## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
fix failures like https://gitlab.com/dashpay/dash/-/jobs/6175160403
## What was done?
use `minimumAmount` option in `listunspent` rpc call to avoid picking
coins that are too small for asset lock txes
## How Has This Been Tested?
run `feature_asset_locks.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
- [ ] 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
faa94cb1675d8bd511eb593176cd07aa59465225 test: Check that invalid peer traffic is accounted for (MarcoFalke)
fae243f0cb92b5648d07d0a5033e2f4de862ae99 test: Remove confusing cast to same type (int to int) (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Couldn't find a test for this and it seems something we should test, so I wrote one.
ACKs for top commit:
vasild:
ACK faa94cb16
practicalswift:
ACK faa94cb1675d8bd511eb593176cd07aa59465225: patch looks correct
Tree-SHA512: efcdd35960045cdfbd14480e16e0d1d09e81eb01670ac541ac2b105e1a63818a157c95853270242234a224880873e79957832bf4231374d7fe81de30f35e3abf
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
To prevent spending withdrawal before that's finalized, mined and
chainlocked, next things should be true:
- txes with spending of unlock and unlock themselves do not receive
islocks. That's true, because IS excluded for txes with no inputs.
- When the unlock is removed from mempool, so are the children.
These functionality has no tests, but that's crucial for consensus be
fine.
## What was done?
Implemented checks to be sure that IS is not send for Withdrawal txes.
Functional test for asset_locks.py are refactored a bit to make it
easier to read.
## How Has This Been Tested?
This PR is tests
## Breaking Changes
N/A
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
9913419cc9db5f8ce7afa0c3774468c330136064 test: remove type: comments in favour of actual annotations (fanquake)
Pull request description:
Now that we require Python 3.6+, we should be using variable type
annotations directly rather than `# type:` comments.
Also takes care of the discarded value issue in p2p_message_capture.py.
See: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19509/files#r571674446.
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
review ACK 9913419cc9db5f8ce7afa0c3774468c330136064
jnewbery:
Code review ACK 9913419cc9db5f8ce7afa0c3774468c330136064
Tree-SHA512: 63aba5eef6c1320578f66cf8a6d85ac9dbab9d30b0d21e6e966be8216e63606de12321320c2958c67933bf68d10f2e76e9c43928e5989614cea34dde4187aad8
bff7c66e67aa2f18ef70139338643656a54444fe Add documentation to contrib folder (Troy Giorshev)
381f77be858d7417209b6de0b7cd23cb7eb99261 Add Message Capture Test (Troy Giorshev)
e4f378a505922c0f544b4cfbfdb169e884e02be9 Add capture parser (Troy Giorshev)
4d1a582549bc982d55e24585b0ba06f92f21e9da Call CaptureMessage at appropriate locations (Troy Giorshev)
f2a77ff97bec09dd5fcc043d8659d8ec5dfb87c2 Add CaptureMessage (Troy Giorshev)
dbf779d5deb04f55c6e8493ce4e12ed4628638f3 Clean PushMessage and ProcessMessages (Troy Giorshev)
Pull request description:
This PR introduces per-peer message capture into Bitcoin Core. 📓
## Purpose
The purpose and scope of this feature is intentionally limited. It answers a question anyone new to Bitcoin's P2P protocol has had: "Can I see what messages my node is sending and receiving?".
## Functionality
When a new debug-only command line argument `capturemessages` is set, any message that the node receives or sends is captured. The capture occurs in the MessageHandler thread. When receiving a message, it is captured as soon as the MessageHandler thread takes the message off of the vProcessMsg queue. When sending, the message is captured just before the message is pushed onto the vSendMsg queue.
The message capture is as minimal as possible to reduce the performance impact on the node. Messages are captured to a new `message_capture` folder in the datadir. Each node has their own subfolder named with their IP address and port. Inside, received and sent messages are captured into two binary files, msgs_recv.dat and msgs_sent.dat, like so:
```
message_capture/203.0.113.7:56072/msgs_recv.dat
message_capture/203.0.113.7:56072/msgs_sent.dat
```
Because the messages are raw binary dumps, included in this PR is a Python parsing tool to convert the binary files into human-readable JSON. This script has been placed on its own and out of the way in the new `contrib/message-capture` folder. Its usage is simple and easily discovered by the autogenerated `-h` option.
## Future Maintenance
I sympathize greatly with anyone who says "the best code is no code".
The future maintenance of this feature will be minimal. The logic to deserialize the payload of the p2p messages exists in our testing framework. As long as our testing framework works, so will this tool.
Additionally, I hope that the simplicity of this tool will mean that it gets used frequently, so that problems will be discovered and solved when they are small.
## FAQ
"Why not just use Wireshark"
Yes, Wireshark has the ability to filter and decode Bitcoin messages. However, the purpose of the message capture added in this PR is to assist with debugging, primarily for new developers looking to improve their knowledge of the Bitcoin Protocol. This drives the design in a different direction than Wireshark, in two different ways. First, this tool must be convenient and simple to use. Using an external tool, like Wireshark, requires setup and interpretation of the results. To a new user who doesn't necessarily know what to expect, this is unnecessary difficulty. This tool, on the other hand, "just works". Turn on the command line flag, run your node, run the script, read the JSON. Second, because this tool is being used for debugging, we want it to be as close to the true behavior of the node as possible. A lot can happen in the SocketHandler thread that would be missed by Wireshark.
Additionally, if we are to use Wireshark, we are at the mercy of whoever it maintaining the protocol in Wireshark, both as to it being accurate and recent. As can be seen by the **many** previous attempts to include Bitcoin in Wireshark (google "bitcoin dissector") this is easier said than done.
Lastly, I truly believe that this tool will be used significantly more by being included in the codebase. It's just that much more discoverable.
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
re-ACK bff7c66e67aa2f18ef70139338643656a54444fe only some minor changes: 👚
jnewbery:
utACK bff7c66e67aa2f18ef70139338643656a54444fe
theStack:
re-ACK bff7c66e67aa2f18ef70139338643656a54444fe
Tree-SHA512: e59e3160422269221f70f98720b47842775781c247c064071d546c24fa7a35a0e5534e8baa4b4591a750d7eb16de6b4ecf54cbee6d193b261f4f104e28c15f47
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Should fix failures like
https://gitlab.com/dashpay/dash/-/jobs/6107697452
## What was done?
See inline comments
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run lots of `feature_governance.py` in parallel multiple times
## 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)_
---------
Co-authored-by: Konstantin Akimov <knstqq@gmail.com>
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
This pull request is a follow-up to
[some](https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/5834#discussion_r1470105685)
[feedback](https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/5834#discussion_r1467009815)
received on [dash#5834](https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/5834) as
the patterns highlighted were present in different parts of the codebase
and hence not corrected within the PR itself but addressed separately.
This is that separate PR 🙂 (with some additional cleanup of my own)
## What was done?
* This pull request will remain a draft until
[dash#5834](https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/5834) as it will
introduce more changes that will need to be corrected in this PR.
* Code introduced that is unique to Dash Core (CoinJoin, InstantSend,
etc.) has been excluded from un-Dashification as the purpose of it is to
reduce backport conflicts, which don't apply in those cases.
* `CWallet::CreateTransaction` and the `CreateTransactionTest` fixture
have been excluded as the former originates from
[dash#3668](https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/3668) and the latter
from [dash#3667](https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/3667) and are
distinct enough to be unique to Dash Core.
* There are certain Dashifications and SegWit-removals that prove
frustrating as it would break compatibility with programs that rely on
the naming of certain keys
* `getrawmempool`, `getmempoolancestors`, `getmempooldescendants` and
`getmempoolentry` return `vsize` which is currently an alias of `size`.
I have been advised to retain `vsize` in lieu of potential future
developments. (this was originally remedied in
219a1d08973e7ccda6e778218b9a8218b4aae034 but has since been dropped)
* `getaddressmempool`, `getaddressutxos` and `getaddressdeltas` all
return a value with the key `satoshis`. This is frustrating to rename to
`duffs` for compatibility reasons.
* `decodepsbt` returns (if applicable) `non_witness_utxo` which is
frustrating to rename simply to `utxo` for the same reason.
* `analyzepsbt` returns (if applicable) `estimated_vsize` which
frustrating to rename to `estimated_size` for the same reason.
## How Has This Been Tested?
## Breaking Changes
None
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository
code-owners and collaborators only)_
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
HD wallets are old-existsing feature, appeared in Dash years ago, but
enabling HD wallets is not trivial task that requires multiple steps and
command line/rpc calls.
Let's have them enabled by default.
## What was done?
- HD wallets are enabled by default. Currently behavior `dashd`,
`dash-qt` are similar to run with option `-usehd=1`
- the rpc `upgradewallet` do not let to upgrade from non-HD wallet to HD
wallet to don't encourage user use non-crypted wallets (postponed till
v21)
- the initialization of ScriptPubKey is updated to be sure that encypted
HD seed is never written on disk (if passphrase is provided)
- enabled and dashified a script `wallet_upgradewallet.py` which test
compatibility between different versions of wallet
## What is not done?
- wallet tool still does not support passhprase, HD seed can appear on
disk
- there's no dialog that show user a mnemonic phrase and encourage him
to make a paper backup
Before removing a command line 'usehd' (backport bitcoin#11250) need to
make at least one major release for fail-over option (if someone wish to
use non-HD wallets only).
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run unit and functional tests.
Enabled new functional test `wallet_upgradewallet.py` that has been
backported long time ago but waited this PR to be enabled.
## Breaking Changes
HD wallets are created by default.
## 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
---------
Co-authored-by: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Fix failures like https://gitlab.com/dashpay/dash/-/jobs/6120923632
## What was done?
Handle disconnects and reconnection of the revoked MN in the right
place.
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run multiple `feature_dip3_v19.py` in parallel a few times
## 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)_
56010f92564a94b0ca6c008c0e6f74a19fad4a2a test: hoist p2p values to test framework constants (Jon Atack)
75447f0893f9ad9bf83d182b301d139430d8de1c test: improve msg sends and p2p disconnections in p2p_invalid_messages (Jon Atack)
57960192a5362ff1a7b996995332535f4c2a25c3 test: refactor test_large_inv() into 3 tests with common method (Jon Atack)
e2b21d8a597c536a8617408d43958bfe9f98a442 test: add p2p_invalid_messages logging (Jon Atack)
9fa494dc0969c61d5ef33708a08923cca19ce091 net: update misbehavior logging for oversized messages (Jon Atack)
Pull request description:
...seen while reviewing #19264, #19252, #19304 and #19107:
in `net_processing.cpp`
- make the debug logging for oversized message size misbehavior the same for `addr`, `getdata`, `headers` and `inv` messages
in `p2p_invalid_messages`
- add missing logging
- improve assertions/message sends, move cleanup disconnections outside the assertion scopes
- split a slowish 3-part test into 3 order-independent tests
- add a few p2p constants to the test framework
ACKs for top commit:
troygiorshev:
reACK 56010f92564a94b0ca6c008c0e6f74a19fad4a2a
MarcoFalke:
ACK 56010f9256 🎛
Tree-SHA512: db67b70278f8d4c318907e105af54b54eb3afd15500f9aa0c98034f6fd4bd1cf9ad1663037bd9b237ff4890f3059b37291a6498d8d6ae2cc38efb9f045f73310
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
kudos to kwvg to report issue: he pointed out that functional tests
randomly fail lately.
Bisect pointed out an exact commit: bitcoin#20027 - mockable time
everywhere
## What was done?
Added call `mn.node.mockscheduler` as it is done in 20027 for other
functional tests
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run 20 times. Without this patch 20% failures; with this patch - zero
failures.
```
test/functional/test_runner.py -j20 feature_llmq_simplepose.py feature_llmq_simplepose.py feature_llmq_simplepose.py feature_llmq_simplepose.py feature_llmq_simplepose.py feature_llmq_simplepose.py feature_llmq_simplepose.py feature_llmq_simplepose.py feature_llmq_simplepose.py feature_llmq_simplepose.py feature_llmq_simplepose.py feature_llmq_simplepose.py feature_llmq_simplepose.py feature_llmq_simplepose.py feature_llmq_simplepose.py feature_llmq_simplepose.py feature_llmq_simplepose.py feature_llmq_simplepose.py feature_llmq_simplepose.py feature_llmq_simplepose.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
- [ ] 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>
fa2ecadd0d3283a89d27772dc0275e76277ae17e test: Fix intermittent rpc_net issue (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
The test fails because getpeerinfo and getnettotals are not synchronised, so a `wait_until` is needed for each RPC (separately).
Fixes https://cirrus-ci.com/task/4663366629195776?command=ci#L5034
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
utACK fa2ecadd0d3283a89d27772dc0275e76277ae17e
Tree-SHA512: 5ea7128801aab8dbe3d9e6737545ff4ee770e4a9c5a2096ba2339a688424f1879ccba6bf8bcb219983acf86eb28af06fc629586613e7fe28aeffadd2c98633e8
778cd0d88d8d6dd22d7f0fb740f3ca3dbb2280a1 [tests] Remove getnettotals/getpeerinfo consistency test (John Newbery)
Pull request description:
We make no guarantees about consistency between RPC calls.
Alternative to 18784
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
review ACK 778cd0d88d8d6dd22d7f0fb740f3ca3dbb2280a1
troygiorshev:
ACK 778cd0d88d8d6dd22d7f0fb740f3ca3dbb2280a1 after reading discussion on 18784, code review, ran test
Tree-SHA512: 438333a111cc93a09680cec47f13fbe03557d4803e5d826aec6f72e5afea62a088622645f0756e8fd2c9182c2a69ccca867d4d6fed2250364bee2b6c834adb1a
fa299ac27364bd7a59e6fb7e0c4ce476f2deec40 test: Speed up wallet_resendwallettransactions test with mockscheduler RPC (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Also fixes#20143
ACKs for top commit:
guggero:
ACK fa299ac2
Tree-SHA512: 024ced4aa5f5c266e24fd0583d47b45b19c2a6ae25a06fabeacaa0ac996eec0c45f11cc34b2df17d01759b78ed31a991aa86978aafcc76cb0017382f601bf85a
8f0b64fb513e8c6cdd1f115856100a4ef5afe23e Better error messages for invalid addresses (Bezdrighin)
Pull request description:
This PR addresses #20809.
We add more detailed error messages in case an invalid address is provided inside the 'validateaddress' and 'getaddressinfo' RPC calls. This also covers the case when a user provides an address from a wrong network.
We also add a functional test to test the new error messages.
ACKs for top commit:
kristapsk:
ACK 8f0b64fb513e8c6cdd1f115856100a4ef5afe23e
meshcollider:
Code review ACK 8f0b64fb513e8c6cdd1f115856100a4ef5afe23e
Tree-SHA512: ca0f806ab573e96b79e98d9f8c810b81fa99c638d9b5e4d99dc18c8bd2568e6a802ec305fdfb2983574a97a19a46fd53b77645f8078fb77e9deb24ad2a22cf93
… best height
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Platform wants to know the height of the bestchainlock when they call
submitchainlock; sooo we change the API of submitchainlock to also
return the height
## What was done?
Adjust API and tests
## How Has This Been Tested?
New tests added for this behavior
## Breaking Changes
Not really any; I **guess** that return value could be considered
breaking change; but going from nothing -> something feels unlikely to
break anything although it in theory could.
## 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>
Co-authored-by: Konstantin Akimov <knstqq@gmail.com>
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Dashmate wanted a way to know if it is safe to restart the masternode.
This new RPC indicates the number of active DKG sessions, and the number
of blocks until next potential DKG.
## What was done?
Examples of responses:
`{'active_dkgs': 0, 'next_dkg': 22}`
## How Has This Been Tested?
`feature_llmq_rotation.py` was updated
## Breaking Changes
no
## 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
- [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
RPC `getassetunlockstatuses` is now accepting an extra optional
parameter `height`.
When a valid `height` is passed, then the RPC returns the status of
AssetUnlock indexes up to this specific block. (Requested by Platform
team)
## What was done?
Note that in order to avoid cases that can lead to deterministic result,
when `height` is passed, then the only `chainlocked` and `unknown`
outcomes are possible.
## How Has This Been Tested?
`feature_asset_locks.py` was updated.
## Breaking Changes
n/a
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository
code-owners and collaborators only)_
---------
Co-authored-by: Konstantin Akimov <knstqq@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
82dee87933ed0714976ff4eb9657acfc13c6de84 test: test decodepsbt fee calculation (count input value only once per UTXO) (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
Fixes#19523, adding a simple test to `rpc_psbt.py` that checks that the decodepsbt fee matches the one given by the wallet (`walletcreatefundedpsbt`). This is in particular important for PSBTs with segwit inputs that have both a witness- and a non-witness-UTXO type set.
Example test run after reverting commit 75122780e2c46505d977e24c5612dfa9442ab754 ("Increment input value sum only once per UTXO in decodepsbt"):
```
$ test/functional/rpc_psbt.py
2020-07-26T11:31:44.862000Z TestFramework (INFO): Initializing test directory /tmp/bitcoin_func_test__sutcd4y
20.00007580
2020-07-26T11:31:47.073000Z TestFramework (ERROR): Assertion failed
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/home/honeybadger/buidl/bitcoin_thestack/test/functional/test_framework/test_framework.py", line 118, in main
self.run_test()
File "test/functional/rpc_psbt.py", line 166, in run_test
assert_equal(decoded['fee'], created_psbt['fee'])
File "/home/honeybadger/buidl/bitcoin_thestack/test/functional/test_framework/util.py", line 49, in assert_equal
raise AssertionError("not(%s)" % " == ".join(str(arg) for arg in (thing1, thing2) + args))
AssertionError: not(20.00007580 == 0.00007580)
2020-07-26T11:31:47.125000Z TestFramework (INFO): Stopping nodes
......
```
ACKs for top commit:
achow101:
ACK 82dee87933ed0714976ff4eb9657acfc13c6de84
Tree-SHA512: 296b8a701f851d482ef6200c6cbf0cf0257a79a828ac6dbc39b05d8c2d839c6fdb9d3f5a084015295cfa3eac7c11faa2f2d52e619c11627b04c75150eead8330
BACKPORT NOTICE
fixup psbt. all missing changes belongs to src/wallet/scriptpubkeyman.h/cpp ----- they are related to descriptor wallet!
-------------------
931dd4760855e036c176a23ec2de367c460e4243 Make lint-spelling.py happy (Glenn Willen)
11a0ffb29d1b4dcc55c8826873f340ab4196af21 [gui] Load PSBT from clipboard (Glenn Willen)
a6cb0b0c29d327d01aebb98b0504f317eb19c3dc [gui] PSBT Operations Dialog (sign & broadcast) (Glenn Willen)
5dd0c03ffa3aeaa69d8a3a716f902f450d5eaaec FillPSBT: report number of inputs signed (or would sign) (Glenn Willen)
9e7b23b73387600d175aff8bd5e6624dd51f86e7 Improve TransactionErrorString messages. (Glenn Willen)
Pull request description:
Add a "PSBT Operations" dialog, reached from the "Load PSBT..." menu item, giving options to sign or broadcast the loaded PSBT as appropriate, as well as copying the result to the clipboard or saving it to a file.
This is based on Sjors' #17509, and depends on that PR going in first. (It effectively replaces the small "load PSBT" dialog from that PR with a more feature-rich one.)
Some notes:
* The way I display status information is maybe unusual (a status bar, rather than messageboxes.) I think it's helpful to have the information in it be persistent rather than transitory. But if people dislike it, I would probably move the "current state of the transaction" info to the top line of the main label, and the "what action just happened, and did it succeed" info into a messagebox.
* I don't really know much about the translation/localization stuff. I put tr() in all the places it seemed like it ought to go. I did not attempt to translate the result of TransactionErrorString (which is shared by GUI and non-GUI code); I don't know if that's correct, but it matches the "error messages in logs should be googleable in English" heuristic. I don't know whether there are things I should be doing to reduce translator effort (like minimizing the total number of distinct message strings I use, or something.)
* I don't really know how (if?) automated testing is applied to GUI code. I can make a list of PSBTs exercising all the codepaths for manual testing, if that's the right approach. Input appreciated.
ACKs for top commit:
instagibbs:
tested ACK 931dd47608
Sjors:
re-tACK 931dd4760855e036c176a23ec2de367c460e4243
jb55:
ACK 931dd4760855e036c176a23ec2de367c460e4243
achow101:
ACK 931dd4760855e036c176a23ec2de367c460e4243
Tree-SHA512: ade52471a2242f839a8bd6a1fd231443cc4b43bb9c1de3fb5ace7c5eb59eca99b1f2e9f17dfdb4b08d84d91f5fd65677db1433dd03eef51c7774963ef4e2e74f
5da96210fc2fda9fbd79531f42f91262fd7a9257 doc: release note for getpeerinfo last_block/last_transaction (Jon Atack)
cfef5a2c98b9563392a4a258fedb8bdc869c9749 test: rpc_net.py logging and test naming improvements (Jon Atack)
21c57bacda766a4f56ee75a2872f5d0f94e3901e test: getpeerinfo last_block and last_transaction tests (Jon Atack)
8a560a7d57cbd9f473d6a3782893a0e2243c55bd rpc: expose nLastBlockTime/TXTime as getpeerinfo last_block/transaction (Jon Atack)
02fbe3ae0bd91cbab2828cb7aa46f6493c82f026 net: add nLastBlockTime/TXTime to CNodeStats, CNode::copyStats (Jon Atack)
Pull request description:
This PR adds inbound peer eviction criteria `nLastBlockTime` and `nLastTXTime` to `CNodeStats` and `CNode::copyStats`, which then allows exposing them in the next commit as `last_transaction` and `last_block` Unix Epoch Time fields in RPC `getpeerinfo`.
This may be useful for writing missing eviction tests. I'd also like to add `lasttx` and `lastblk` columns to the `-netinfo` dashboard as described in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19643#issuecomment-671093420.
Relevant discussion at the p2p irc meeting http://www.erisian.com.au/bitcoin-core-dev/log-2020-08-11.html#l-549:
```text
<jonatack> i was specifically trying to observe and figure out how to test https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19500
<jonatack> which made me realise that i didn't know what was going on with my peer conns in enough detail
<jonatack> i'm running bitcoin locally with nLastBlockTime and nLastTXTime added to getpeerinfo for my peer connections dashboard
<jonatack> sipa: is there a good reason why that (eviction criteria) data is not exposed through getpeerinfo currently?
<sipa> jonatack: nope; i suspect just nobody ever added it
<jonatack> sipa: thanks. will propose.
```
The last commit is optional, but I think it would be good to have logging in `rpc_net.py`.
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
Code review ACK 5da96210fc2fda9fbd79531f42f91262fd7a9257
theStack:
Code Review ACK 5da96210fc2fda9fbd79531f42f91262fd7a9257
darosior:
ACK 5da96210fc2fda9fbd79531f42f91262fd7a9257
Tree-SHA512: 2db164bc979c014837a676e890869a128beb7cf40114853239e7280f57e768bcb43bff6c1ea76a61556212135281863b5290b50ff9d24fce16c5b89b55d4cd70
b6834e312a6a7bb395ec7266bc9469384639df96 Avoid 'timing mishap' warnings when mocking (Pieter Wuille)
ec3916f40a3fc644ecbbaaddef6258937c7fcfbc Use mockable time everywhere in net_processing (Pieter Wuille)
Pull request description:
The fact that net_processing uses a mix of mockable tand non-mockable time functions made it hard to write functional tests for #19988.
I'm opening this as a separate PR as I believe it's independently useful. In some ways this doesn't go quite as far as it could, as there are now several data structures that could be converted to `std::chrono` types as well now. I haven't done that here, but I'm happy to reconsider that.
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
ACK b6834e312a 🌶
jnewbery:
utACK b6834e312a6a7bb395ec7266bc9469384639df96
naumenkogs:
utACK b6834e3
Tree-SHA512: 6528a167c57926ca12894e0c476826411baf5de2f7b01c2125b97e5f710e620f427bbb13f72bdfc3de59072e56a9c1447bce832f41c725e00e81fea019518f0e
0fcaf731997c4989b869e42d8990f742637799c2 test: use explicit p2p objects where available (Oliver Gugger)
Pull request description:
This is a follow-up patch to #19804 as suggested by MarcoFalke (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19804#discussion_r494950062).
To make the intent of the tests easier to understand, we reference the
p2p connection objects by their explicit names instead of the p2ps array.
ACKs for top commit:
theStack:
ACK 0fcaf731997c4989b869e42d8990f742637799c2
Tree-SHA512: 37db22185077beeadfa7245bb768b87d6b7a2cfb906c3c859ab92ec3d657122db7301777f0838e13dfc748f37303850144fb7553e6cb6c66903e304d6e10e659
10d61505fe77880d6989115defa5e08417f3de2d [test] remove confusing p2p property (gzhao408)
549d30faf04612d9589c81edf9770c99e3221885 scripted-diff: replace p2p with p2ps[0] in p2p_invalid_tx (gzhao408)
7a0de46aeafb351cffa3410e1aae9809fd4698ad [doc] sample code for test framework p2p objects (gzhao408)
784f757994c1306bb6584b14c0c78617d6248432 [refactor] clarify tests by referencing p2p objects directly (gzhao408)
Pull request description:
The `TestNode` has a `p2p` property which is an alias for `p2ps[0]`.
I think this should be removed because it can be confusing and misleading (to both the test writer and reviewer), especially if a TestNode has multiple p2ps connected (which is the case for many tests).
Another example is when a test has multiple subtests that connect 1 p2p and use the `p2p` property to reference it. If the subtests don't completely clean up after themselves, the subtests may affect one another.
The best way to refer to a connected p2p is use the object returned by `add_p2p_connection` like this:
```py
p2p_conn = node.add_p2p_connection(P2PInterface())
```
A good example is [p2p_invalid_locator.py](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/test/functional/p2p_invalid_locator.py), which cleans up after itself (waits in both `wait_for_disconnect` and in `disconnect_p2ps`) but wouldn't need so much complexity if it just referenced the connections directly.
If there is only one connected, it's not really that tedious to just use `node.p2ps[0]` instead of `node.p2p` (and it can always be aliased inside the test itself).
ACKs for top commit:
robot-dreams:
utACK 10d61505fe77880d6989115defa5e08417f3de2d
jnewbery:
utACK 10d61505fe77880d6989115defa5e08417f3de2d
guggero:
Concept ACK 10d61505.
Tree-SHA512: 5965548929794ec660dae03467640cb2156d7d826cefd26d3a126472cbc2494b855c1d26bbb7b412281fbdc92b9798b9765a85c27bc1a97f7798f27f64db6f13
21f24336019d438e225c7bd6653871119883a4ee test: run mempool_spend_coinbase.py even with wallet disabled (Michael Dietz)
Pull request description:
Run the mempool spend coinbase test even when the wallet was not compiled, as proposed in #20078.
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
ACK 21f24336019d438e225c7bd6653871119883a4ee
Tree-SHA512: 301582c04376371cfa8f1ebb2418a4341b42ddcd9ad4f48b58bcf888d867a97bdc409972856b67a8339ac5e60124aefee82a049b4f7fc6bca7a18d7e92e090be
3b064fcb9dd3df6c438a440f0fea86e9cf7b5f57 test: run mempool_expiry.py even with wallet disabled (Michael Dietz)
Pull request description:
Run the mempool expiry test even when the wallet was not compiled, as proposed in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20078.
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
ACK 3b064fcb9dd3df6c438a440f0fea86e9cf7b5f57
Tree-SHA512: 5860dc021d02bc3752268ec1e859505bec87174953223b34b1af8a8e4ab66d645458fbf9571c0b816a9de891c3ff41314996e580869671fccd6972c093e78154
5b77f8098de537898151ab116d0e547fd6ff9466 test: add p2p_lock acquires in p2p_leak_tx.py (Sebastian Falbesoner)
cc8c6823b4a8b74922f78ce6ce527ced9325bd49 test: use MiniWallet for p2p_leak_tx.py (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
This PR enables one more of the non-wallet functional tests (p2p_leak_tx.py) to be run even with the Bitcoin Core wallet disabled by using the new MiniWallet instead, as proposed in #20078. It also adds missing p2p_lock acquires that need to be held while modifying internal p2p Interface state (in this case the `last_message` dictionary) to avoid data races.
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
Code review ACK 5b77f8098de537898151ab116d0e547fd6ff9466
Tree-SHA512: 6661bc6e3491a9af4bf040f379e5955c525136397e99d3eadde92e247580d0d87efff750e6d3b1f6d9a4e578144a433a982f574ef056b44dd6bca33873a1bae6
e15344889aac50aadee9211ac34e466867d5862b Clarify blocksonly whitelistforcerelay test (t-bast)
Pull request description:
As discussed in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19943, this test may be a bit misleading to newcomers.
We underscore the fact that our peer needs to run a modified version of Bitcoin Core to actually relay transactions to a `blocksonly` node and benefit from the `whitelistforcerelay` parameter.
ACKs for top commit:
naumenkogs:
ACK e15344889aac50aadee9211ac34e466867d5862b
Tree-SHA512: cc3526ac26c40a2d878b0ad863008663040683fd21092fcdc93866c2b0a79db8c2d29767d1f70bf56195092fca2aa2961cdbee52b5f0b1ae757cece9cd206301
b128b566725a5037fdaea99940d1b9de5553d198 test: add logging for mining_getblocktemplate_longpoll.py (Sebastian Falbesoner)
8ee3536b2b77aeb3a48df5b34effbc7345ef34d8 test: remove unused helpers random_transaction(), make_change() and gather_inputs() (Sebastian Falbesoner)
fddce7e199308d96e366d700dca982ef088ba98b test: use MiniWallet for mining_getblocktemplate_longpoll.py (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
This PR enables one more of the non-wallet functional tests (mining_getblocktemplate_longpoll.py) to be run even with the Bitcoin Core wallet disabled by using the new MiniWallet instead, as proposed in #20078. Also adds missing log messages for the subtests.
This was the only functional test that used the `random_transaction` helper in `test_framework/util.py`, hence it is removed, together with other helpers (`make_change` and `gather_inputs`) that were again only used by `random_transaction`.
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
ACK b128b566725a5037fdaea99940d1b9de5553d198
Tree-SHA512: 09a5fa7b0f5976a47040f7027236d7ec0426d5a4829a082221c4b5fae294470230e89ae3df0bca0eea26833162c03980517f5cc88761ad251c3df4c4a49bca46
faabc26a61873b2cd0390a21df571fe53c893c11 test: Replace getmempoolentry with testmempoolaccept in MiniWallet (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
This is a refactor to not use the return value of `sendrawtransaction` and `getmempoolentry` with the goal that submitting the tx to the mempool will become optional.
ACKs for top commit:
mjdietzx:
ACK faabc26a61873b2cd0390a21df571fe53c893c11
Tree-SHA512: 4260a59e65fed1c807530dad23f1996ba6e881bcce91995f5b498a0be6001f67b3e0251507c8801750fe105410147c68bb2f393ebe678c6a3a4d045e5d72fc19
a7599c80ebb9579df45e2d6ccf3168302cf42f03 test: run mempool_compatibility.py even with wallet disabled (Michael Dietz)
Pull request description:
Another functional test rewritten as proposed in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20078
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
review ACK a7599c80ebb9579df45e2d6ccf3168302cf42f03 didn't test
Tree-SHA512: cc7a617e5489ed27bbdbdee85a82fa08525375061f7f4524577a6b8ecb340396adac88419b51f513be22ca53edd0a3bd5d572d9f43ffc2c18550b0ef9069d238
faf251d854e3a670533ea3e9087e82c92f3ae533 test: gettxoutproof duplicate txid (João Barbosa)
faf5eb45c4a08fbfd9a8c12534bca8adfe756ef2 test: Test empty array in gettxoutproof (MarcoFalke)
fa56e866e8ac08b35e775a4e37a4e5849e093c7d test: Run rpc_txoutproof.py even with wallet disabled (MarcoFalke)
faba790bd40b5a9e8849997785020790ff60571b test: MiniWallet: Default fee_rate in send_self_transfer, Pass in utxo_to_spend (MarcoFalke)
fa65a11d0c9a34ff7f4cc4efd53367794e751749 test: bugfix: Actually pick largest utxo (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Run the consensus test even when the wallet was not compiled. Also:
* Minor bugfix in MiniWallet
* Two new test cases (one cherry-picked from #19847)
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
utACK faf251d854e3a670533ea3e9087e82c92f3ae533. Thanks Marco!
kristapsk:
ACK faf251d854e3a670533ea3e9087e82c92f3ae533
Tree-SHA512: a5ab33695c88cfb3c369021d4506069c08ce298e24e891db55159130693ed3817444c72f6aad3f472235aa4597b2c601010af714411c2ec8ad9c2d2e0b00ecbc
fa188c9c59b8c3e43c31be01797f073e27a7bc10 test: Use MiniWalet in p2p_feefilter (MarcoFalke)
fa39c62eb7f39e7d249b8d46c075c4e7a9aec684 test: inline hashToHex (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
This introduces a minimalistic test wallet, which can be used as a drop in replacement for the Bitcoin Core wallet to create dummy transactions with a given fee rate.
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
utACK fa188c9c59b8c3e43c31be01797f073e27a7bc10
Tree-SHA512: 0aad9cb14eea4f0055bd6a47cc8c8f82a16941b152598c3bf1e083aae84cca4ffa23f0b854a362a68be1b917deba1b5ec7c0207b63b0805d747ba9a7d1d82efe
84d295e51341a126a6c3cbeea7a8caa04c7b5bc3 tests: Check that segwit inputs in psbt have both UTXO types (Andrew Chow)
46004790588c24174a0bec49b540d158ce163ffd psbt: always put a non_witness_utxo and don't remove it (Andrew Chow)
5279d8bc07d601fe6a67ad665fbc7591fe73c7de psbt: Allow both non_witness_utxo and witness_utxo (Andrew Chow)
72f6bec1da198764d4648a10a61c485e7ab65e9e rpc: show both UTXOs in decodepsbt (Andrew Chow)
Pull request description:
Due to recent changes to hardware wallets, the full previous transaction will need to be provided for segwit inputs. Since some software may be checking for the existence of a `witness_utxo` to determine whether to produce a segwit signature, we keep that field to ease the transition.
Because all of the sanity checks implemented by the `IsSane` functions were related to having mixed segwit and non-segwit data in a PSBT, those functions are removed as those checks are no longer proper.
Some tests are updated/removed to accommodate this and a simple test added to check that both UTXOs are being added to segwit inputs.
As discussed in the wallet IRC meeting, our own signer will not require `non_witness_utxo` for segwit inputs.
ACKs for top commit:
Sjors:
utACK 84d295e51341a126a6c3cbeea7a8caa04c7b5bc3 (didn't retest compared to 836d6fc, but fortunately HWI's CI tracks our master branch, with a bunch of hardware wallet simulators)
ryanofsky:
Code review re-ACK 84d295e51341a126a6c3cbeea7a8caa04c7b5bc3. No changes since last review, but now I understand the context better. I think it would good to improve the comments as suggested https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19215#discussion_r447889473 and maybe refer to
meshcollider:
utACK 84d295e51341a126a6c3cbeea7a8caa04c7b5bc3
Tree-SHA512: ccc1fd3c16ac3859f5aca4fa489bd40f68be0b81bbdc4dd51188bbf28827a8642dc8b605a37318e5f16cf40f1c4910052dace2f27eca21bb58435f02a443e940
7984c39be11ca04460883365e1ae2a496aaa6c0e test framework: serialize/deserialize inv type as unsigned int (Jon Atack)
407175e0c2bc797599ebd9c0a1f2ec89ad7af136 p2p: change CInv::type from int to uint32_t (Jon Atack)
Pull request description:
Fixes UBSan implicit-integer-sign-change issue per https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19610#issuecomment-680686460.
Credit to Crypt-iQ for finding and reporting the issue and to vasild for the original review suggestion in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19590#pullrequestreview-455788826.
Closes#19678.
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
ACK 7984c39be11ca04460883365e1ae2a496aaa6c0e
MarcoFalke:
ACK 7984c39be11ca04460883365e1ae2a496aaa6c0e 🌻
vasild:
ACK 7984c39be
Tree-SHA512: 59f3a75f40ce066ca6f0bb1927197254238302b4073af1574bdbfe6ed580876437be804be4e47d51467d604f0d9e3a5875159f7f2edbb2351fdb2bb9465100b5
6d1f51343cf11b07cd401fbd0c5bc3603e185a0e [rpc] fundrawtransaction, walletcreatefundedpsbt lock manually selected coins (Sjors Provoost)
Pull request description:
When using `fundrawtransaction` and `walletcreatefundedpsbt` with `lockUnspents`, it would only lock automatically selected coins, not manually selected coins. That doesn't make much sense to me if the goal is to prevent accidentally double-spending yourself before you broadcast a transaction.
Note that when creating a transaction, manually selected coins are automatic "unlocked" (or more accurately: the lock is ignored). Earlier versions of this PR introduced an error when a locked coin is manually selected, but this idea was abandoned after some discussion. An application that uses this RPC should either rely on automatic coin selection (with `lockUnspents`) or handle lock concurrency itself with manual coin selection. In particular it needs to make sure to avoid/pause calls with automatic coin selection between calling `lockunspent` and the subsequent spending RPC.
See #7518 for historical background.
ACKs for top commit:
meshcollider:
Code review ACK 6d1f51343cf11b07cd401fbd0c5bc3603e185a0e
fjahr:
Code review ACK 6d1f51343cf11b07cd401fbd0c5bc3603e185a0e
Tree-SHA512: 8773c788d92f2656952e1beac147ba9956b8c5132d474e0880e4c89ff53642928b4cbfcd1cb3d17798b9284f02618a8830c93a9f7a4733e5bded96adff1d5d4d
fa330ec2fe5f5ba68a8d43fff0b19584c0b1ff39 test: Remove confusing and broken use of wait_until global (MarcoFalke)
fa6583c30bf7d82cf7ffdae995f8f16524ad2c0d ci: Set increased --timeout-factor by default (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Assuming that tests don't have a logic error or race, setting a high timeout should not cause any issues. The tests will still pass just as fast in the fastest case, but it allows for some buffer in case of slow disks or otherwise starved ci machines.
Fixes#19729
ACKs for top commit:
hebasto:
ACK fa330ec2fe5f5ba68a8d43fff0b19584c0b1ff39, I have reviewed the code, and it looks OK, I agree it can be merged.
Tree-SHA512: 3da80ee008c7b08bab5fdaf7804d57c79d6fed49a7d37b9c54fc89756659fcb9981fd10afc4d07bd90d93c1699fd410a0110a3cd34d016873759d114ce3cd82d
This backport is marked as full, not partial, but it has only refactorings
and non-witness related changes.
Included commits are:
- test: Update test framework p2p protocol version to 70016
- Rename AddInventoryKnown() to AddKnownTx()
- Add support for tx-relay via wtxid
This adds a field to CNodeState that tracks whether to relay transactions with
that peer via wtxid, instead of txid. As of this commit the field will always
be false, but in a later commit we will add a way to negotiate turning this on
via p2p messages exchanged with the peer.
- Just pass a hash to AddInventoryKnown
Since it's only used for transactions, there's no need to pass in an inv type.
- Add wtxid to mempool unbroadcast tracking
