0a76c292ac doc: Install `net/py-pyzmq` port on FreeBSD for `interface_zmq.py` (Hennadii Stepanov)
Pull request description:
On FreeBSD, Python's `zmq` module is provided as a separate port.
This PR updates the FreeBSD Build Guide to include this port, enabling the `interface_zmq.py` functional test.
ACKs for top commit:
maflcko:
lgtm ACK 0a76c292ac
vasild:
ACK 0a76c292ac
Tree-SHA512: c13eada3e870149f47348145d6a29f41125ac75efd88eabe6dd2d0429e0377ed280e76a764cfaf627498c1d07b9135a995cc644146fa666bc3bfa0eb2c86e88b
b6f0593f43 doc: add release note about testmempoolaccept debug-message (Matthew Zipkin)
f9cac63523 test: cover testmempoolaccept debug-message in RBF test (Matthew Zipkin)
f9650e18ea rbf: remove unecessary newline at end of error string (Matthew Zipkin)
221c789e91 rpc: include verbose reject-details field in testmempoolaccept response (Matthew Zipkin)
Pull request description:
Adds a new field `reject-details` in `testmempoolaccept` responses to include `m_debug_message` from `ValidationState`. This string is the complete error message thrown by the mempool in response to `sendrawtransaction`.
The extra verbosity is helpful to consumers of `testmempoolaccept`, which is sort of a debug tool anyway.
example:
>
> {
> "txid": "07d7a59a7bdad4c3a5070659ea04147c9b755ad9e173c52b6a38e017abf0f5b8",
> "wtxid": "5dc243b1b92ee2f5a43134eb3e23449be03d1abb3d7f3c03c836ed0f13c50185",
> "allowed": false,
> "reject-reason": "insufficient fee",
> "reject-details": "insufficient fee, rejecting replacement 07d7a59a7bdad4c3a5070659ea04147c9b755ad9e173c52b6a38e017abf0f5b8; new feerate 0.00300000 BTC/kvB <= old feerate 0.00300000 BTC/kvB"
> }
ACKs for top commit:
rkrux:
re-ACK b6f0593f43
glozow:
ACK b6f0593f43
Tree-SHA512: 340b8023d59cefa84598879c4efdb7c399a3f62da126e87c595523f302e53d33098fc69da9c5f8c92b7580dc75466c66cea372051f935b197265648fe15c43a3
1. Update the documented NetBSD version.
2. Add the optional ZeroMQ package to align the guide with other *BSD
systems.
3. Update the Python version to meet the minimum requirement specified
in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30527.
4. Install `net/py-zmq` package to enable the `interface_zmq.py`
functional test.
5. Fix a formatting issue.
1dd3af8fbc Add release note for #31223 (Martin Zumsande)
997757dd2b test: add functional test for -port behavior (Martin Zumsande)
0e2b12b92a net, init: derive default onion port if a user specified a -port (Martin Zumsande)
Pull request description:
This resolves#31133 (setups with multiple local nodes each using a different `-port` no longer working with v28.0, see the issue description for more details) by deriving the default onion listening port to be the value specified by `-port` incremented by 1 (idea by vasild / laanwj).
Note that with this fix, the chosen `-port` values of two local nodes cannot be adjacent, otherwise there will be port collisions again.
From the discussion in the linked issue, this was the most popular option, followed by doing nothing and telling affected users to change their setups to use `-bind` instead of `-port`. But more opinions are certainly welcome!
I think that if we decide to do something about the problem described in the issue, we should do so soon (in 28.1.), so I opened this PR.
Fixes#31133
ACKs for top commit:
achow101:
ACK 1dd3af8fbc
laanwj:
Tested ACK 1dd3af8fbc
tdb3:
Code review ACK 1dd3af8fbc
Tree-SHA512: 37fda2b23bbedcab5df3a401cf5afce66ae5318fb78f9660f83e3fd075b528e8156d7a0903f9a12ffe97ab5d83860587116b74af28670a1f4c2f0d1be4999f40
32fc59796f rpc: Allow single transaction through submitpackage (glozow)
Pull request description:
There's no particular reason to restrict single transaction submissions with submitpackage. This change relaxes the RPC checks as enables the `AcceptPackage` flow to accept packages of a single transaction.
Resolves#31085
ACKs for top commit:
naumenkogs:
ACK 32fc59796f
achow101:
ACK 32fc59796f
glozow:
ACK 32fc59796f
Tree-SHA512: ffed353bfdca610ffcfd53b40b76da05ffc26df6bac4b0421492e067bede930380e03399d2e2d1d17f0e88fb91cd8eb376e3aabebbabcc724590bf068d09807c
73db95c65c kernel: Make bitcoin-chainstate's block validation mirror submitblock's (TheCharlatan)
bb53ce9bda tests: Add functional test for submitting a previously pruned block (Greg Sanders)
1f7fc73825 rpc: Remove submitblock duplicate pre-check (TheCharlatan)
e62a8abd7d rpc: Remove submitblock invalid-duplicate precheck (TheCharlatan)
36dbebafb9 rpc: Remove submitblock coinbase pre-check (TheCharlatan)
Pull request description:
With the introduction of a mining ipc interface and the potential future introduction of a kernel library API it becomes increasingly important to offer common behaviour between them. An example of this is ProcessNewBlock, which is used by ipc, rpc, net_processing and (potentially) the kernel library. Having divergent behaviour on suggested pre-checks and checks for these functions is confusing to both developers and users and is a maintenance burden.
The rpc interface for ProcessNewBlock (submitblock) currently pre-checks if the block has a coinbase transaction and whether it has been processed before. While the current example binary for how to use the kernel library, bitcoin-chainstate, imitates these checks, the other interfaces do not.
The coinbase check is repeated again early during ProcessNewBlock. Pre-checking it may also shadow more fundamental problems with a block. In most cases the block header is checked first, before validating the transactions. Checking the coinbase first therefore masks potential issues with the header. Fix this by removing the pre-check.
Similary the duplicate checks are repeated early in the contextual checks of ProcessNewBlock. If duplicate blocks are detected much of their validation is skipped. Depending on the constitution of the block, validating the merkle root of the block is part of the more intensive workload when validating a block. This could be an argument for moving the pre-checks into block processing. In net_processing this would have a smaller effect however, since the block mutation check, which also validates the merkle root, is done before.
Testing spamming a node with valid, but duplicate unrequested blocks seems to exhaust a CPU thread, but does not seem to significantly impact keeping up with the tip. The benefits of adding these checks to net_processing are questionable, especially since there are other ways to trigger the more CPU-intensive checks without submitting a duplicate block. Since these DOS concerns apply even less to the RPC interface, which does not have banning mechanics built in, remove them too.
Finally, also remove the pre-checks from `bitcoin-chainstate.cpp`.
---
This PR is part of the [libbitcoinkernel project](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27587).
ACKs for top commit:
Sjors:
re-utACK 73db95c65c
achow101:
ACK 73db95c65c
instagibbs:
ACK 73db95c65c
mzumsande:
ACK 73db95c65c
Tree-SHA512: 2d02e851cf402ecf6a1968c058df3576aac407e200cbf922a1a6391b7f97b4f42c6d9f6b0a78b9d1af0a6d40bdd529a7b11a1e6d88885bd7b8b090f6d1411861
8bf1b3039c doc: Use more precise anchor links to Xcode SDK extraction (Jeremy Rand)
Pull request description:
The "SDK Extraction" section is what users presumably are looking for when they follow these links.
ACKs for top commit:
fanquake:
ACK 8bf1b3039c
Tree-SHA512: 38669a6b171aa102bb80f5b3a343bd6a067c6921c454f6d18087c5add8016eea2ba8196036f9968f0a9b7df1f642c96ff6c657338c32e775beb04038497cde1f
37a5c5d836 doc: update descriptors.md for getdescriptoractivity (James O'Beirne)
ee3ce6a4f4 test: rpc: add no address case for getdescriptoractivity (James O'Beirne)
811f76f3a5 rpc: add getdescriptoractivity (James O'Beirne)
25fe087de5 rpc: move-only: move ScriptPubKeyDoc to utils (James O'Beirne)
Pull request description:
The RPC command `scanblocks` provides a useful way to get a set of blockhashes that have activity relevant to a set of descriptors (`relevant_blocks`). However actually extracting the activity from those blocks is left as an exercise to the end user.
This process involves not only generating the (potentially ranged) set of scripts for the descriptor set on the client side (maybe via `deriveaddresses`), but then the user must retrieve each block's contents one-by-one using `getblock <hash>`, which is transmitted over a network link. And that's all before they perform the actual search over block content. There's even more work required to incorporate unconfirmed transactions.
This PR introduces an RPC `getdescriptoractivity` that [dovetails](https://bitcoin-irc.chaincode.com/bitcoin-core-dev/2024-08-16#1046393;) with `scanblocks` output, handling the process described above. Users specify the blockhashes (perhaps from `relevant_blocks`) and a set of descriptors; they are then given all spend/receive activity in that set of blocks.
This is a very useful tool when implementing lightweight wallets that want neither to require a third-party indexer like electrs, nor the overhead of creating and managing watch-only wallets in Core. This allows Core to be more easily used in a "stateless" manner by wallets, with potentially many nodes interchangeably acting as backends.
### Example usage
```
% ./src/bitcoin-cli scanblocks start \
'["addr(bc1p0cp0vyag6snlta2l7c4am3rue7eef9f72l7uhx52m4v27vfydx9s8tfs7t)"]' \
857263
{
"from_height": 857263,
"to_height": 858263,
"relevant_blocks": [
"00000000000000000002bc5cc78f5b0913a5230a8f4b0d5060bc9a60900a5a88",
"00000000000000000001c5291ed6a40c06d3db5c8fb738567654b24a14b24ecb"
],
"completed": true
}
% ./src/bitcoin-cli getdescriptoractivity \
'["00000000000000000002bc5cc78f5b0913a5230a8f4b0d5060bc9a60900a5a88", "00000000000000000001c5291ed6a40c06d3db5c8fb738567654b24a14b24ecb"]' \
'["addr(bc1p0cp0vyag6snlta2l7c4am3rue7eef9f72l7uhx52m4v27vfydx9s8tfs7t)"]'
{
"activity": [
{
"type": "receive",
"amount": 0.00002900,
"blockhash": "00000000000000000002bc5cc78f5b0913a5230a8f4b0d5060bc9a60900a5a88",
"height": 857907,
"txid": "c9d34f202c1f66d80cae76f305350f5fdde910b97cf6ae6bf79f5bcf2a337d06",
"vout": 254,
"output_spk": {
"asm": "1 7e02f613a8d427f5f55ff62bddc47ccfb394953e57fdcb9a8add58af3124698b",
"desc": "rawtr(7e02f613a8d427f5f55ff62bddc47ccfb394953e57fdcb9a8add58af3124698b)#yewcd80j",
"hex": "51207e02f613a8d427f5f55ff62bddc47ccfb394953e57fdcb9a8add58af3124698b",
"address": "bc1p0cp0vyag6snlta2l7c4am3rue7eef9f72l7uhx52m4v27vfydx9s8tfs7t",
"type": "witness_v1_taproot"
}
},
{
"type": "spend",
"amount": 0.00002900,
"blockhash": "00000000000000000001c5291ed6a40c06d3db5c8fb738567654b24a14b24ecb",
"height": 858260,
"spend_txid": "7f61d1b248d4ee46376f9c6df272f63fbb0c17039381fb23ca5d90473b823c36",
"spend_vin": 0,
"prevout_txid": "c9d34f202c1f66d80cae76f305350f5fdde910b97cf6ae6bf79f5bcf2a337d06",
"prevout_vout": 254,
"prevout_spk": {
"asm": "1 7e02f613a8d427f5f55ff62bddc47ccfb394953e57fdcb9a8add58af3124698b",
"desc": "rawtr(7e02f613a8d427f5f55ff62bddc47ccfb394953e57fdcb9a8add58af3124698b)#yewcd80j",
"hex": "51207e02f613a8d427f5f55ff62bddc47ccfb394953e57fdcb9a8add58af3124698b",
"address": "bc1p0cp0vyag6snlta2l7c4am3rue7eef9f72l7uhx52m4v27vfydx9s8tfs7t",
"type": "witness_v1_taproot"
}
}
]
}
```
ACKs for top commit:
instagibbs:
reACK 37a5c5d836
achow101:
ACK 37a5c5d836
tdb3:
Code review and light retest ACK 37a5c5d836
rkrux:
re-ACK 37a5c5d836
Tree-SHA512: 04aa51e329c6c2ed72464b9886281d5ebd7511a8a8e184ea81249033a4dad535a12829b1010afc2da79b344ea8b5ab8ed47e426d0bf2eb78ab395d20b1da8dbb
ee1128ead8 doc: update stack-clash-protection comment re mingw-w64 (fanquake)
bf47448f15 test: drop check for Windows < 10 (fanquake)
35b898c47f release: target Windows 10 or later (fanquake)
398754e70b depends: target Windows 10 when building for mingw-w64 (fanquake)
Pull request description:
Follows up to https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31048#discussion_r1803165670.
We definitely cannot claim that Bitcoin Core is "supported and extensively tested on" on Windows 7.
Note that #30997 is also increasing the minimum required Windows version (for the GUI) to 10.
ACKs for top commit:
hodlinator:
cr-ACK ee1128ead8
davidgumberg:
ACK ee1128ead8
achow101:
ACK ee1128ead8
hebasto:
re-ACK ee1128ead8, only rebased, a commit message and a comment have been amended since my recent [review](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31172#pullrequestreview-2415452160).
TheCharlatan:
ACK ee1128ead8
Tree-SHA512: 245e0bac3d63414d919a1948661fef4ff79359faaacaf19d64abd91cc62e822797fb1cf3379e340bfdf9a85c0b88fd99a90eda450dd4218b6213ab78aefb1374
And under the hood suppoert single transactions
in AcceptPackage. This simplifies user experience
and paves the way for reducing number of codepaths
for transaction acceptance in the future.
Co-Authored-By: instagibbs <gsanders87@gmail.com>
The duplicate checks are repeated early in the contextual checks of
ProcessNewBlock. If duplicate blocks are detected much of their
validation is skipped. Depending on the constitution of the block,
validating the merkle root of the block is part of the more intensive
workload when validating a block. This could be an argument for moving
the pre-checks into block processing. In net_processing this would have
a smaller effect however, since the block mutation check, which also
validates the merkle root, is done before.
A side effect of this change is that a duplicate block is persisted
again on disk even when pruning is activated. This is similar to the
behaviour with getblockfrompeer. Add a release note for this change in
behaviour.
Testing spamming a node with valid, but duplicate unrequested blocks
seems to exhaust a CPU thread, but does not seem to significantly impact
keeping up with the tip. The benefits of adding these checks to
net_processing are questionable, especially since there are other ways
to trigger the more CPU-intensive checks without submitting a duplicate
block. Since these DOS concerns apply even less to the RPC interface,
which does not have banning mechanics built in, remove them too.
---
With the introduction of a mining ipc interface and the potential future
introduction of a kernel library API it becomes increasingly important
to offer common behaviour between them. An example of this is
ProcessNewBlock, which is used by ipc, rpc, net_processing and
(potentially) the kernel library. Having divergent behaviour on
suggested pre-checks and checks for these functions is confusing to both
developers and users and is a maintenance burden.
The rpc interface for ProcessNewBlock (submitblock) currently pre-checks
if the block has a coinbase transaction and whether it has been
processed before. While the current example binary for how to use the
kernel library, bitcoin-chainstate, imitates these checks, the other
interfaces do not.
Brew has migrated to using the later:
```bash
brew info pkg-config
==> pkgconf: stable 2.3.0 (bottled), HEAD
Package compiler and linker metadata toolkit
https://github.com/pkgconf/pkgconf
```
5736d1ddac tracing: pass if replaced by tx/pkg to tracepoint (0xb10c)
a4ec07f194 doc: add comments for CTxMemPool::ChangeSet (Suhas Daftuar)
83f814b1d1 Remove m_all_conflicts from SubPackageState (Suhas Daftuar)
d3c8e7dfb6 Ensure that we don't add duplicate transactions in rbf fuzz tests (Suhas Daftuar)
d7dc9fd2f7 Move CalculateChunksForRBF() to the mempool changeset (Suhas Daftuar)
284a1d33f1 Move prioritisation into changeset (Suhas Daftuar)
446b08b599 Don't distinguish between direct conflicts and all conflicts when doing cluster-size-2-rbf checks (Suhas Daftuar)
b53041021a Duplicate transactions are not permitted within a changeset (Suhas Daftuar)
b447416fdd Public mempool removal methods Assume() no changeset is outstanding (Suhas Daftuar)
2b30f4d36c Make RemoveStaged() private (Suhas Daftuar)
18829194ca Enforce that there is only one changeset at a time (Suhas Daftuar)
7fb62f7db6 Apply mempool changeset transactions directly into the mempool (Suhas Daftuar)
34b6c5833d Clean up FinalizeSubpackage to avoid workspace-specific information (Suhas Daftuar)
57983b8add Move LimitMempoolSize to take place outside FinalizeSubpackage (Suhas Daftuar)
01e145b975 Move changeset from workspace to subpackage (Suhas Daftuar)
802214c083 Introduce mempool changesets (Suhas Daftuar)
87d92fa340 test: Add unit test coverage of package rbf + prioritisetransaction (Suhas Daftuar)
15d982f91e Add package hash to package-rbf log message (Suhas Daftuar)
Pull request description:
part of cluster mempool: #30289
It became clear while working on cluster mempool that it would be helpful for transaction validation if we could consider a full set of proposed changes to the mempool -- consisting of a set of transactions to add, and a set of transactions (ie conflicts) to simultaneously remove -- and perform calculations on what the mempool would look like if the proposed changes were to be applied. Two specific examples of where we'd like to do this:
- Determining if ancestor/descendant/TRUC limits would be violated (in the future, cluster limits) if either a single transaction or a package of transactions were to be accepted
- Determining if an RBF would make the mempool "better", however that idea is defined, both in the single transaction and package of transaction cases
In preparation for cluster mempool, I have pulled this reworking of the mempool interface out of #28676 so it can be reviewed on its own. I have not re-implemented ancestor/descendant limits to be run through the changeset, since with cluster mempool those limits will be going away, so this seems like wasted effort. However, I have rebased #28676 on top of this branch so reviewers can see what the new mempool interface could look like in the cluster mempool setting.
There are some minor behavior changes here, which I believe are inconsequential:
- In the package validation setting, transactions would be added to the mempool before the `ConsensusScriptChecks()` are run. In theory, `ConsensusScriptChecks()` should always pass if the `PolicyScriptChecks()` have passed and it's just a belt-and-suspenders for us, but if somehow they were to diverge then there could be some small behavior change from adding transactions and then removing them, versus never adding them at all.
- The error reporting on `CheckConflictTopology()` has slightly changed due to no longer distinguishing between direct conflicts and indirect conflicts. I believe this should be entirely inconsequential because there shouldn't be a logical difference between those two ideas from the perspective of this function, but I did have to update some error strings in some tests.
- Because, in a package setting, RBFs now happen as part of the entire package being accepted, the logging has changed slightly because we do not know which transaction specifically evicted a given removed transaction.
- Specifically, the "package hash" is now used to reference the set of transactions that are being accepted, rather than any single txid. The log message relating to package RBF that happen in the `TXPACKAGES` category has been updated as well to include the package hash, so that it's possible to see which specific set of transactions are being referenced by that package hash.
- Relatedly, the tracepoint logging in the package rbf case has been updated as well to reference the package hash, rather than a transaction hash.
ACKs for top commit:
naumenkogs:
ACK 5736d1ddac
instagibbs:
ACK 5736d1ddac
ismaelsadeeq:
reACK 5736d1ddac
glozow:
ACK 5736d1ddac
Tree-SHA512: 21810872e082920d337c89ac406085aa71c5f8e5151ab07aedf41e6601f60a909b22fbf462ef3b735d5d5881e9b76142c53957158e674dd5dfe6f6aabbdf630b
ac286e0d1b doc: Fix grammatical errors in multisig-tutorial.md (secp512k2)
Pull request description:
This pull request fixes grammatical errors in the `multisig-tutorial.md` document.
ACKs for top commit:
Abdulkbk:
ACK ac286e0d1b
Tree-SHA512: 684fe16e802431109957b9cde441353edeb16ffffde4282310c1a6f104adffc53347d00a2cf3a5969a78803f3177d6056ca37d3b7e8be52c2ec43ec0b9fcf4d9
The mempool:replaced tracepoint now reports either a txid or a
package hash (previously it always was a txid). To let users know
if a txid or package hash is passed, a boolean argument is added
the the tracepoint.
In the functional test, a ctypes.Structure class for MempoolReplaced
is introduced as Python warns the following when not explcitly
casting it to a ctype:
Type: 'bool' not recognized. Please define the data with ctypes manually.
5a96767e3f depends, libevent: Do not install *.pc files and remove patches for them (Hennadii Stepanov)
ffda355b5a cmake, refactor: Move `HAVE_EVHTTP_...` to `libevent` interface (Hennadii Stepanov)
b619bdc330 cmake: Revamp `FindLibevent` module (Hennadii Stepanov)
Pull request description:
This PR generalizes the use of `find_package` / `pkg_check_modules`, prioritizing the former.
Addresses https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30903#issuecomment-2444700876:
> We should also follow up with refactoring the libevent module, to more generically use CMake/pkg-config, rather than restricting the CMake usage to `vcpkg`. At that point, we'd likely be able to dump pkg-config for the depends path entirely.
Similar to https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30903.
ACKs for top commit:
fanquake:
ACK 5a96767e3f
Tree-SHA512: 181020c16ccd2821e718c73f264badcdc5e62980c4a8d9691e759efe2ea00da2326e26308d1dcfdeac01e9e27930428ecace9f36941deee951b751b138d7266c
ec375de39f doc: Add missing 'blank=true' option in offline-signing-tutorial.md (secp512k2)
Pull request description:
Issue:
The text mentions that the `createwallet` command should use the options `disable_private_keys=true, blank=true`, but the provided command only includes `disable_private_keys=true`, missing the `blank=true` option.
Correction:
Added `blank=true` to the command to match the options described in the text.
Explanation:
The `blank=true` option is necessary to create a blank wallet. Including this option ensures the command matches the options specified in the text.
ACKs for top commit:
fanquake:
ACK ec375de39f
Tree-SHA512: 8c145e3ef1598c5e13f2aa89e496f76bfe2fc6f47d5e740963acad18dd1f782655a822dc234862af8e5a08060ab7fe1039a3dcfa68455a9143fe2d849975927c
5e3b444022 doc: Fix missing comma in JSON example in REST-interface.md (secp512k2)
Pull request description:
This pull request addresses a minor issues in the REST-interface.md documentation:
Missing Comma in JSON Example: In the "Query UTXO set" section, a missing comma after the "desc" field in the JSON example has been added to ensure valid JSON syntax.
ACKs for top commit:
maflcko:
lgtm ACK 5e3b444022
Abdulkbk:
ACK 5e3b444022
Tree-SHA512: d2d479c8a991d3380d16b7b140a375a90dca0fce0a024a4b8ccf842d703398fde14ae972349f5fbd2e0ce26aa6cd6d07c0262d9c09ddc4c6c466527cfbe0e1f1
0de3e96e33 tracing: use bitcoind pid in bcc tracing examples (0xb10c)
411c6cfc6c tracing: only prepare tracepoint args if attached (0xb10c)
d524c1ec06 tracing: dedup TRACE macros & rename to TRACEPOINT (0xb10c)
Pull request description:
Currently, if the tracepoints are compiled (e.g. in depends and release builds), we always prepare the tracepoint arguments regardless of the tracepoints being used or not. We made sure that the argument preparation is as cheap as possible, but we can almost completely eliminate any overhead for users not interested in the tracepoints (the vast majority), by gating the tracepoint argument preparation with an `if(something is attached to this tracepoint)`. To achieve this, we use the optional semaphore feature provided by SystemTap.
The first commit simplifies and deduplicates our tracepoint macros from 13 TRACEx macros to a single TRACEPOINT macro. This makes them easier to use and also avoids more duplicate macro definitions in the second commit.
The Linux tracing tools I'm aware of (bcc, bpftrace, libbpf, and systemtap) all support the semaphore gating feature. Thus, all existing tracepoints and their argument preparation is gated in the second commit. For details, please refer to the commit messages and the updated documentation in `doc/tracing.md`.
Also adding unit tests that include all tracepoint macros to make sure there are no compiler problems with them (e.g. some varadiac extension not supported).
Reviewers might want to check:
- Do the tracepoints still work for you? Do the examples in `contrib/tracing/` run on your system (as bpftrace frequently breaks on every new version, please test master too if it should't work for you)? Do the CI interface tests still pass?
- Is the new documentation clear?
- The `TRACEPOINT_SEMAPHORE(event, context)` macros places global variables in our global namespace. Is this something we strictly want to avoid or maybe move to all `TRACEPOINT_SEMAPHORE`s to a separate .cpp file or even namespace? I like having the `TRACEPOINT_SEMAPHORE()` in same file as the `TRACEPOINT()`, but open for suggestion on alternative approaches.
- Are newly added tracepoints in the unit tests visible when using `readelf -n build/src/test/test_bitcoin`? You can run the new unit tests with `./build/src/test/test_bitcoin --run_test=util_trace_tests* --log_level=all`.
<details><summary>Two of the added unit tests demonstrate that we are only processing the tracepoint arguments when attached by having a test-failure condition in the tracepoint argument preparation. The following bpftrace script can be used to demonstrate that the tests do indeed fail when attached to the tracepoints.</summary>
`fail_tests.bt`:
```c
#!/usr/bin/env bpftrace
usdt:./build/src/test/test_bitcoin:test:check_if_attached {
printf("the 'check_if_attached' test should have failed\n");
}
usdt:./build/src/test/test_bitcoin:test:expensive_section {
printf("the 'expensive_section' test should have failed\n");
}
```
Run the unit tests with `./build/src/test/test_bitcoin` and start `bpftrace fail_tests.bt -p $(pidof test_bitcoin)` in a separate terminal. The unit tests should fail with:
```
Running 594 test cases...
test/util_trace_tests.cpp(31): error: in "util_trace_tests/test_tracepoint_check_if_attached": check false has failed
test/util_trace_tests.cpp(51): error: in "util_trace_tests/test_tracepoint_manual_tracepoint_active_check": check false has failed
*** 2 failures are detected in the test module "Bitcoin Core Test Suite"
```
</details>
These links might provide more contextual information for reviewers:
- [How SystemTap Userspace Probes Work by eklitzke](https://eklitzke.org/how-sytemtap-userspace-probes-work) (actually an example on Bitcoin Core; mentions that with semaphores "the overhead for an untraced process is effectively zero.")
- [libbpf comment on USDT semaphore handling](1596a09b5d/src/usdt.c (L83-L92)) (can recommend the whole comment for background on how the tracepoints and tracing tools work together)
- https://sourceware.org/systemtap/wiki/UserSpaceProbeImplementation#Semaphore_Handling
ACKs for top commit:
willcl-ark:
utACK 0de3e96e33
laanwj:
re-ACK 0de3e96e33
jb55:
utACK 0de3e96e33
vasild:
ACK 0de3e96e33
Tree-SHA512: 0e5e0dc5e0353beaf5c446e4be03d447e64228b1be71ee9972fde1d6fac3fac71a9d73c6ce4fa68975f87db2b2bf6eee2009921a2a145e24d83a475d007a559b
This pull request addresses a minor issues in the REST-interface.md documentation:
Missing Comma in JSON Example: In the "Query UTXO set" section, a missing comma after the "desc" field in the JSON example has been added to ensure valid JSON syntax.
c189eec848 doc: release note for mempoolrullrbf removal (Greg Sanders)
d47297c6aa rpc: Mark fullrbf and bip125-replaceable as deprecated (Greg Sanders)
04a5dcee8a docs: remove requirement to signal bip125 (Greg Sanders)
111a23d9b3 Remove -mempoolfullrbf option (Greg Sanders)
Pull request description:
Given https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30493 and the related discussion on network uptake it's probably not helpful to have an option for a feature that will not be respected by the network in any meaningful way.
Wallet changes can be done in another PR on its own cadence to account for possible fingerprinting, waiting for fullrbf logic to permeate the network, etc.
ACKs for top commit:
stickies-v:
re-ACK c189eec848
achow101:
ACK c189eec848
murchandamus:
ACK c189eec848
rkrux:
reACK c189eec848
Tree-SHA512: 9447f88f8f291c56c5bde70af0a91b0a4f5163aaaf173370fbfdaa3c3fd0b44120b14d3a1977f7ee10e27ffe9453f8a70dd38aad0ffb8c39cf145049d2550730
While we will only outwardly support Windows 10+, due to an issue in
mingw-w64, we can't set the *-subsystem-version values higher than to
target Windows 8, so do that as a best effort.
Issue:
The text mentions that the `createwallet` command should use the options `disable_private_keys=true, blank=true`, but the provided command only includes `disable_private_keys=true`, missing the `blank=true` option.
Correction:
Added `blank=true` to the command to match the options described in the text.
Explanation:
The `blank=true` option is necessary to create a blank wallet. Including this option ensures the command matches the options specified in the text.
This pull request fixes grammatical errors in the 'multisig-tutorial.md' document.
Corrections:
1. Incorrect Phrase "As can been seen":
- Before:
There are discussions about eliminating this redundancy, as can been seen in the issue #17190 (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/17190).
- After:
There are discussions about eliminating this redundancy, as can be seen in the issue #17190 (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/17190).
2. Clarity Improvement in a Sentence:
- Before:
Note that at least two descriptors are usually used, one for internal derivation paths and external ones.
- After:
Note that at least two descriptors are usually used, one for internal derivation paths and one for external ones.
Explanation:
- Corrected "been" to "be" to fix the grammatical error.
- Added "one for" before "external ones" to improve clarity and parallel structure in the sentence.
These minor corrections enhance the readability and professionalism of the documentation. Thank you for considering this pull request.
9f71cff6ab doc: Use relative hyperlinks in release-process.md (Jeremy Rand)
Pull request description:
Improves usability with offline clones of the documentation.
Refs
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30025#issuecomment-2093081127
ACKs for top commit:
maflcko:
review ACK 9f71cff6ab
Tree-SHA512: 475603556e111ec21e656e9d105f742e6881fbfce220347951c96406ffe8a71da0b10a0631dd2da89f59e9b76d5d9980b3e5c8f97a9c2562ff58422ae41d1343
This pull request fixes a word order error in developer-notes.md.
Before:
"In cases where do you call .c_str(), you might want to additionally check that the string does not contain embedded '\0' characters..."
After:
"In cases where you do call .c_str(), you might want to additionally check that the string does not contain embedded '\0' characters..."
Explanation:
The sentence had incorrect word order, making it grammatically incorrect. Rearranging "do you" to "you do" corrects the sentence, improving the readability and clarity of the documentation.
e60cecc811 doc: add release note for 31156 (Martin Zumsande)
fc7dfb3df5 test: Don't enforce BIP94 on regtest unless specified by arg (Martin Zumsande)
Pull request description:
The added arg `-test=bip94` is only used in a functional test for BIP94. This is done because the default regtest consensus rules should follow mainnet, not testnet.
Fixes#31137.
ACKs for top commit:
achow101:
ACK e60cecc811
tdb3:
cr and light test ACK e60cecc811
rkrux:
tACK e60cecc811
BrandonOdiwuor:
utACK e60cecc811
laanwj:
Code review ACK e60cecc811
Tree-SHA512: ca2f322f89d8808dfc3565fe020d2615cfcc110e188a02128ad7108fef51c735b33d55b5e6a70c505d78f7291f3c635dc7dfbcd78be1348d4d6e483883be4216
0ea84bc362 test: explicitly check boolean verbosity is disallowed (tdb3)
7a2e6b68cd doc: add rpc guidance for boolean verbosity avoidance (tdb3)
698f302df8 rpc: disallow boolean verbosity in getorphantxs (tdb3)
63f5e6ec79 test: add entry and expiration time checks (tdb3)
808a708107 rpc: add entry time to getorphantxs (tdb3)
56bf302714 refactor: rename rpc_getorphantxs to rpc_orphans (tdb3)
7824f6b077 test: check that getorphantxs is hidden (tdb3)
ac68fcca70 rpc: disallow undefined verbosity in getorphantxs (tdb3)
Pull request description:
Implements follow-up suggestions from #30793.
- Now disallows undefined verbosity levels (below and above valid values) (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30793#discussion_r1786093549)
- Disallows boolean verbosity (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30793#discussion_r1788273274) and adds guidance to developer-notes
- Checks that `getorphantxs` is a hidden rpc (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30793#discussion_r1786107786)
- Adds a test for `expiration` time
- Adds `entry` time to the returned orphan objects (verbosity >=1) to relieve the user from having to calculate it from `expiration`. Also adds associated test. (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30793#discussion_r1743687732)
- Minor cleanup (blank line removal and log message move) (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30793#discussion_r1786092641)
Included a commit to rename the test to a more generic `get_orphans` to better accommodate future orphanage-related RPCs (e.g. `getorphanangeinfo`). Can drop the refactor commit from this PR if people feel strongly about it.
ACKs for top commit:
achow101:
ACK 0ea84bc362
glozow:
utACK 0ea84bc362
rkrux:
tACK 0ea84bc362
itornaza:
tACK 0ea84bc362
Tree-SHA512: e48a088f333ebde132923072da58e970461e74362d0acebbc799c3043d5727cdf5f28e82b43cb38bbed27c603df6710695dba91ff0695e623ad168e985dce08e
Before this commit, we would always prepare tracepoint arguments
regardless of the tracepoint being used or not. While we already made
sure not to include expensive arguments in our tracepoints, this
commit introduces gating to make sure the arguments are only prepared
if the tracepoints are actually used. This is a win-win improvement
to our tracing framework. For users not interested in tracing, the
overhead is reduced to a cheap 'greater than 0' compare. As the
semaphore-gating technique used here is available in bpftrace, bcc,
and libbpf, users interested in tracing don't have to change their
tracing scripts while profiting from potential future tracepoints
passing slightly more expensive arguments. An example are mempool
tracepoints that pass serialized transactions. We've avoided the
serialization in the past as it was too expensive.
Under the hood, the semaphore-gating works by placing a 2-byte
semaphore in the '.probes' ELF section. The address of the semaphore
is contained in the ELF note providing the tracepoint information
(`readelf -n ./src/bitcoind | grep NT_STAPSDT`). Tracing toolkits
like bpftrace, bcc, and libbpf increase the semaphore at the address
upon attaching to the tracepoint. We only prepare the arguments and
reach the tracepoint if the semaphore is greater than zero. The
semaphore is decreased when detaching from the tracepoint.
This also extends the "Adding a new tracepoint" documentation to
include information about the semaphores and updated step-by-step
instructions on how to add a new tracepoint.
