1ef2138c0db3bd4f9332c777fa3fb2770dc1b08c lint: run mypy over contrib/devtools (fanquake)
Pull request description:
wumpus mentioned on IRC that we don't currently run `mypy` over the `contrib/devtools` directory, and that it would likely be worthwhile given #20434. This just adds that dir to the linter, as well as some missing annotations to fix existing errors. Note that now we require Python 3.6 we can make use of variable annotations.
master (patched to check contrib devtools):
```bash
test/lint/lint-python.sh
contrib/devtools/symbol-check.py:154: error: Incompatible types in assignment (expression has type "List[str]", variable has type "str")
contrib/devtools/circular-dependencies.py:35: error: Need type annotation for 'deps' (hint: "deps: Dict[<type>, <type>] = ...")
contrib/devtools/circular-dependencies.py:67: error: Need type annotation for 'closure' (hint: "closure: Dict[<type>, <type>] = ...")
Found 4 errors in 3 files (checked 187 source files)
```
I haven't quite gone as far as to add annotations like
```python
CHECKS: Dict[str, List[Tuple[str, Callable[[Any], bool]]]] = {...
```
to `symbol-check.py`.
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
ACK 1ef2138c0db3bd4f9332c777fa3fb2770dc1b08c
Tree-SHA512: a58c2ece588c640289dc1d35dad5b1b8732788272daa0965d6bf44ee8a7f7c8e8585f94d233ac41c84b9ffcfc97841a00fe2c9acba41f58fd164f01de4b6512b
Backport notice:
- data have real blocks from testnet
- due to big gap in blocks before checkpoints (half-year) for sack of this test is added one more checkpoint, otherwise blocks are not accepted due to non-mockable time for other chains except regtest
- data for 2 blocks in split chain are generated locally for testnet
--------------
333317ce6b67aa92f7363d48cd750712190b4b6b test: Test that low difficulty chain fork is rejected (MarcoFalke)
fa31dc1bf4ee471c4641eef8de02702ba0619ae7 test: Pass down correct chain name in tests (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
To prevent OOM, Bitcoin Core will reject chain forks at low difficulty by default. This is the only use-case of checkpoints, so add a test for it to make sure the feature works as expected. If it didn't work, checkpoints would have no use-case and we might as well remove them
ACKs for top commit:
Sjors:
Thanks for adding the node 1 example. Code review ACK 333317c
Tree-SHA512: 90dffa540d0904f3cffb61d2382b1a26f84fe9560b7013e4461546383add31a8757b350616a6d43217c59ef7b8b2a1b62bb3bab582c679cbb2c660a782ce7be1
7e698732836121912f179b7c743a72dd6fdffa72 sync: remove DEBUG_LOCKCONTENTION preprocessor directives (Jon Atack)
9b08006bc502e67956d6ab518388fad6397cac8d log, sync: improve lock contention logging and add time duration (Jon Atack)
3f4c6b87f1098436693c4990f2082515ec0ece26 log, timer: add timing macro in usec LOG_TIME_MICROS_WITH_CATEGORY (Jon Atack)
b7a17444e0746c562ae97b26eba431577947b06a log, sync: add LOCK logging category, apply it to lock contention (Jon Atack)
Pull request description:
To enable lock contention logging, `DEBUG_LOCKCONTENTION` has to be defined at compilation. Once built, the logging is not limited to a category and is high frequency, verbose and in all-caps. With these factors combined, it seems likely to be rarely used.
This patch:
- adds a `lock` logging category
- adds a timing macro in microseconds, `LOG_TIME_MICROS_WITH_CATEGORY`
- updates `BCLog::LogMsg()` to omit irrelevant decimals for microseconds and skip unneeded code and math
- improves the lock contention logging, drops the all-caps, and displays the duration in microseconds
- removes the conditional compilation directives
- allows lock contentions to be logged on startup with `-debug=lock` or at run time with `bitcoin-cli logging '["lock"]'`
```
$ bitcoind -signet -debug=lock
2021-09-01T12:40:01Z LockContention: cs_vNodes, net.cpp:1920 started
2021-09-01T12:40:01Z LockContention: cs_vNodes, net.cpp:1920 completed (4μs)
2021-09-01T12:40:01Z LockContention: cs_vNodes, net.cpp:1302 started
2021-09-01T12:40:01Z LockContention: cs_vNodes, net.cpp:1302 completed (4μs)
2021-09-01T12:40:02Z LockContention: cs_vNodes, net.cpp:2242 started
2021-09-01T12:40:02Z LockContention: cs_vNodes, net.cpp:2242 completed (20μs)
2021-09-01T12:43:04Z LockContention: ::cs_main, validation.cpp:4980 started
2021-09-01T12:43:04Z LockContention: ::cs_main, validation.cpp:4980 completed (3μs)
$ bitcoin-cli -signet logging
"lock": true,
$ bitcoin-cli -signet logging [] '["lock"]'
"lock": false,
$ bitcoin-cli -signet logging '["lock"]'
"lock": true,
```
I've tested this with Clang 13 and GCC 10.2.1, on Debian, with and without `--enable-debug`.
ACKs for top commit:
hebasto:
re-ACK 7e698732836121912f179b7c743a72dd6fdffa72, added a contention duration to the log message since my [previous](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22736#pullrequestreview-743764606) review.
theStack:
re-ACK 7e698732836121912f179b7c743a72dd6fdffa72 🔏⏲️
Tree-SHA512: c4b5eb88d3a2c051acaa842b3055ce30efde1f114f61da6e55fcaa27476c1c33a60bc419f7f5ccda532e1bdbe70815222ec2b2b6d9226f29c8e94e598aacfee7
c79f8b5ea2 fix: keep ADDRS outside (UdjinM6)
a39065be88 test: fix incorrect nServices assertion, use NODE_NETWORK value (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
0e78555a5b fix: add missing check for sending addrs (UdjinM6)
3cd69377b6 fix: test nodes should use mocktime (UdjinM6)
acbbe8c9a2 fix: relayed addresses should use mocktime (UdjinM6)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
`p2p_addr_relay.py` is broken but we don't see it in CI because it doesn't test everything it should atm. This weird behaviour was discovered by @kwvg while preparing #5964.
## What was done?
Bring back the missing check and fix the test. Borrowed one fix from #5964 to make this PR complete.
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run `p2p_addr_relay.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 _(for repository code-owners and collaborators only)_
ACKs for top commit:
kwvg:
ACK c79f8b5ea2
Tree-SHA512: a88f9c3563205b092ebd9ab7e8f0c034b6ef5bef2adbf57c269c444ef334e519e30d028325e73e99de025654a0dbd94baad033fb1538896e85572d4db2a00b23
adc0e4b382 fix: apply changes for .clang-format to make it matched with our code style (Konstantin Akimov)
0c884f9740 chore: narrow score of clang-diff-format for dash specific files only (Konstantin Akimov)
4bc0e1f697 chore: intentionally introducing wrong formatting to bip39.cpp to trigger CI (Konstantin Akimov)
2c74ad427d fix: adjust wallet/bip39 accordingly linter comments (Konstantin Akimov)
d3faa8522c refactor: use better masks for list of files; add missing bip39.{h,cpp} (Konstantin Akimov)
7788f1db0e refactor: move list of non backported files o test/util/data/non-backported.txt (Konstantin Akimov)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
**Note**: should be this PR either https://github.com/dashpay/dash/pull/5942 be merged, not both
CI clang-format triggers to non-dash files + clang format is differ from out current formatting.
## What was done?
See each commits
## How Has This Been Tested?
See CI result
To test locally how new style will look, just run this command:
```
diff -u <(cat {coinjoin,governance,llmq,evo,masternode}/*.{h,cpp}) <(clang-format-16 {coinjoin,governance,llmq,evo,masternode}/*.{h,cpp} )
```
## 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
Top commit has no ACKs.
Tree-SHA512: d87f30ba78e04f886d7eb2b6b235c20a966bc4438e6428a83ecff5c795d72777516d4270eb9769ffebef9f06e9509acf3c535b4c87b1be6c8a5aef7e2b7efecb
The value of nServices for `NODE_NETWORK | NODE_WITNESS`, the default for
p2p_addr{v2}_relay.py in Bitcoin Core, is 9. Dash doesn't implement SegWit
and so the corresponding nServices value is `NODE_NETWORK`, which is 1.
f3ba916e8b5b5ee2a381cef38882671eadb231df lint: ignore gitian keys file for spelling linter (Sebastian Falbesoner)
da289a6c4a0a5e110e301f34f1db57b6d31bcdcc lint: update list of spelling linter false positives (Sebastian Falbesoner)
a0022f1cfbb3d8f1f8f3ff135f854be0cb89643f test: bump codespell linter version to 2.0.0 (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
This small patch updates the ignore list for the spelling linter script (which uses `codespell`), both removing false-positives that are not relevant anymore and adding new ones. As [suggested by jonatack](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20762#issuecomment-750889701)~~, whose last name is now also part of the list :)~~. Also changed the linter script to not check the gitian keys file, as [suggested by hebasto](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20817#discussion_r550763409). The codespell version used is bumped to most recent version 2.0.0, which is more aware of some terms that were previously needed in the ignorelist for v1.17.1, see https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20817#issuecomment-753428669.
Running spelling linter on master branch (repeated findings in the same file are removed to keep the output short):
```
$ ./test/lint/lint-spelling.sh
contrib/gitian-keys/keys.txt:16: Atack ==> Attack
doc/developer-notes.md:1284: inout ==> input, in out
doc/psbt.md:122: Asend ==> Ascend, as end
src/bench/verify_script.cpp:27: Keypair ==> Key pair
src/blockencodings.h:30: Unser ==> Under, unset, unsure, user
src/compressor.h:65: Unser ==> Under, unset, unsure, user
src/core_read.cpp:131: presense ==> presence
src/index/disktxpos.h:21: blockIn ==> blocking
src/net_processing.h:67: anounce ==> announce
src/netaddress.h:486: compatiblity ==> compatibility
src/primitives/transaction.h:35: nIn ==> inn, min, bin, nine
src/qt/bitcoinunits.cpp:101: nIn ==> inn, min, bin, nine
src/rpc/blockchain.cpp:2150: nIn ==> inn, min, bin, nine
src/rpc/misc.cpp:198: nIn ==> inn, min, bin, nine
src/script/bitcoinconsensus.cpp:81: nIn ==> inn, min, bin, nine
src/script/bitcoinconsensus.h:63: nIn ==> inn, min, bin, nine
src/script/interpreter.cpp:1279: nIn ==> inn, min, bin, nine
src/script/interpreter.h:222: nIn ==> inn, min, bin, nine
src/script/sign.cpp:17: nIn ==> inn, min, bin, nine
src/script/sign.h:39: nIn ==> inn, min, bin, nine
src/serialize.h:181: Unser ==> Under, unset, unsure, user
src/signet.cpp:142: nIn ==> inn, min, bin, nine
src/test/base32_tests.cpp:17: fo ==> of, for
src/test/base64_tests.cpp:17: fo ==> of, for
src/test/script_tests.cpp:1509: nIn ==> inn, min, bin, nine
src/test/sighash_tests.cpp:27: nIn ==> inn, min, bin, nine
src/test/validation_tests.cpp:78: excercise ==> exercise
src/undo.h:36: Unser ==> Under, unset, unsure, user
src/validation.cpp:1403: nIn ==> inn, min, bin, nine
src/validation.h:255: nIn ==> inn, min, bin, nine
src/wallet/wallet.cpp:1532: nIn ==> inn, min, bin, nine
src/wallet/walletdb.cpp:429: Crypted ==> Encrypted
test/functional/feature_nulldummy.py:63: unnecssary ==> unnecessary
test/functional/wallet_encryption.py:81: crypted ==> encrypted
test/functional/wallet_upgradewallet.py:36: fpr ==> for, far, fps
^ Warning: codespell identified likely spelling errors. Any false positives? Add them to the list of ignored words in test/lint/lint-spelling.ignore-words.txt
```
Running spelling linter on PR branch:
```
$ ./test/lint/lint-spelling.sh
src/core_read.cpp:131: presense ==> presence
src/net_processing.h:67: anounce ==> announce
src/netaddress.h:486: compatiblity ==> compatibility
src/test/validation_tests.cpp:78: excercise ==> exercise
src/wallet/walletdb.cpp:429: Crypted ==> Encrypted
test/functional/feature_nulldummy.py:63: unnecssary ==> unnecessary
test/functional/wallet_encryption.py:81: crypted ==> encrypted
^ Warning: codespell identified likely spelling errors. Any false positives? Add them to the list of ignored words in test/lint/lint-spelling.ignore-words.txt
```
This list of remaining findings doesn't contain false positives anymore -- the typos are fixed in PR https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20762.
Happy new year! 🍾
ACKs for top commit:
hebasto:
re-ACK f3ba916e8b5b5ee2a381cef38882671eadb231df, only suggested changes since my [previous](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20817#pullrequestreview-560632881) review.
jonatack:
ACK f3ba916e8b5b5ee2a381cef38882671eadb231df I don't know if there are any particular issues with bumping codespell to v2.0.0, but locally running the spelling linter and the cirrus job at https://cirrus-ci.com/task/5004066998714368 both LGTM. Thanks for also verifying and removing the unused words from the ignore list.
Tree-SHA512: e92ae6f16c01d4ff3d54f8c3a0ee95e12741f7bfe031d307a785f5cfd8a80525b16b34275f413b914c4a318f5166f9887399c21f2dad9cc7e9be41647042ef37
3e1571285f4a0edf59d51bbdeee028be3038b6dc Update TSan suppressions (Hennadii Stepanov)
Pull request description:
It seems possible now to drop some TSan suppressions.
Top commit has no ACKs.
Tree-SHA512: 94518fd2f3a7168b2989424de0696e42c8f509b833aafbc7e75f4c1180a0b8d9a47f43c50d06b03b26a924643afe86274b2062c9d456c17a68576d19566ed66f
3c2478c38522c176e81befd4d991a259b09be063 ci: Print COMMIT_RANGE to the log as it was in Travis CI (Hennadii Stepanov)
c123892c2e47e3706f06820aba2454d494a39564 ci: Drop Travis-specific workaround for shellcheck (Hennadii Stepanov)
10af252d97532843b26505d215f6e975f4b21672 ci: Drop Travis-specific way to set COMMIT_RANGE variable (Hennadii Stepanov)
93504da3a932f33126545ebc9383f695a6efe51e ci: Fix COMMIT_RANGE variable value for PRs (Hennadii Stepanov)
Pull request description:
This PR:
- is a #20658 and #20682 followup
- set the `COMMIT_RANGE` variable correctly for PRs
- cleans up Travis-specific code
- prints COMMIT_RANGE value to the log for convenience as it was in Travis CI
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
ACK 3c2478c38522c176e81befd4d991a259b09be063
Tree-SHA512: beb933352b10fd5eb3e66373ddb62439e4f3a03b50fb037ee89fa92c0706cec41d05f2d307f15bb18d1e634e6464f4e123b7e2f88703c8edfd145d8d6eff0b1a
95487b055328b590ba83f258de9637ab0f9a2f17 doc: Drop mentions of Travis CI as it is no longer used (Hennadii Stepanov)
09d105ef0f8b4b06bf248721a1209c9e16e9db75 ci: Drop travis_fold feature as Travis CI is no longer used (Hennadii Stepanov)
Pull request description:
As Travis CI is no longer used, this PR:
- drops `travis_fold` feature
- drops mentions of Travis CI in docs
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
ACK 95487b055328b590ba83f258de9637ab0f9a2f17
Tree-SHA512: 2e259bb8b1e37bcefc1251737bb2716f06ddb57c490010b373825c4e70f42ca38efae69a2f63f21f577d7cee3725b94097bdddbd313f8ebf499281cf97c53cef
815e4f8026 masternode: protect m_{error,state} with cs (pasta)
136e445abc refactor: pass CActiveMasternodeManager as pointer arg to LLMQContext (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
5e0f77747a refactor: pass CActiveMasternodeManager as pointer arg to CJContext (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
f171c24a29 refactor: add CActiveMasternodeManager NodeContext alias, use in RPC (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
44beb941cb refactor: prefix member variable names with m_ (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
73cef4f5f9 refactor: make bls{Pub}KeyOperator member variables instead of pointers (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
fbc783635a refactor: make m_info private, get const refs (or copies) from Get*() functions (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
1b516ce4ed refactor: use signing helper function instead of passing blsKeyOperator (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
33702aca39 refactor: add helper function to decrypt messages with blsKeyOperator (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
3eb931b596 refactor: add helper function to sign messages with blsKeyOperator (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
3827355cce refactor: move key initialization to InitKeys, define destructor (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
e5295dec1f refactor: move activeMasternodeInfo{Cs} into CActiveMasternodeManager (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
b8c1f010e7 refactor: avoid accessing active masternode info if not in masternode mode (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
9a3c5a3c48 trivial: access activeMasternodeInfo when lock is in scope (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
Pull request description:
## Additional Information
* `CActiveMasternodeManager`, unlike other managers, is _conditionally_ initialized (specifically, when the node is hosting a masternode). This means that checks need to be made to ensure that the conditions needed to initialize the manager are true or that the pointer leads to a valid manager instance.
As the codebase currently checks (and fast-fails) based on the node being in "masternode mode" (`fMasternodeMode`) or not, we will continue with this approach, but with additional assertions _after_ the masternode mode check if the manager exists.
* Though, since `activeMasternodeInfo`(`Cs`) are global variables, they can be accessed _regardless_ of whether the corresponding manager exists. This means some parts of the codebase attempt to fetch information about the (nonexistent) active masternode _before_ determining if it should use the masternode mode path or not (looking at you, `CMNAuth::ProcessMessage`)
Moving them into `CActiveMasternodeManager` meant adding checks _before_ attempting to access information about the masternode, as they would no longer be accessible with dummy values ([here](2110c0c309/src/init.cpp (L1633-L1635))) on account of being part of the conditionally initialized manager.
* In an attempt to opportunistically dereference the manager, `CDKGSessionManager` (accepting a pointer) was dereferencing the manager before passing it to `CDKGSessionHandler`. This was done under the assumption that `CDKGSessionManager` would only ever be initialized in masternode mode.
This is not true. I can confirm that because I spent a few days trying to debug test failures. `CDKGSessionHandler` is initialized in two scenarios:
* In masternode mode
* If the `-watchquorums` flag is enabled
The latter scenario doesn't initialize `CActiveMasternodeManager`.
Furthermore, the DKG round thread is started unconditionally ([here](2110c0c309/src/llmq/context.cpp (L79))) and the `CDKGSessionHandler::StartThreads` > `CDKGSessionHandler::StartThread` > `CDKGSessionHandler::PhaseHandlerThread` > `CDKGSessionHandler::HandleDKGRound` > `CDKGSessionHandler::InitNewQuorum` > `CActiveMasternodeManager::GetProTxHash` call chain reveals an attempt to fetch active masternode information without any masternode mode checks.
This behaviour has now been changed and the thread will only be spun up if in masternode mode.
* Dereferencing so far has been limited to objects that primarily hold data (like `CCoinJoinBroadcastTx` or `CGovernanceObject`) as they should not have knowledge of node's state (that responsibility lies with whatever manager manipulates those objects), perform one-off operations and static functions.
* `activeMasternodeInfo` allowed its members to be read-write accessible to anybody who asked. Additionally, signing and decrypting involved borrowing the operator secret key from the active masternode state to perform those operations.
This behaviour has now been changed. The internal state is now private and accessible read-only as a const ref (or copy) and `Decrypt`/`Sign` functions have been implemented to allow those operations to happen without having another manager access the operator private key in order to do so.
* You cannot combine a `WITH_LOCK` and an `Assert` (in either mutex or accessed value), doing so will cause errors if `-Werror=thread-safety` is enabled. This is why `assert`s are added even when it would intuitively seem that `Assert` would've been more appropriate to use.
## Future Considerations
Currently there are no unit tests that test the functionality of `CActiveMasternodeManager` as it's never initialized in test contexts, breakage had to be found using functional tests. Perhaps some (rudimentary) tests for `CActiveMasternodeManager` may prove to be valuable.
## Breaking Changes
Not _really_. Some behaviour has been modified but nothing that should necessitate updates or upgrades.
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas **(note: N/A)**
- [x] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests
- [x] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation **(note: N/A)**
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository code-owners and collaborators only)_
ACKs for top commit:
PastaPastaPasta:
utACK 815e4f8026
Tree-SHA512: cbe49ea9e1c35df514e1b40869ee271baef1c348c9d09e4b356e5fc8fe5449cbbe66569258f2d664029faa9a46f711df9bf9e41eb8734c3aefc6cd8e94378948
d5d1a714fb Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#24390: test: Remove suppression no longer needed with headers-only Boost.Test (fanquake)
51630d2e5e Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#22824: refactor: remove RecursiveMutex cs_nBlockSequenceId (MarcoFalke)
a9b1575fe8 Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#22781: wallet: fix the behavior of IsHDEnabled, return false in case of a blank hd wallet. (Samuel Dobson)
0505229c89 Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#22327: cli: Avoid truncating -rpcwaittimeout (MarcoFalke)
1dc97c7679 Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#22149: test: Add temporary logging to debug #20975 (W. J. van der Laan)
44f91cbc9a Merge #21597: test: Document race:validation_chainstatemanager_tests suppression (fanquake)
c326830f48 Merge bitcoin-core/gui#243: fix issue when disabling the auto-enabled blank wallet checkbox (MarcoFalke)
267f42fd6a Merge #21382: build: Clean remnants of QTBUG-34748 fix (fanquake)
1fcc5f1101 Merge #20540: test: Fix wallet_multiwallet issue on windows (MarcoFalke)
4afbaf2ea1 Merge #20322: test: Fix intermittent issue in wallet_listsinceblock (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Batch of backports
## What was done?
Trivial batch of backports
## How Has This Been Tested?
CI looks good
## Breaking Changes
None
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository code-owners and collaborators only)_
Top commit has no ACKs.
Tree-SHA512: 8eeac54f011eb1111888c745dd56184ac9601de290f2b0f7b7ad02240e8dc1cab5a47fed26bfed2bd6f1066e0710827a3e5b2426f0bf66821cf1cd09099d5160
81738d2881253f28b69666ada2a01ebb353f503a test: Remove suppression no longer needed with headers-only Boost.Test (Hennadii Stepanov)
Pull request description:
It appears, that moving to [headers-only](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24301) Boost.Test makes the removed suppression unneeded even without [bumping](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24383) boost version.
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
cr ACK 81738d2881253f28b69666ada2a01ebb353f503a
Tree-SHA512: e60443f79a2e38cc78fceeff5c2956d622e8a10730129f9c27c14aef59bc6fa0894b8011e6191530443bf3165f78da978bc08ad04248ddb65e2da373264afa6a
faa94961d6e38392ba068381726ed4e033367b03 test: Add temporary logging to debug #20975 (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
to be reverted after a fix
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
Code review ACK faa94961d6
Tree-SHA512: 1f3103fcf4cad0af54e26c4d257bd824b128b5f2d2b81c302e861a829fd55d6a099fa476b79b30a71fe98975ae604b9e3ff31fd48a51d442389a9bd515e60ba0
fada2dfcac1c4b47ee76b877d91d515cf1d36410 test: Fix wallet_multiwallet issue on windows (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
The error message on windows:
> 2020-11-30T18:10:47.536032Z ListWalletDir: Error scanning C:\Users\user\AppData\Local\Temp\test_runner_₿_🏃_20201130_181042\wallet_multiwallet_0\node0\regtest\wallets\self_walletdat_symlink: boost::filesystem::status: The name of the file cannot be resolved by the system: "C:\Users\user\AppData\Local\Temp\test_runner_₿_🏃_20201130_181042\wallet_multiwallet_0\node0\regtest\wallets\self_walletdat_symlink\wallet.dat"
ACKs for top commit:
promag:
Code review ACK fada2dfcac1c4b47ee76b877d91d515cf1d36410. Although it could ignore (don't log) directories that lead to no permission error.
fanquake:
ACK fada2dfcac1c4b47ee76b877d91d515cf1d36410
Tree-SHA512: b475162cc3cd1574209d916605b229a79c8089714295f5e16569b71f958f0007d54dc76833938492d931387784588b11b73e3ef00f963540af42c079417f8d72
fa108d6a757838225179a8df942cfb6d99c98c90 test: update tests for peer discouragement (Jon Atack)
1a9f462caa63fa16d7b4415312d2032a42b3fe0b gui, doc: rm Ban Score in GUI Peers window/release notes updates (Jon Atack)
Pull request description:
This is the third `-banscore` PR in the mini-series described in #19464. See that PR for the intention and reasoning.
- no longer display "Ban Score" in the GUI peers window and add a release note, plus release note fixups per https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19464#pullrequestreview-447452052
- update tests (`src/test/denialofservice_tests.cpp` and `test/functional/p2p_leak.py`) from banning to discouragement and per https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19464#issuecomment-658052518
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
ACK fa108d6a757838225179a8df942cfb6d99c98c90
laanwj:
ACK fa108d6a757838225179a8df942cfb6d99c98c90
Tree-SHA512: 58a449b3f47b8cb5490b34e4442ee8675bfad1ce48af4e4fd5c67715b0c1a596fb8e731d42e576b4c3b64627f76e0a68cbb1da9ea9f588a5932fe119baf40d50
41d55d30579358c805036201664ad6a1c1d48681 doc: getpeerinfo banscore deprecation release note (Jon Atack)
dd54e3796e633cfdf6954af306afd26eadc25116 test: getpeerinfo banscore deprecation test (Jon Atack)
8c7647b3fbbab03ea84071cf3cd2d0d2bf8be255 rpc: deprecate banscore field in rpc getpeerinfo (Jon Atack)
Pull request description:
Per https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19219#discussion_r443074487 and https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19219#issuecomment-652699592, this PR deprecates returning the `banscore` field in the `getpeerinfo` RPC, updates the help, adds a test, and updates the release notes. Related to #19464.
ACKs for top commit:
fanquake:
ACK 41d55d30579358c805036201664ad6a1c1d48681
Tree-SHA512: 8eca08332581e2fe191a2aafff6ba89ce39413f0491ed0de8b86577739f0ec430b1a8fbff2914b0f3138a229563dfcc1981c0cf5b7dd6061b5c48680a28423bc
bdb8b9a347e68f80a2e8d44ce5590a2e8214b6bb test: doc: improve doc for `from_hex` helper (mention `to_hex` alternative) (Sebastian Falbesoner)
191405420815d49ab50184513717a303fc2744d6 scripted-diff: test: rename `FromHex` to `from_hex` (Sebastian Falbesoner)
a79396fe5f8f81c78cf84117a87074c6ff6c9d95 test: remove `ToHex` helper, use .serialize().hex() instead (Sebastian Falbesoner)
2ce7b47958c4a10ba20dc86c011d71cda4b070a5 test: introduce `tx_from_hex` helper for tx deserialization (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
There are still many functional tests that perform conversions from a hex-string to a message object (deserialization) manually. This PR identifies all those instances and replaces them with a newly introduced helper `tx_from_hex`.
Instances were found via
* `git grep "deserialize.*BytesIO"`
and some of them manually, when it were not one-liners.
Further, the helper `ToHex` was removed and simply replaced by `.serialize().hex()`, since now both variants are in use (sometimes even within the same test) and using the helper doesn't really have an advantage in readability. (see discussion https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22257#discussion_r652404782)
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
review re-ACK bdb8b9a347e68f80a2e8d44ce5590a2e8214b6bb 😁
Tree-SHA512: e25d7dc85918de1d6755a5cea65471b07a743204c20ad1c2f71ff07ef48cc1b9ad3fe5f515c1efaba2b2e3d89384e7980380c5d81895f9826e2046808cd3266e
b9e76f1bf08c52fcd402b2314e00db4ad247ebc8 rpc: Add test for -rpcwaittimeout (Christian Decker)
f76cb10d7dc9a7b0c55d28011161606399417664 rpc: Prefix rpcwaittimeout error with details on its nature (Christian Decker)
c490e17ef698a1695050f82ef6567b3b87a21861 doc: Add release notes for the `-rpcwaittimeout` cli parameter (Christian Decker)
a7fcc8eb59fe51473571661316214156fbdbdcae rpc: Add a `-rpcwaittimeout` parameter to limit time spent waiting (Christian Decker)
Pull request description:
Adds a new numeric `-rpcwaittimeout` that can be used to limit the
time we spend waiting on the RPC server to appear. This is used by
downstream projects to provide a bit of slack when `bitcoind`s RPC
interface is not available right away.
This makes the `-rpcwait` argument more useful, since we can now limit
how long we'll ultimately wait, before potentially giving up and reporting
an error to the caller. It was discussed in the context of the BTCPayServer
wanting to have c-lightning wait for the RPC interface to become available
but still have the option of giving up eventually ([4355]).
I checked with laanwj whether this is already possible ([comment]), and
whether this would be a welcome change. Initially I intended to repurpose
the (optional) argument to `-rpcwait`, however I decided against it since it
would potentially break existing configurations, using things like `rpcwait=1`,
or `rpcwait=true` (the former would have an unintended short timeout, when
old behavior was to wait indefinitely).
~Due to its simplicity I didn't implement a test for it yet, but if that's desired I
can provide one.~ Test was added during reviews.
[4355]: https://github.com/ElementsProject/lightning/issues/4355
[comment]: https://github.com/ElementsProject/lightning/issues/4355#issuecomment-768288261
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
Code review ACK b9e76f1bf08c52fcd402b2314e00db4ad247ebc8
promag:
ACK b9e76f1bf08c52fcd402b2314e00db4ad247ebc8.
Tree-SHA512: 3cd6728038ec7ca7c35c2e7ccb213bfbe963f99a49bb48bbc1e511c4dd23d9957c04f9af1f8ec57120e47b26eaf580b46817b099d5fc5083c98da7aa92db8638
Co-authored-by: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
1f449586a9e39bc4fb53cb5c7a31362e47aea19b test: add `bad-txns-prevout-null` test to mempool_accept.py (Sebastian Falbesoner)
aa0a5bb70d77739d43d5a9ceae78fb0c6fafd435 test: add `bad-txns-prevout-null` test case to invalid_txs.py (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
This simple PR adds missing tests for the reject reason `bad-txns-prevout-null`, which is thrown in the function `CheckTransaction()`: a62fc35a15/src/consensus/tx_check.cpp (L52-L54)
Basically this condition is met for non-coinbase transactions (the code snippet above only hits if `!tx.IsCoinBase()`) with coinbase-like outpoints, i.e. hash=0, n=0xffffffff.
Can be tested by running the functional tests `feature_block.py`, `p2p_invalid_tx.py` and `mempool_accept.py`. Not sure if the redundancy in the tests is desired (I guess it would make sense if the mempool acceptance test also makes use of the invalid_txs templates?).
ACKs for top commit:
rajarshimaitra:
tACK 1f449586a9
brunoerg:
tACK 1f449586a9e39bc4fb53cb5c7a31362e47aea19b
kristapsk:
ACK 1f449586a9e39bc4fb53cb5c7a31362e47aea19b, code looks correct and all tests pass.
Tree-SHA512: 2d4f940a6ac8e0d80d2670c9e1111cbf43ae6ac62809a2ccf17cffee9a41d387ea4d889ee300eb4a407c055b13bfa5d37102a32ed59964a9b6950bd907ba7204
5a6b8b6b1f partial Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#27053: wallet: reuse change dest when re-creating TX with avoidpartialspends (fanquake)
2f788aa76d fix: change port to use for zmq in interface_zmq_dash.py (Konstantin Akimov)
0ce66fd477 Merge #19507: Expand functional zmq transaction tests (Wladimir J. van der Laan)
a1c2386153 Merge #17445: zmq: Fix due to invalid argument and multiple notifiers (Wladimir J. van der Laan)
44929bad82 Merge #16404: qa: Test ZMQ notification after chain reorg (MarcoFalke)
1707f01309 fix: follow-up changes from bitcoin/bitcoin#22220 for maxapsfee (Konstantin Akimov)
eb4270deae Merge #19743: -maxapsfee follow-up (Samuel Dobson)
6a6d379711 Merge #19756: tests: add sync_all to fix race condition in wallet groups test (MarcoFalke)
5821a1d23a Merge #14582: wallet: always do avoid partial spends if fees are within a specified range (Samuel Dobson)
59d5a4ef39 Merge #19773: wallet: Avoid recursive lock in IsTrusted (Samuel Dobson)
2489f29f0e Merge #19830: test: Add tsan supp for leveldb::DBImpl::DeleteObsoleteFiles (fanquake)
10fa7a66b6 Merge #19538: ci: Add tsan suppression for race in DatabaseBatch (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Regular backports from bitcoin v21
## What was done?
- bitcoin/bitcoin#19538
- bitcoin/bitcoin#19830
- bitcoin/bitcoin#19773
- bitcoin/bitcoin#14582
- bitcoin/bitcoin#19756
- bitcoin/bitcoin#19743
- bitcoin/bitcoin#16404
- bitcoin/bitcoin#17445
- bitcoin/bitcoin#19507
- partial bitcoin/bitcoin#27053
+some extra fixes and missing changes from bitcoin/bitcoin#22220 for `maxapsfee`
+changed port for zmq in `interface_zmq_dash.py` to prevent intermittent error in `interface_zmq.py`
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run unit & functional tests
## Breaking Changes
`CreateTransaction` now uses sometime 2 private keys for one transaction instead one
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
ACKs for top commit:
PastaPastaPasta:
utACK 5a6b8b6b1f
Tree-SHA512: 7efd8a31808f155c08035d0fb7ceaac369e3e44e68d2c91a88e52815a60efba5fe9458f41d93352627c2c062d414fb0207dcf216fa75b54af210b503f9123de6
c5031685bc fix: rename arguments for 'voteraw' (Konstantin Akimov)
3621966f12 feat: add todo to drop Throw() from rpc/util.h (Konstantin Akimov)
b54f03a0c1 fix: wrong name of argument for coinjoin (Konstantin Akimov)
d0163543d9 refactor: use new format CPCCommand for rpc/coinjoin (Konstantin Akimov)
0e1a31159f Merge #19994: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (net, rpcwallet) (MarcoFalke)
af9eb81e56 fix: wrong name of arguments for RPC (Konstantin Akimov)
c30c8f22dd Merge #19849: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (blockchain,rawtransaction) (MarcoFalke)
f525f574b0 fix: follow-up missing changes from Merge #18607: rpc: Fix named arguments in documentation (Konstantin Akimov)
7ac1ee0fb4 Merge #19717: rpc: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (mining,zmq,rpcdump) (MarcoFalke)
860d31f504 Merge #19455: rpc generate: print useful help and error message (Wladimir J. van der Laan)
41c35fd8dc fix: adjust missing arguments and help for misc rpc: debug, echo, mnsync (Konstantin Akimov)
58d923cd5b Merge #19528: rpc: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (misc) (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
This batch of backports asserts that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones.
## What was done?
done backports:
- bitcoin/bitcoin#19994
- bitcoin/bitcoin#19849
- bitcoin/bitcoin#19717
- bitcoin/bitcoin#19455
- bitcoin/bitcoin#19528
Beside that same changes are applied for src/coinjoin's rpc.
There's also applied multiple fixes for various rpcs for cases when RPCArg names are mismatched with CPCCommand
**Please, note, that this PR is not final fix for all RPCArgs**. There's a lot of dash's rpc that is not refactored that.
That it is not easy to implement for `quorum command` because the list of arguments (and even their numbers) are different for each sub-command. This fixes are out-of scope of this PR and should be done before bitcoin#18531 is backported.
See also relevant bitcoin#21035.
## How Has This Been Tested?
I used this helper to see which exactly args are specified wrongly:
```cpp
diff --git a/src/rpc/server.h b/src/rpc/server.h
index d4a7ba60eb..cdfd741f54 100644
--- a/src/rpc/server.h
+++ b/src/rpc/server.h
@@ -16,6 +16,7 @@
#include <string>
#include <univalue.h>
+#include <logging.h>
class CRPCCommand;
@@ -110,6 +111,19 @@ public:
fn().GetArgNames(),
intptr_t(fn))
{
+ if (fn().m_name != name_in || fn().GetArgNames() != args_in) {
+ std::cerr << "names: " << fn().m_name << ' ' << name_in << std::endl;
+ std::cerr << "arg names: " << fn().GetArgNames().size() << std::endl;
+ for (const auto& i : fn().GetArgNames()) {
+ std::cerr << "arg: " << i << std::endl;
+ }
+ std::cerr << "FIASCO FIASCO FIASCO FIASCO FIASCO FIASCO" << std::endl;
+ }
CHECK_NONFATAL(fn().m_name == name_in);
CHECK_NONFATAL(fn().GetArgNames() == args_in);
}
```
## Breaking Changes
N/A
Some arguments are renamed in RPC but they have been broken (used incorrect name not same as in docs)
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
ACKs for top commit:
PastaPastaPasta:
(self)utACK c5031685bc
Tree-SHA512: e885a8f8fa8bc282dae092fe8df65a37e2ab6ca559cd0598d54bfc06cacddb3bd6f3c74fa2d9c1551f8a4fbdfdeabb8d065649df66d5809e792aec6f51d0df14
14b4921a91920df25b19ff420bfe2bff8c56f71e wallet: reuse change dest when recreating TX with avoidpartialspends (Matthew Zipkin)
Pull request description:
Closes https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27051
When the wallet creates a transaction internally, it will also create an alternative that spends using destination groups and see if the fee difference is negligible. If it costs the user the same to send the grouped version, we send it (even if the user has `avoidpartialspends` set to `false` which is default). This patch ensures that the second transaction creation attempt re-uses the change destination selected by the first attempt. Otherwise, the first change address remains reserved, will not be used in the second attempt, and then will never be used by the wallet, leaving gaps in the BIP44 chain.
If the user had `avoidpartialspends` set to true, there is no second version of the created transaction and the change addresses are not affected.
I believe this behavior was introduced in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14582
ACKs for top commit:
achow101:
ACK 14b4921a91920df25b19ff420bfe2bff8c56f71e
Tree-SHA512: a3d56f251ff4b333fc11325f30d05513e34ab0a2eb703fadd0ad98d167ae074493df1a24068298336c6ed2da6b31aa2befa490bc790bbc260ed357c8f2397659
7356292e1d7a44da8a2bd31c02c58d550bf38009 Have zmq reorg test cover mempool txns (Gregory Sanders)
a0f4f9c983e57cc97ecbc56d0177eaf1854c842c Add zmq test for transaction pub during reorg (Gregory Sanders)
2399a0600ca9c4b676fa2f97520b8ecc44642246 Add test case for mempool->block zmq notification (Gregory Sanders)
e70512a83c69bc85e96b08ade725594eda3e230f Make ordering of zmq consumption irrelevant to functional test (Gregory Sanders)
Pull request description:
Tests written to better define what messages are sent when. Also did a bit of refactoring to make sure the exact notification channel ordering doesn't matter.
Confusions below aside, I believe having these more descriptive tests helps describe what behavior we expect from ZMQ notificaitons.
Remaining confusion:
1) Notification patterns seem to vary wildly with the inclusion of mempool transactions being reorg'ed. See difference between "Add zmq test for transaction pub during reorg" and "Have zmq reorg test cover mempool txns" commits for specifics.
2) Why does a reorg'ed transaction get announced 3 times? From what I understand it can get announced once for disconnected block, once for mempool entry. What's the third? It occurs a 4th time when included in a block(not added in test)
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
code review ACK 7356292e1d7a44da8a2bd31c02c58d550bf38009
promag:
Code review ACK 7356292e1d7a44da8a2bd31c02c58d550bf38009.
Tree-SHA512: 573662429523fd6a1af23dd907117320bc68cb51a93fba9483c9a2160bdce51fb590fcd97bcd2b2751d543d5c1148efa4e22e1c3901144f882b990ed2b450038
