove `nLastResend` logic, which is used to ensure rebroadcast doesn't happen again if no new block has been mined (makes sense in 10-15 min period, but not necessary for 12-36 hour period). (#18038 [comment](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18038#discussion_r416826914))
- expose unbroadcast info via RPCs, for more informative queries and testing (#18038 [comment](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18038#discussion_r416837980))
- add sanity check to verify unbroadcast transactions still exist in mempool before rebroadcasting (#18038 [comment](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18038#discussion_r416861609))
ACKs for top commit:
naumenkogs:
Code review ACK 651f1d816f054cb9c637f8a99c9360bba381ef58
amitiuttarwar:
ACK 651f1d816f054cb9c637f8a99c9360bba381ef58 🎉
MarcoFalke:
Review ACK 651f1d816f054cb9c637f8a99c9360bba381ef58
Tree-SHA512: d5327e95ef39d44152b48df5c610502ae11c168f43dbbfb2885340c93d1ba9426eb3a5794573f5fc843502109cb3ffb63efa3f2db4f8f112efcde8f76d9a8845
20b6e959449d0c07639599b99ba917d2cac62493 test: refactor functional tests to use restart_node (Christopher Coverdale)
Pull request description:
fixes#19345
This PR replaces consecutive calls to `stop_node()` and `start_node()` with `restart_node()` where appropriate in the functional tests.
The commit messages are repetitive but focused on each file changed with the intention of squashing if applicable.
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
ACK 20b6e959449d0c07639599b99ba917d2cac62493
Tree-SHA512: 1cfa1fb8c5f01a7b00fe44e80dbef072147f21e3891098817acd4275b0c5d91dc1c787594209e117edd418f2fa3a7b2dfcbafdf87efc07f740040938d641f3a9
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
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
fa156999695ddaeb016d8320bee62f8d96679d55 test: Add basic test for BIP 37 (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
This does not add full coverage, but should be a good start and can be extended in the future. Currently, none of the BIP 37 p2p code has test coverage.
ACKs for top commit:
practicalswift:
Code review ACK fa156999695ddaeb016d8320bee62f8d96679d55 -- more testing coverage is better than less testing coverage
Tree-SHA512: d52e8be79240dffb769105c087ae0ae9305d599282546e4ca7379c4c7add2dbcd668265b46670aa07c357638044cf0f61a6fab7dba8971dd0f80c8f99768686e
45eff751c6d07007dabc365dc4c0e6c63e3fe5cf Add functional test for P2P eviction logic of inbound peers (Martin Zumsande)
Pull request description:
This adds a functional test for the eviction logic for inbound peers, which is triggered when the number of maximum connections is exceeded.
The functional test covers eviction protection for peers that have sent us blocks or txns recently, or that have faster pings. I couldn't find a way to test the logic of `CConnman::AttemptToEvictConnection` that is based on netgroup (see #14210 for related discussion)
Fixes#16660 (at least partially).
[Edit: Earlier, this PR also contained a unit test, which was removed after the discussion]
ACKs for top commit:
jonatack:
ACK 45eff751c6d07007dabc365dc4c0e6c63e3fe5cf
naumenkogs:
Tested ACK 45eff75
fjahr:
re-ACK 45eff751c6d07007dabc365dc4c0e6c63e3fe5cf
andrewtoth:
re-ACK 45eff751c6d07007dabc365dc4c0e6c63e3fe5cf
Tree-SHA512: 177208ab6f30dc62da1cc5f51e654f7c9770d8c6b42aca6ae7ecb30e29d3096e04d75739578e7d149a0f29dd92652b4a707e93c0f1be8aa7ed315e6ec3ab07a4
fa98e10d5efcd965ee224ec21c9e79ebb123f055 test: Remove leftover comment in mining_basic (MarcoFalke)
faedb50d89cf113084adfa50c280c295c95571a8 test: pep-8 mining_basic (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Remove an accidental leftover comment from #19082, which no longer applies and thus might be confusing
ACKs for top commit:
adamjonas:
code review ACK fa98e10
Tree-SHA512: c7f7f8f579b3c6e92f45769be0a7af1a421438a3f5524db5278b2269511a9e0e08f44e3836afb26727644035897ee51ff8296d13ce23030549e7403f57b40e40
6fc641644f7193365cf2b40f5cf20374ec871943 change blacklist to blocklist (TrentZ)
Pull request description:
Let's use a more appropriate and clear word and discard the usage of the blacklist. Blocklist is clear and shall make everyone happy.
ACKs for top commit:
amitiuttarwar:
ACK 6fc641644f7193365cf2b40f5cf20374ec871943
jonatack:
ACK 6fc641644f7193365cf2b40f5cf20374ec871943 git grep shows these two lines to be the only uses of the word in the codebase other than for specifying colors for the GUI.
sipsorcery:
ACK 6fc641644f7193365cf2b40f5cf20374ec871943 due to easy change.
Tree-SHA512: 12fd55ad5c79f1a227da90c7fa730972aae6b74ab1f9df79ec1e7d0eca05c383ef7d6ef5f353620a01da344db915005339b62ca0884179d0f47fbefb084c9efc
7daffc6a90a797ce7c365a893a31a31b0206985c [test] CScriptNum Decode Check as Unit Tests (Gillian Chu)
Pull request description:
The CScriptNum test (#14816) is a roundtrip test of the test framework. Thus, it would be better suited as a unit test. This is now possible with the introduction of the unit test module for the functional tests. See #18576.
This PR:
1. Refactors the CScriptNum tests into 2 unit tests, one in script.py and one in blocktools.py.
2. Extends the script.py CScriptNum test to trial larger numbers.
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
ACK 7daffc6a90a797ce7c365a893a31a31b0206985c
Tree-SHA512: 17a04a4bfff1b1817bfc167824c679455d9e06e6e0164c00a7e44f8aa5041c5f5080adcc1452fd80ba1a6d8409f976c982bc481d686c434edf97a5893a32a436
f0dfac7da3886f8c1a1eedd70f4fd2bd298b9cd9 test: add executable flag for rpc_estimatefee.py (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
Again a functional test without executable flag set sneaked in (see e.g. https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/17806 and https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16742 for previous similar PRs, setting the filemode from 644 to 755). Maybe a linter like suggested in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/17830 would be worth considering to avoid future (trivial) PRs like this?
ACKs for top commit:
promag:
ACK f0dfac7da3886f8c1a1eedd70f4fd2bd298b9cd9.
kristapsk:
ACK f0dfac7da3886f8c1a1eedd70f4fd2bd298b9cd9
Tree-SHA512: b37c11bdef439aa9d5736c9e0e0bbcc19aff876744f0c4e099ca5c67c9ff1293f1f9140f0d167ea13fee5396ae017aa4a0f1bae4f7aec8fa80b46beb421561c1
612a931d1a3ac1678d02aed30c48fd25ccd113db tests: simplify next_block() function in feature_block (John Newbery)
Pull request description:
The solve parameter is unnecessary. Remove it and add comments.
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
ACK 612a931d1a3ac1678d02aed30c48fd25ccd113db
TheQuantumPhysicist:
ACK 612a931
Looks good. Thanks for improving it 😄
practicalswift:
ACK 612a931d1a3ac1678d02aed30c48fd25ccd113db -- simpler is better and patch looks correct :)
Tree-SHA512: 25b4879842ea37a3f598be886f02ce4c2fb0b5a618d02b266dbd380f5cbfdd71a8bd35ddd9d6f2cf83920e37c02caf9955a841a02b17ba75ac63f88d32f8b60b
111880aaf7e12a12f0797f1b19673e3d96328edd [test] Add coverage to estimaterawfee and estimatesmartfee (Ben Woosley)
Pull request description:
This adds light functional coverage to estimaterawfee - a subset of
the testing applied to estimatesmartfee, and argument validation
testing to both estimaterawfee and estimatesmartfee.
One valid estimatesmartfee signature test is commented out because it
fails currently.
Extracted from #12940
Top commit has no ACKs.
Tree-SHA512: 361a883457b28b2dc75081666e49d6dc6b5d76eed40d858abe2dd4f35ece152cf1f99c94480a91f42a896aa2a73cf55f57921316fe66970b2d7ba691a3b17e2d
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
`develop` can't sync on mainnet and testnet atm because platform quorums
are already active there but we skip non-hpms nodes when calculating
quorums.
## What was done?
Fixed the code to respect `IsV19Active`. Also dropped
`IsLLMQTypeHPMNOnly` cause it's not used anywhere else and it just makes
things more confusing imo.
## How Has This Been Tested?
Can successfully sync on mainnet/testnet
## Breaking Changes
n/a, fixes breaking changes introduced earlier :)
## 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
**For repository code-owners and collaborators only**
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
## What was done?
1. Increased protocol version of mininode to match v19 changes in
`MNLISTDIFF` P2P message
2. Added verification of MNs and HPMNs (dip4) in `feature_llmq_hpmn.py`
## 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
- [x] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
**For repository code-owners and collaborators only**
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
## What was done?
As discussed with Platform team, threshold for `llmq_test_platform`
needed to be 67%. Therefore, the size went from 4 members to 3 (while
keeping threshold to 2)
## 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
- [x] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
**For repository code-owners and collaborators only**
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
## What was done?
- `masternode status` now returns the type as well
- `masternode count` now returns in addition total and total enabled MNs
per type.
## How Has This Been Tested?
Added functional tests
## 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
- [x] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [x] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
**For repository code-owners and collaborators only**
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
## What was done?
Implementation of 4k collateral HPMN.
## 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
- [x] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [x] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
**For repository code-owners and collaborators only**
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
---------
Co-authored-by: thephez <thephez@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: pasta <pasta@dashboost.org>
Co-authored-by: PastaPastaPasta <6443210+pastapastapasta@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: UdjinM6 <1935069+Udjinm6@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Konstantin Akimov <545784+knst@users.noreply.github.com>
fa499b5f027f77c0bf13699852c8c06f78e27bef rpc: bugfix: Properly use iswitness in converttopsbt (MarcoFalke)
fa5c5cd141f0265a5693234690ac757b811157d8 rpc: Switch touched RPCs to IsValidNumArgs (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
When a serialized transaction has inputs, there is no risk in only trying to deserialize it with witness allowed. (This is how all transactions from p2p are deserialized.) In fact, it would avoid a common issue where a transaction with inputs can be deserialized in two ways:
* Fixes#12989
* Fixes#15872
* Fixes#15701
* Fixes#13738
* ...
When a serialized transaction has no inputs, there is no risk in only trying to deserialze it with witness disallowed. (A transaction without inputs can't have corresponding witness data)
ACKs for commit fa499b:
meshcollider:
utACK fa499b5f02
ryanofsky:
utACK fa499b5f027f77c0bf13699852c8c06f78e27bef. Changes since last review: consolidating commits and making iswitness documentation the same across methods.
PastaPastaPasta:
utACK fa499b5f027f77c0bf13699852c8c06f78e27bef
Tree-SHA512: a64423a3131f3f0222a40da557c8b590c9ff01b45bcd40796f77a1a64ae74c6680a6be9d01ece95c492dfbcc7e2810409d2c2b336c2894af00bb213972fc85c6
7813eb1db1 [qa] Overhaul p2p_compactblocks.py (Suhas Daftuar)
+ extra fixes for pull request #1966 (compact blocks)
Pull request description:
Remove tests of:
- compactblock behavior in a simulated pre-segwit version of bitcoind
This should have been removed a long time ago, as it is not generally
necessary for us to test the behavior of old nodes (except perhaps if we
want to test that upgrading from an old node to a new one behaves properly)
- compactblock behavior during segwit upgrade (ie verifying that network
behavior before and after activation was as expected)
This is unnecessary to test now that segwit activation has already happened.
ACKs for commit 7813eb:
jnewbery:
utACK 7813eb1db132c023902ad945995cc32a325893ca
Tree-SHA512: cadf035e6f822fa8cff974ed0c2e88a1d4d7da559b341e574e785fd3d309cc2c98c63bc05479265dc00550ae7b77fc3cbe815caae7f68bcff13a04367dca9b52
b651ef7e1c submitheader: more directly test missing prev block header (Gregory Sanders)
1e7f741745 remove some magic mining constants in functional tests (Gregory Sanders)
Pull request description:
The fewer magic numbers the better.
Also more directly tested a `submitheader` case of bad previous blockhash.
Tree-SHA512: 52b01a6aa199fa909eea4e9e84409a901933e545724e33149cc4132c82168199fd678809b6d94d95c9ff6ad02238a9552363620d13b8beaa5d4b67ade9ef425c
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
it was picking the wrong DMN as a payee...
## What was done?
see code and notes
## How Has This Been Tested?
run tests
## 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
- [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
**For repository code-owners and collaborators only**
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
deaa6dd144f5650b385658a0c4f9a014aff8dde2 psbt: check output index is within bounds before accessing (Andrew Chow)
f1ef7f0aa46338f4cd8de79696027a1bf868f359 Don't calculate tx fees for PSBTs with invalid money values (Andrew Chow)
Pull request description:
Fixes#17149
Two classes of issues were found by the psbt fuzzer: values out of range and causing overflows, and prevout indexes being out of range. This PR fixes both.
When accessing a specific output using the index given in the tx, check that it is actually a possible output before trying to access the output.
When summing and checking amounts for `decodepsbt` and `analyzepsbt`, make sure that the values are actually valid money values.. Otherwise, stop summing and don't show the fee. For `analyzepsbt`, return that the next role is the Creator since the Creator needs to remake the transaction to be valid.
ACKs for top commit:
practicalswift:
ACK deaa6dd144f5650b385658a0c4f9a014aff8dde2 -- only change since last ACK was the addition of tests
gwillen:
tested ACK deaa6dd, would also like to see this merged!
Tree-SHA512: 06c36720bbb5a7ab1c29f7d15878bf9f0d3e5760c06bff479d412e1bf07bb3e0e9ab6cca820a4bfedaab71bfd7af813807e87cbcdf0af25cc3f66a53a06dbcfd
773d4572a4864ab7b6380858d07d9579ff6dd9a2 Mark PSBTs spending unspendable outputs as invalid in analysis (Andrew Chow)
638e40cb6080800c7b0a7f4028f63326acbe4700 Have a PSBTAnalysis state that indicates invalid PSBT (Andrew Chow)
Pull request description:
When analyzing an unspendable PSBT, report that it is unspendable and exit analysis early.
ACKs for top commit:
Sjors:
ACK 773d457
instagibbs:
After some thought ACK 773d4572a4
Tree-SHA512: 99b0cb2fa1ea37593fc65a20effe881639d69ddeeecf5197bc87bc7f2220cbeb40f1d429d517e4d27f2e9fb563a00cd845d2b4b1ce05246a75a6cb56fb9b0ba5
91cc18f602fe2ff7fe47335a8e1e7734895a19d9 [docs] Add release notes for PR 15427 (John Newbery)
3b11420b3c91f731b03805a39e48ee32e54484a2 [RPC] add new utxoupdatepsbt arguments to the CRPCCommand and CPRCConvertParam tables (John Newbery)
Pull request description:
The new `descriptors` argument was not added to the CRPCCommand and CPRCCvertParam tables, meaning that it couldn't be used with bitcoin-cli or named arguments.
Before this PR:
```
> bitcoin-cli utxoupdatepsbt 'cHNidP8BAFMCAAAAAYCdwVRx2X3o4KHx5tAMsN1ddp51MbfWsietjfMbl5HtAAAAAAD/////AQDh9QUAAAAAF6kUW+rtEOi4nk9rpw2F5XZl1dd8ehGHAAAAAAAAAA==' "[{\"desc\":\"sh(wpkh([bd50871a/0h/0h/0h]03895c66337b38699bfafff1084ad35bc347fac4f4e5e5fe5eb7dd81155280db53))\"}]"
error code: -3
error message:
Expected type array, got string
> bitcoin-cli --named utxoupdatepsbt psbt='cHNidP8BAFMCAAAAAYCdwVRx2X3o4KHx5tAMsN1ddp51MbfWsietjfMbl5HtAAAAAAD/////AQDh9QUAAAAAF6kUW+rtEOi4nk9rpw2F5XZl1dd8ehGHAAAAAAAAAA==' descriptors="[{\"desc\":\"sh(wpkh([bd50871a/0h/0h/0h]03895c66337b38699bfafff1084ad35bc347fac4f4e5e5fe5eb7dd81155280db53))\"}]"
error code: -8
error message:
Unknown named parameter descriptors
```
After this PR:
```
bitcoin-cli utxoupdatepsbt 'cHNidP8BAFMCAAAAAYCdwVRx2X3o4KHx5tAMsN1ddp51MbfWsietjfMbl5HtAAAAAAD/////AQDh9QUAAAAAF6kUW+rtEOi4nk9rpw2F5XZl1dd8ehGHAAAAAAAAAA==' "[{\"desc\":\"sh(wpkh([bd50871a/0h/0h/0h]03895c66337b38699bfafff1084ad35bc347fac4f4e5e5fe5eb7dd81155280db53))\"}]"
cHNidP8BAFMCAAAAAYCdwVRx2X3o4KHx5tAMsN1ddp51MbfWsietjfMbl5HtAAAAAAD/////AQDh9QUAAAAAF6kUW+rtEOi4nk9rpw2F5XZl1dd8ehGHAAAAAAAAAA==
bitcoin-cli --named utxoupdatepsbt psbt='cHNidP8BAFMCAAAAAYCdwVRx2X3o4KHx5tAMsN1ddp51MbfWsietjfMbl5HtAAAAAAD/////AQDh9QUAAAAAF6kUW+rtEOi4nk9rpw2F5XZl1dd8ehGHAAAAAAAAAA==' descriptors="[{\"desc\":\"sh(wpkh([bd50871a/0h/0h/0h]03895c66337b38699bfafff1084ad35bc347fac4f4e5e5fe5eb7dd81155280db53))\"}]"
cHNidP8BAFMCAAAAAYCdwVRx2X3o4KHx5tAMsN1ddp51MbfWsietjfMbl5HtAAAAAAD/////AQDh9QUAAAAAF6kUW+rtEOi4nk9rpw2F5XZl1dd8ehGHAAAAAAAAAA==
```
ACKs for top commit:
promag:
ACK 91cc18f.
fanquake:
re-ACK 91cc18f602fe2ff7fe47335a8e1e7734895a19d9
Tree-SHA512: 279b2339a5cac17e363002e4ab743e251d6757c904c89f1970575bdce18d4f63d5e13507e171bf2bdc1bf6dd457db345a4b11b15d4ff71b96c2fedc4ffe52b23
58cfbc38e040925b51cb8d35d23b50e9cf06fb2a Ignoring (but warn) on duplicate -wallet parameters (Jonas Schnelli)
Pull request description:
I expect that there are many users with load on startup wallet definitions in `bitcoin.conf` or via startup CLI argument.
With the new `settings.json` r/w configuration file, users unloading and loading a wallet through the GUI or via the RPC calls might end up with a duplicate `-wallet` entry (one that still remains in bitcoin.conf or CLI) plus the new duplication in `settings.json` due to the unload/load.
Steps to reproduce
* create wallet (if via RPC set `load_on_startup` or unloadwallet/loadwallet then set `load_on_startup`).
* stop bitcoin
* start bitcoind again with same `--wallet=mywallet`
I guess it is acceptable to skip duplicates.
ACKs for top commit:
achow101:
Tested ACK 58cfbc38e040925b51cb8d35d23b50e9cf06fb2a
meshcollider:
Code review ACK 58cfbc38e040925b51cb8d35d23b50e9cf06fb2a
ryanofsky:
Code review ACK 58cfbc38e040925b51cb8d35d23b50e9cf06fb2a. Changes since previous review: rebased, tweaked warning message, squashed/fixed test
Tree-SHA512: f94e5a999bdd7dc291f0bc142911b0a8033929350d6f6a35b58c4a06a3c8f83147be0f0c402d4e946dedbbcc85b7e023b672c731b6d7a8984d4780017c961cfb
fa5f46600fb98f1b35346bedc1a66c9019d01114 test: Fix rpc_net intermittent issue (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Without the sync, the nodes might generate blocks at the same height and thus never be able to sync
ACKs for top commit:
practicalswift:
ACK fa5f46600fb98f1b35346bedc1a66c9019d01114: patch looks correct
Tree-SHA512: 21255795c2121c71fc620beb766855e57c7af94a668331d1b625665e22eb4b485a2b5c3ad2bb9a7042744f3c3e49c71251bcec41ba25bca03fd54aae32968a3a
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
autoresending was really slow
## What was done?
reduced the time range to from 1-3 hours from now
## How Has This Been Tested?
hasn't
## Breaking Changes
Shouldn't be
## 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
- [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
**For repository code-owners and collaborators only**
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
Co-authored-by: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
fa80b4788bbe3ef00c5d767c0d89ba9809d8707c test: Remove global wait_until from p2p_getdata (MarcoFalke)
999922baed3a80b581ce46daa01c4cbca4fcbfd8 test: Default mininode.wait_until timeout to 60s (MarcoFalke)
fab47375fe0bdec1e557e087fdb0707c4dfa7cc2 test: pep-8 p2p_getdata.py (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Using the global wait_until makes it impossible to adjust the timeout based on the hardware the test is running on.
Fix that by using the mininode member function.
So for example, `./test/functional/p2p_getdata.py --timeout-factor=0.04` gives a timeout of 2.4 seconds.
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
ACK fa80b4788bbe3ef00c5d767c0d89ba9809d8707c
Tree-SHA512: ebb1b7860a64451de2b8ee9a0966faddb13b84af711f6744e8260d7c9bc0b382e8fb259897df5212190821e850ed30d4d5c2d7af45a97f207fd4511b06b6674a
9847e205bf7edcac4c30ce4b6d62f482aa7bc1b7 [docs] Improve commenting in ProcessGetData() (John Newbery)
2f032556e08a04807c71eb02104ca9589eaadf1b [test] test that an invalid GETDATA doesn't prevent processing of future messages (Amiti Uttarwar)
e257cf71c851e25e1a533bf1d4296f6b55c81332 [net processing] ignore unknown INV types in GETDATA messages (Amiti Uttarwar)
047ceac142246b5d51056a51dbf4645b31802be4 [net processing] ignore tx GETDATA from blocks-only peers (Amiti Uttarwar)
Pull request description:
Currently we'll stall peers that send us an unknown INV type in a GETDATA message. Be a bit more friendly and just drop the invalid request.
Ditto for blocks-relay-only peers that send us a GETDATA for a transaction.
There's a test for the first part. The second is difficult to test in the functional test framework since we aren't able to make blocks-relay-only connections.
ACKs for top commit:
sipa:
utACK 9847e205bf7edcac4c30ce4b6d62f482aa7bc1b7
brakmic:
ACK 9847e205bf
luke-jr:
utACK 9847e205bf7edcac4c30ce4b6d62f482aa7bc1b7
naumenkogs:
utACK 9847e20
ajtowns:
utACK 9847e205bf7edcac4c30ce4b6d62f482aa7bc1b7
Tree-SHA512: 6007f2fd839ffe737727f6fb8e8f083b2d9e05a510748f1d40b8f9be8fdf7b5419a36d8f1039923eec1ba2983e8f6f0436ec5fc196d9f6dcb0657f2ff8ff8e4c
09502452bbbe21bb974f1de8cf53196373921ab9 IsUsedDestination should count any known single-key address (Gregory Sanders)
Pull request description:
This plugs the privacy leak detailed at https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/17605, at least for the single-key case.
ACKs for top commit:
meshcollider:
Code Review ACK 09502452bbbe21bb974f1de8cf53196373921ab9
Tree-SHA512: e1d68281675f05072b3087171cba1df9416a69c9ccf70c72e8555e55eadda2d0fd339e5a894e3a3438ff94b9e3827fb19b8b701faade70c08756b19ff157ee0c
fab558612278909df93bdf88f5727b04f13aef0f doc: Use precise permission flags where possible (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Instead of mentioning the all-encompassing `-whitelist*` settings, change the docs to mention the exact permission flag that will influence the behaviour.
This is needed because in the future, the too-broad `-whitelist*` settings (they either include *all* permission flags or apply to *all* peers) might be deprecated to require the permission flags to be enumerated.
Alternatively, in the future there could be an RPC to set the net permission flags on an existing connection, in which case the `-whitelist*` terminology is of no help.
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
reACK fab558612278909df93bdf88f5727b04f13aef0f
fjahr:
Code review ACK fab558612278909df93bdf88f5727b04f13aef0f
jonatack:
ACK fab558612278909df93bdf88f5727b04f13aef0f
Tree-SHA512: c7dea3e577d90103bb2b0ffab7b7c8640b388932a3a880f69e2b70747fc9213dc1f437085671fd54c902ec2a578458b8a2fae6dbe076642fb88efbf9fa9e679c
8098dea06944f9de8b285f44958eb98761f133ee test: Add mempool_updatefromblock.py (Hennadii Stepanov)
Pull request description:
This PR adds a new test for mempool update of transaction descendants/ancestors information (count, size) when transactions have been re-added from a disconnected block to the mempool.
It could be helpful for working on PRs like #17925, #18191.
ACKs for top commit:
ariard:
ACK 8098dea
Tree-SHA512: 7e808fa8df8d7d7a7dbdc3f79361049b49c7bce9b58fd5539b28c9636bedac747695537e500d7ed68dc8bdb80167ad3f1c01086f7551691405d2ba2e38ef1d06
