Since https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25454 we keep track of the last
GETHEADERS request that was sent and wasn't responded to. So far, every incoming
HEADERS message is treated as a response to whatever GETHEADERS was last sent,
regardless of its contents.
This commit makes this tracking more accurate, by only treating HEADERS messages
which (1) are empty, (2) connect to our existing block header tree, or (3) are a
continuation of a low-work headers sync as responses that clear the "outstanding
GETHEADERS" state (m_last_getheaders_timestamp).
That means that HEADERS messages which do not satisfy any of the above criteria
will be ignored, not triggering a GETHEADERS, and potentially (for now, but see
later commit) increase misbehavior score.
4b7d984269 lint: add markdown hyperlink checker (willcl-ark)
Pull request description:
Potential followup to: #30025
This should prevent us reintroducing broken markdown links.
It does not test "online" (external) links, only those within this repo. Both relative and absolute links are parsed successfully if they resolve.
ACKs for top commit:
maflcko:
re-utACK 4b7d984269
davidgumberg:
reACK 4b7d984269
Tree-SHA512: 9bc40d700b73499c046bb76157bc139f32ec3850f64ef813bbf7f18f9c01a253abe6a857d6f559890165f2bd26e7742c05d86232cd9b8efb33ff85d735f4f095
This adds a markdown hyperlink check task to the lint test_runner. It
relies on having the [`mlc`](https://crates.io/crates/mlc) binary found
on $PATH, but will fail with `success` if the binary is not found.
`mlc` is also added to the ci/04_install.sh script run by the
containerfile.
Note that broken markdown hyperlinks will be detected in untracked
markdown files found in a dirty working directory (including e.g.
.venv).
2fd34ba504 Add sanity checks for various ATMPArgs booleans (Greg Sanders)
20d8936d8b [refactor] make some members MemPoolAccept-wide (glozow)
cbbfe719b2 cpfp carveout is excluded in packages (glozow)
69f7ab05ba Add m_allow_sibling_eviction as separate ATMPArgs flag (Greg Sanders)
57ee3029dd Add description for m_test_accept (Greg Sanders)
Pull request description:
First few commits of https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28984 to set the stage for the package RBF logic.
These refactors are preparation for evaluating an RBF in a multi-proposed-transaction context instead of only a single proposed transaction. Also, carveouts and sibling evictions only should work in single RBF cases so add logic to preclude multi-tx cases in the future.
No behavior changes aside from bailing earlier from failed carve-outs.
ACKs for top commit:
glozow:
reACK 2fd34ba504 via range-diff
sr-gi:
utACK [2fd34ba](2fd34ba504)
theStack:
re-ACK 2fd34ba504
Tree-SHA512: 5071c5b8d9b8d2c9faa278c8c4df31de288cb407a68e4d55544c588caff6c86160cce7825453549c6ed69e29d9ccb5ee2d4a518b18f563bfb12f2ced073fe42a
542e13b293 rpc: Enhance metadata of the dumptxoutset output (Fabian Jahr)
4d8e5edbaa assumeutxo: Add documentation on dumptxoutset serialization format (Fabian Jahr)
c14ed7f384 assumeutxo: Add test for changed coin size value (Fabian Jahr)
de95953d87 rpc: Optimize serialization disk space of dumptxoutset (Fabian Jahr)
Pull request description:
The second attempt at implementing the `dumptxoutset` space optimization as suggested in #25675. Closes#25675.
This builds on the work done in #26045, addresses open feedback, adds some further improvements (most importantly usage of compact size), documentation, and an additional test.
The [original snapshot at height 830,000](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29551) came in at 10.82 GB. With this change, the same snapshot is 8.94 GB, a reduction of 17.4%.
This also enhances the metadata of the output file and adds the following data to allow for better error handling and make future upgrades easier:
- A newly introduced utxo set magic
- A version number
- The network magic
- The block height
ACKs for top commit:
achow101:
ACK 542e13b293
TheCharlatan:
Re-ACK 542e13b293
theStack:
ACK 542e13b293
Tree-SHA512: 0825d30e5c3c364062db3c6cbca4e3c680e6e6d3e259fa70c0c2b2a7020f24a47406a623582040988d5c7745b08649c31110df4c10656aa25f3f27eb35843d99
The behavior is not new, but this rule exits earlier than before.
Previously, a carve out could have been granted in PreChecks() but then
nullified in PackageMempoolChecks() when CheckPackageLimits() is called
with the default limits.
154b2b2296 [fuzz] V3_MAX_VSIZE and effective ancestor/descendant size limits (glozow)
a29f1df289 [policy] restrict all v3 transactions to 10kvB (glozow)
d578e2e354 [policy] explicitly require non-v3 for CPFP carve out (glozow)
Pull request description:
Opening for discussion / conceptual review.
We like the idea of a smaller maximum transaction size because:
- It lowers potential replacement cost (i.e. harder to do Rule 3 pinning via gigantic transaction)
- They are easier to bin-pack in block template production
- They equate to a tighter memory limit in data structures that are bounded by a number of transactions (e.g. orphanage and vExtraTxnForCompact). For example, the current memory bounds for orphanage is 100KvB * 100 = 40MB, and guaranteeing 1 tx per peer would require reserving a pretty large space.
History for `MAX_STANDARD_TX_WEIGHT=100KvB` (copied from https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29873#issuecomment-2115459510):
- 2010-09-13 In 3df62878c3 satoshi added a 100kB (MAX_BLOCK_SIZE_GEN/5 with MBS_GEN = MAX_BLOCK_SIZE/2) limit on new transactions in CreateTransaction()
- 2013-02-04 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/2273 In gavin gave that constant a name, and made it apply to transaction relay as well
Lowering `MAX_STANDARD_TX_WEIGHT` for all txns is not being proposed, as there are existing apps/protocols that rely on large transactions. However, it's been brought up that we should consider this for TRUCs (which is especially designed to avoid Rule 3 pinning).
This reduction should be ok because using nVersion=3 isn't standard yet, so this wouldn't break somebody's existing use case. If we find that this is too small, we can always increase it later. Decreasing would be much more difficult.
~[Expected size of a commitment transaction](https://github.com/lightning/bolts/blob/master/03-transactions.md#expected-weight-of-the-commitment-transaction) is within (900 + 172 * 483 + 224) / 4 = 21050vB~ EDIT: this is incorrect, but perhaps not something that should affect how we choose this number.
ACKs for top commit:
sdaftuar:
ACK 154b2b2296
achow101:
ACK 154b2b2296
instagibbs:
ACK 154b2b2296
t-bast:
ACK 154b2b2296
murchandamus:
crACK 154b2b2296
Tree-SHA512: 89392a460908a8ea9f547d90e00f5181de0eaa9d2c4f2766140a91294ade3229b3d181833cad9afc93a0d0e8c4b96ee2f5aeda7c50ad7e6f3a8320b9e0c5ae97
6629d1d0f8 test: improve robustness of connect_nodes() (furszy)
Pull request description:
Decoupled from #27837 because this can help other too, found it investigating a CI failure https://cirrus-ci.com/task/5805115213348864?logs=ci#L3200.
The `connect_nodes` function in the test framework relies on a stable number of peer
connections to verify that the new connection between the nodes is successfully established.
This approach is fragile, as any of the peers involved in the process can drop, lose, or
create a connection at any step, causing subsequent `wait_until` checks to stall indefinitely
even when the peers in question were connected successfully.
This commit improves the situation by using the nodes' subversion and the connection
direction (inbound/outbound) to identify the exact peer connection and perform the
checks exclusively on it.
ACKs for top commit:
stratospher:
reACK 6629d1d.
achow101:
ACK 6629d1d0f8
maflcko:
utACK 6629d1d0f8
AngusP:
re-ACK 6629d1d0f8
Tree-SHA512: 5f345c0ce49ea81b643e97c5cffd133e182838752c27592fcdeac14ad10919fb4b7ff38e289e42a7c3c638a170bd0d0b7a9cd493898997a2082a7b7ceef4aeeb
1e54d61c46 test: add coverage for `mapped_as` from `getrawaddrman` (brunoerg)
8c2714907d net: rpc: return peer's mapped AS in getrawaddrman (brunoerg)
Pull request description:
This PR adds two new fields in `getrawaddrman` RPC: "mapped_as" and "source_mapped_as". These fields are used to return the ASN (Autonomous System Number) mapped to the peer and its source. With these informations we can have a better view of the bucketing logic with ASMap specially in projects like [addrman-observer](https://github.com/0xb10c/addrman-observer).
ACKs for top commit:
fjahr:
Code review ACK 1e54d61c46
virtu:
ACK [1e54d61](1e54d61c46)
0xB10C:
ACK 1e54d61c46
glozow:
ACK 1e54d61c46
Tree-SHA512: af86bcc7a2e69bebd3fa9eaa2e527e0758c44c0a958de7292514d5f99f8f01f5df3bae11400451268e0255f738ff3acccc77f48fe129937512f1e9d9963c4c5e
Test addresses are being mapped according to the ASMap
file provided properly. Compare the result of the `getrawaddrman`
RPC with the result from the ASMap Health Check.
b3efb48673 protocol: make message types constexpr (Vasil Dimov)
2fa9de06c2 net: make the list of known message types a compile time constant (Vasil Dimov)
Pull request description:
Turn the `std::vector` to `std::array` because it is cheaper and allows us to have the number of the messages as a compile time constant: `ALL_NET_MESSAGE_TYPES.size()` which can be used in future code to build other `std::array`s with that size.
---
This change is part of https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29418 but it makes sense on its own and would be good to have it, regardless of the fate of https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29418. Also, if this is merged, that would reduce the size of https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29418, thus the current standalone PR.
ACKs for top commit:
achow101:
ACK b3efb48673
jonatack:
ACK b3efb48673
maflcko:
utACK b3efb48673🎊
willcl-ark:
ACK b3efb48673
Tree-SHA512: 6d3860c138c64514ebab13d97ea67893e2d346dfac30a48c3d9bc769a1970407375ea4170afdb522411ced306a14a9af4eede99e964d1fb1ea3efff5d5eb57af
The 'connect_nodes' function in the test framework relies
on a stable number of peer connections to verify the new
connection between the nodes is successfully established.
This approach is fragile, as any of the peers involved in
the process can drop, lose, or create a connection at any
step, causing subsequent 'wait_until' checks to stall
indefinitely even when the peers in question are connected
successfully.
This commit improves the situation by using the nodes' subversion
and the connection direction (inbound/outbound) to identify the
exact peer connection and perform the checks exclusively on it.
d51fbab4b3 wallet, test: Be able to always swap BDB endianness (Ava Chow)
0b753156ce test: Test bdb_ro dump of wallet without reset LSNs (Ava Chow)
c1984f1282 test: Test dumping dbs with overflow pages (Ava Chow)
fd7b16e391 test: Test dumps of other endian BDB files (Ava Chow)
6ace3e953f bdb: Be able to make byteswapped databases (Ava Chow)
d9878903fb Error if LSNs are not reset (Ava Chow)
4d7a3ae78e Berkeley RO Database fuzz test (TheCharlatan)
3568dce9e9 tests: Add BerkeleyRO to db prefix tests (Ava Chow)
70cfbfdadf wallettool: Optionally use BERKELEY_RO as format when dumping BDB wallets (Ava Chow)
dd57713f6e Add MakeBerkeleyRODatabase (Ava Chow)
6e50bee67d Implement handling of other endianness in BerkeleyRODatabase (Ava Chow)
cdd61c9cc1 wallet: implement independent BDB deserializer in BerkeleyRODatabase (Ava Chow)
ecba230979 wallet: implement BerkeleyRODatabase::Backup (Ava Chow)
0c8e728476 wallet: implement BerkeleyROBatch (Ava Chow)
756ff9b478 wallet: add dummy BerkeleyRODatabase and BerkeleyROBatch classes (Ava Chow)
ca18aea5c4 Add AutoFile::seek and tell (Ava Chow)
Pull request description:
Split from #26596
This PR adds `BerkeleyRODatabase` which is an independent implementation of a BDB file parser. It provides read only access to a BDB file, and can therefore be used as a read only database backend for wallets. This will be used for dumping legacy wallet records and migrating legacy wallets without the need for BDB itself.
Wallettool's `dump` command is changed to use `BerkeleyRODatabase` instead of `BerkeleyDatabase` (and `CWallet` itself) to demonstrate that this parser works and to test it against the existing wallettool functional tests.
ACKs for top commit:
josibake:
reACK d51fbab4b3
TheCharlatan:
Re-ACK d51fbab4b3
furszy:
reACK d51fbab4b3
laanwj:
re-ACK d51fbab4b3
theStack:
ACK d51fbab4b3
Tree-SHA512: 1e7b97edf223b2974eed2e9eac1179fc82bb6359e0a66b7d2a0c8b9fa515eae9ea036f1edf7c76cdab2e75ad994962b134b41056ccfbc33b8d54f0859e86657b
8950053636 test: remove unneeded `-maxorphantx=1000` settings (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
It's unclear what the motivation for increasing the orphan pool is here, and it seems that this not needed at all. None of these tests involve orphan transactions explicitly, and if they would occur occasionally, there is no good reason to prefer a value of 1000 over the default of 100 (see DEFAULT_MAX_ORPHAN_TRANSACTIONS).
ACKs for top commit:
maflcko:
utACK 8950053636
edilmedeiros:
Tested ACK 8950053636
AngusP:
tACK 8950053636
glozow:
ACK 8950053636 From skimming the tests, it appears that none of these need a larger `-maxorphantx`.
Tree-SHA512: 81d4a4fb2ea92b97119f21cbc6c4b1240d863269932e6adf4982aead9726f20652523a4707add3ad38eb332d4452de41de6735265f22e62298f3b4b45de75a57
9365baa489 test: add conflicting topology test case (Greg Sanders)
Pull request description:
We want to ensure that even if topologies
that are acceptable are relaxed, like
removing package-not-child-with-unconfirmed-parents, that we don't end up accepting packages we shouldn't.
ACKs for top commit:
glozow:
reACK 9365baa489
rkrux:
reACK [9365baa](9365baa489)
Tree-SHA512: d58661064ca099ac0447c331a5020c74c0cdfe24259aa875592805bbd63de1bf23aa7ced9ff485fef90dc0602fcb997e631aaf1aa2e9805d2cf5f0e5c9b2f0e2
It's unclear what the motivation for increasing the orphan pool is, and
it seems that this not needed at all. None of these tests involve orphan
transactions explicitly, and if they would occur occasionally, there is
no good reason to prefer a value of 1000 over the default of 100 (see
DEFAULT_MAX_ORPHAN_TRANSACTIONS).
9408a04e42 tests, fuzz: use new NUMS_H const (josibake)
b946f8a4c5 crypto: add NUMS_H const (josibake)
Pull request description:
Broken out from #28122
---
[BIP341](https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0341.mediawiki#constructing-and-spending-taproot-outputs) defines a NUMS point `H` as *H = lift_x(0x50929b74c1a04954b78b4b6035e97a5e078a5a0f28ec96d547bfee9ace803ac0)* which is [constructed](11af7015de/src/modules/rangeproof/main_impl.h (L16)) by taking the hash of the standard uncompressed encoding of the [secp256k1](https://www.secg.org/sec2-v2.pdf) base point G as X coordinate."
Add this as a constant so it can be used in our codebase. My primary motivation is BIP352 specifies a special case for when taproot spends use `H` as the internal key, but outside of BIP352 it seems generally useful to have `H` in the codebase, for testing or other use cases.
ACKs for top commit:
paplorinc:
re-ACK 9408a04e42
achow101:
ACK 9408a04e42
theStack:
Code-review ACK 9408a04e42
Tree-SHA512: ad84492f5d635c0cb05bd82546079ded7e5138e95361f20d8285a9ad6e69c10ee2cc3fe46e16b46ef03c4253c8bee1051911c6b91264c90c3b1ad33a824bff4b
cbc6c440e3 doc: add comments and release-notes for JSON-RPC 2.0 (Matthew Zipkin)
e7ee80dcf2 rpc: JSON-RPC 2.0 should not respond to "notifications" (Matthew Zipkin)
bf1a1f1662 rpc: Avoid returning HTTP errors for JSON-RPC 2.0 requests (Matthew Zipkin)
466b90562f rpc: Add "jsonrpc" field and drop null "result"/"error" fields (Matthew Zipkin)
2ca1460ae3 rpc: identify JSON-RPC 2.0 requests (Matthew Zipkin)
a64a2b77e0 rpc: refactor single/batch requests (Matthew Zipkin)
df6e3756d6 rpc: Avoid copies in JSONRPCReplyObj() (Matthew Zipkin)
09416f9ec4 test: cover JSONRPC 2.0 requests, batches, and notifications (Matthew Zipkin)
4202c170da test: refactor interface_rpc.py (Matthew Zipkin)
Pull request description:
Closes https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/2960
Bitcoin Core's JSONRPC server behaves with a special blend of 1.0, 1.1 and 2.0 behaviors. This introduces compliance issues with more strict clients. There are the major misbehaviors that I found:
- returning non-200 HTTP codes for RPC errors like "Method not found" (this is not a server error or an HTTP error)
- returning both `"error"` and `"result"` fields together in a response object.
- different error-handling behavior for single and batched RPC requests (batches contain errors in the response but single requests will actually throw HTTP errors)
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15495 added regression tests after a discussion in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15381 to kinda lock in our RPC behavior to preserve backwards compatibility.
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12435 was an attempt to allow strict 2.0 compliance behind a flag, but was abandoned.
The approach in this PR is not strict and preserves backwards compatibility in a familiar bitcoin-y way: all old behavior is preserved, but new rules are applied to clients that opt in. One of the rules in the [JSON RPC 2.0 spec](https://www.jsonrpc.org/specification#request_object) is that the kv pair `"jsonrpc": "2.0"` must be present in the request. Well, let's just use that to trigger strict 2.0 behavior! When that kv pair is included in a request object, the [response will adhere to strict JSON-RPC 2.0 rules](https://www.jsonrpc.org/specification#response_object), essentially:
- always return HTTP 200 "OK" unless there really is a server error or malformed request
- either return `"error"` OR `"result"` but never both
- same behavior for single and batch requests
If this is merged next steps can be:
- Refactor bitcoin-cli to always use strict 2.0
- Refactor the python test framework to always use strict 2.0 for everything
- Begin deprecation process for 1.0/1.1 behavior (?)
If we can one day remove the old 1.0/1.1 behavior we can clean up the rpc code quite a bit.
ACKs for top commit:
cbergqvist:
re ACK cbc6c440e3
ryanofsky:
Code review ACK cbc6c440e3. Just suggested changes since the last review: changing uncaught exception error code from PARSE_ERROR to MISC_ERROR, renaming a few things, and adding comments.
tdb3:
re ACK for cbc6c440e3
Tree-SHA512: 0b702ed32368b34b29ad570d090951a7aeb56e3b0f2baf745bd32fdc58ef68fee6b0b8fad901f1ca42573ed714b150303829cddad4a34ca7ad847350feeedb36
0fb17bf61a [log] updates in TxOrphanage (glozow)
b16da7eda7 [functional test] attackers sending mutated orphans (glozow)
6675f6428d [unit test] TxOrphanage handling of same-txid-different-witness txns (glozow)
8923edfc1f [p2p] allow entries with the same txid in TxOrphanage (glozow)
c31f148166 [refactor] TxOrphanage::EraseTx by wtxid (glozow)
efcc593017 [refactor] TxOrphanage::HaveTx only by wtxid (glozow)
7e475b9648 [p2p] don't query orphanage by txid (glozow)
Pull request description:
Part of #27463 in the "make orphan handling more robust" section.
Currently the main map in `TxOrphanage` is indexed by txid; we do not allow 2 transactions with the same txid into TxOrphanage. This means that if we receive a transaction and want to store it in orphanage, we'll fail to do so if a same-txid-different-witness version of the tx already exists in the orphanage. The existing orphanage entry can stay until it expires 20 minutes later, or until we find that it is invalid.
This means an attacker can try to block/delay us accepting an orphan transaction by sending a mutated version of the child ahead of time. See included test.
Prior to #28970, we don't rely on the orphanage for anything and it would be relatively difficult to guess what transaction will go to a node's orphanage. After the parent(s) are accepted, if anybody sends us the correct transaction, we'll end up accepting it. However, this is a bit more painful for 1p1c: it's easier for an attacker to tell when a tx is going to hit a node's orphanage, and we need to store the correct orphan + receive the parent before we'll consider the package. If we start out with a bad orphan, we can't evict it until we receive the parent + try the 1p1c, and then we'll need to download the real child, put it in orphanage, download the parent again, and then retry 1p1c.
ACKs for top commit:
AngusP:
ACK 0fb17bf61a
itornaza:
trACK 0fb17bf61a
instagibbs:
ACK 0fb17bf61a
theStack:
ACK 0fb17bf61a
sr-gi:
crACK [0fb17bf](0fb17bf61a)
stickies-v:
ACK 0fb17bf61a
Tree-SHA512: edcbac7287c628bc27036920c2d4e4f63ec65087fbac1de9319c4f541515d669fc4e5fdc30c8b9a248b720da42b89153d388e91c7bf5caf4bc5b3b931ded1f59
For JSON-RPC 2.0 requests we need to distinguish between
a missing "id" field and "id":null. This is accomplished
by making the JSONRPCRequest id property a
std::optional<UniValue> with a default value of
UniValue::VNULL.
A side-effect of this change for non-2.0 requests is that request which do not
specify an "id" field will no longer return "id": null in the response.
Avoid returning HTTP status errors for non-batch JSON-RPC 2.0 requests if the
RPC method failed but the HTTP request was otherwise valid. Batch requests
already did not return HTTP errors previously.
We want to ensure that even if topologies
that are acceptable are relaxed, like
removing package-not-child-with-unconfirmed-parents,
that we don't end up accepting packages we shouldn't.
e912717ff6 test: add missing comparison of node1's mempool in MempoolPackagesTest (umiumi)
Pull request description:
#29941 Recreated a pull request because there was a conflict. Trying to resolve the conflict but the old one automatically closed.
Add missing comparison for TODO comments in `mempool_packages.py`
Also, notice that the ancestor size limits and descendant size limits actually implemented in #21800 , so I removed the todo for those two size limits.
ACKs for top commit:
kevkevinpal:
ACK [e912717](e912717ff6)
achow101:
ACK e912717ff6
alfonsoromanz:
Tested ACK e912717ff6. The code looks good to me and the test execution is successful.
rkrux:
tACK [e912717](e912717ff6)
Tree-SHA512: 8cb51746b0547369344c9ceef59599bfe9c91d424687af5e24dc6641f9e99fb433515d79c724e71fd3d5e02994f0cef623d3674367b8296b05c3c6fcdde282ef
fd6a7d3a13 test: use sleepy wait-for-log in reindex readonly (Matthew Zipkin)
Pull request description:
Also rename the busy wait-for-log method to prevent recurrence. See https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27039#discussion_r1532578152
ACKs for top commit:
maflcko:
utACK fd6a7d3a13
achow101:
ACK fd6a7d3a13
tdb3:
ACK for fd6a7d3a13
rkrux:
ACK [fd6a7d3](fd6a7d3a13)
Tree-SHA512: 7ff0574833df1ec843159b35ee88b8bb345a513ac13ed0b72abd1bf330c454a3f9df4d927871b9e3d37bfcc07542b06ef63acef8e822cd18499adae8cbb0cda8
dd8fa86193 test: use tagged ephemeral MiniWallet instance in fill_mempool (Sebastian Falbesoner)
b2037ad4ae test: add MiniWallet tagging support to avoid UTXO mixing (Sebastian Falbesoner)
c8e6d08236 test: refactor: eliminate COINBASE_MATURITY magic number in fill_mempool (Sebastian Falbesoner)
4f347140b1 test: refactor: move fill_mempool to new module mempool_util (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
Different MiniWallet instances using the same mode (either ADDRESS_OP_TRUE, RAW_OP_TRUE or RAW_P2PK) currently always create and spend UTXOs with identical output scripts, which can cause unintentional tx dependencies (see e.g. the discussion in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29827#discussion_r1565443465). In order to avoid mixing of UTXOs between instances, this PR introduces the possibility to provide a MiniWallet tag name, that is used to derive a different internal key for the taproot construction, leading to a different P2TR output script. Note that since we use script-path spending and only the key-path is changed here, no changes in the MiniWallet spending logic are needed.
The new tagging option is then used in the `fill_mempool` helper to create an ephemeral wallet for the filling txs, as suggested in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29827#discussion_r1565964264. To avoid circular dependencies, `fill_mempool` is moved to a new module `mempool_util.py` first.
I'm still not sure if a generic word like "tag" is the right term for what this tries to achieve, happy to pick up better suggestions. Also, maybe passing a tag name is overkill and a boolean flag like "random_output_script" is sufficient?
ACKs for top commit:
glozow:
ACK dd8fa86193
achow101:
ACK dd8fa86193
rkrux:
tACK [dd8fa86](dd8fa86193)
brunoerg:
utACK dd8fa86193
Tree-SHA512: 5ef3558c3ef5ac32cfa79c8f751972ca6bceaa332cd7daac7e93412a88e30dec472cb041c0845b04abf8a317036d31ebddfc3234e609ed442417894c2bdeeac9
d53d848347 test: adds outbound eviction tests for non outbound-full-relay peers (Sergi Delgado Segura)
a8d9a0edc7 test: adds outbound eviction functional tests, updates comment in ConsiderEviction (Sergi Delgado Segura)
Pull request description:
## Motivation
While checking the outbound eviction code I realized a case was not considered within the comments, which in turn made me realize we had no functional tests for the outbound eviction case (when I went to check/add the test case).
This PR updates the aforementioned comment and adds functional tests to cover the outbound eviction logic, in addition to the existing unit tests found at `src/test/denialofservice_tests.cpp`.
ACKs for top commit:
davidgumberg:
reACK d53d848347
tdb3:
Re ACK for d53d848347
achow101:
ACK d53d848347
cbergqvist:
ACK d53d848347
Tree-SHA512: 633b84bb1229fe21e2f650c1beada33ca7f190b64eafd64df2266516d21175e5d652e019ff7114f00cb8bd19f5817dc19e65adf75767a88e24dc0842ce40c63e
b259b0e8d3 [Test] Assumeutxo: ensure failure when importing a snapshot twice (Alfonso Roman Zubeldia)
Pull request description:
I am getting familiar with the `assume_utxo` tests and I found that the scenario of trying to activate a snapshot twice is not covered. This test is to ensure failure when loading a snapshot if there is already a snapshot-based chainstate.
ACKs for top commit:
fjahr:
Code review ACK b259b0e8d3
kevkevinpal:
tACK [b259b0e](b259b0e8d3)
achow101:
ACK b259b0e8d3
rkrux:
tACK [b259b0e](b259b0e8d3)
Tree-SHA512: 3510861390d0e40cdad6861b728df04827a1b63e642f3d956aee66ed2770b1cb7e3aa3eb00c62eb9da0544703c943cc5296936c9ebfcac18c719741c354421bb
78e52f663f doc: rpc: fix submitpackage examples (stickies-v)
1a875d4049 rpc: update min package size error message in submitpackage (stickies-v)
f9ece258aa doc: rpc: submitpackage takes sorted array (stickies-v)
17f74512f0 test: add bounds checking for submitpackage RPC (stickies-v)
Pull request description:
`submitpackage` requires the package to be topologically sorted with the child being the last element in the array, but this is not documented in the RPC method or the error messages.
Also sneaking in some other minor improvements that I found while going through the code:
- Informing the user that `package` needs to be an array of length between `1` and `MAX_PACKAGE_COUNT` is confusing when `IsChildWithPackage()` requires that the package size >= 2. Remove this check to avoid code duplication and sending a confusing error message.
- fixups to the `submitpackage` examples
ACKs for top commit:
fjahr:
re-ACK 78e52f663f
instagibbs:
ACK 78e52f663f
achow101:
ACK 78e52f663f
glozow:
utACK 78e52f663f
Tree-SHA512: a8845621bb1cbf784167fc7c82cb8ceb105868b65b26d3465f072d1c04ef3699e85a21a524ade805d423bcecbc34f7d5bff12f2c21cbd902ae1fb154193ebdc9
98570fe29b test: add coverage for parsing cryptographically invalid pubkeys (Sebastian Falbesoner)
c740b154d1 rpc: use `HexToPubKey` helper for all legacy pubkey-parsing RPCs (Sebastian Falbesoner)
100e8a75bf rpc: check and throw specific pubkey parsing errors in `HexToPubKey` (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
Parsing legacy public keys can fail for three reasons (in this order):
- pubkey is not in hex
- pubkey has an invalid length (not 33 or 65 bytes for compressed/uncompressed, respectively)
- pubkey is crytographically invalid, i.e. is not on curve (`CPubKey.IsFullyValid()` check)
Many RPCs currently perform these checks manually with different error messages, even though we already have a `HexToPubKey` helper. This PR puts all three checks in this helper (the length check was done on the call-sites before), adds specific error messages for each case, and consequently uses it for all RPCs that parse legacy pubkeys. This leads to deduplicated code and also to more consistent and detailed error messages for the user.
Affected RPC calls are `createmultisig`, `addmultisigaddress`, `importpubkey`, `importmulti`, `fundrawtransaction`, `walletcreatefundedpsbt`, `send` and `sendall`.
Note that the error code (-5 a.k.a. `RPC_INVALID_ADDRESS_OR_KEY`) doesn't change in any of the causes, so the changes are not breaking RPC API compatibility. Only the messages are more specific.
The last commits adds test coverage for the cryptographically invalid (not-on-curve) pubkey case which wasn't exercised before.
ACKs for top commit:
stratospher:
tested ACK 98570fe.
davidgumberg:
ACK 98570fe29b
Eunovo:
Tested ACK 98570fe29b
achow101:
ACK 98570fe29b
Tree-SHA512: cfa474176e95b5b18f3a9da28fdd9e87195cd58994c1331198f2840925fff322fd323a6371feab74a1b32e4b9ea58a6dc732fa751b4cdd45402c1029af609ece
ee67bba76c test: added test coverage to loadtxoutset (kevkevin)
Pull request description:
The functional test coverage did not cover the rpc error of "Couldn't open file..." for loadtxoutset and this test adds coverage for it
This adds coverage to this line
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/rpc/blockchain.cpp#L2777
ACKs for top commit:
maflcko:
ACK ee67bba76c
davidgumberg:
LGTM ACK ee67bba76c
rkrux:
ACK [ee67bba](ee67bba76c)
alfonsoromanz:
ACK ee67bba76c. Code looks good to me. I also ran `test/functional/feature_assumeutxo.py` to make sure all tests passes, including this one.
tdb3:
ACK for ee67bba76c
Tree-SHA512: 210a7eb928f625d2a8d9acb63ee83cb4aaec9c267e5a0c52ad219c2935466e2cdc68667e30ad29566e6060981587e5bec42805d296f6e60f9b3b13f3330575f2
fa09451f8e Add lint check for bitcoin-config.h include IWYU pragma (MarcoFalke)
dddd40ba82 scripted-diff: Add IWYU pragma keep to bitcoin-config.h includes (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
The `bitcoin-config.h` includes have issues:
* The header is incompatible with iwyu, because symbols may be defined or not defined. So the `IWYU pragma: keep` is needed to keep the include when a symbol is not defined on a platform. Compare the previous discussion in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29408#issuecomment-1948959711
* Guarding the includes by `HAVE_CONFIG_H` is verbose and brittle. Now that all build config dependencies have been removed from low level headers, the benefits are questionable, and the guard can be removed. The linter could also be tricked by guarding the include by `#if defined(HAVE_C0NFIG_H)` (`O` replaced by `0`). Compare the previous discussion in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29404#discussion_r1483189853 .
ACKs for top commit:
achow101:
ACK fa09451f8e
TheCharlatan:
ACK fa09451f8e
hebasto:
re-ACK fa09451f8e, only rebased since my recent [review](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29494#pullrequestreview-2028864535) (`timedata.cpp` removed in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29623).
Tree-SHA512: 47cb973f7f24bc625acc4e78683371863675d186780236d55d886cf4130e05a78bb04f1d731aae7088313b8e963a9677cc77cf518187dbd99d776f6421ca9b52
42fb5311b1 rpc: return warnings as an array instead of just a single one (stickies-v)
Pull request description:
The RPC documentation for `getblockchaininfo`, `getmininginfo` and `getnetworkinfo` states that "warnings" returns "any network and blockchain warnings". In practice, only a single warning (i.e. the latest one that is set) is returned, the other ones are ignored.
Fix that by returning all warnings as an array.
As a side benefit, clean up the GetWarnings() logic.
Since this PR changes the RPC result schema, I've added release notes. Users can temporarily revert to the old results by using `-deprecatedrpc=warnings`, until it's removed in a future version.
---
Some historical context from git log:
- when `GetWarnings` was introduced in 401926283a, it was used in the `getinfo` RPC, where only a [single error/warning was returned](401926283a (diff-7442c48d42cd5455a79915a0f00cce5e13359db46437a32b812876edb0a5ccddR250)) (similar to how it is now).
- later on, "warnings" RPC response fields were introduced, e.g. in ef2a3de25c, with the description [stating](ef2a3de25c (diff-1021bd3c74415ad9719bd764ad6ca35af5dfb33b1cd863c0be49bdf52518af54R411)) that it returned "any network warnings" but in practice still only a single warning was returned
ACKs for top commit:
achow101:
re-ACK 42fb5311b1
tdb3:
Re ACK for 42fb5311b1
TheCharlatan:
ACK 42fb5311b1
maflcko:
ACK 42fb5311b1🔺
Tree-SHA512: 4225ed8979cd5f030dec785a80e7452a041ad5703445da79d2906ada983ed0bbe7b15889d663d75aae4a77d92e302c93e93eca185c7bd47c9cce29e12f752bd3
This exercises the bug fixed by previous commits, where
we were unable to generate and sign for segwit redeem scripts
(in this case multisig redeem scripts) longer than 520 bytes.
and also, this adds coverage for legacy 15-15 multisig script
generation and signing.
And also, simplified the test a bit by re-using the already existing 'wallet_multi'
(instead of creating a new one). Plus, removed the 'is_bdb_compiled()' calls
which were there basically to check if the test has the wallet compiled or not.
The function exists merely to check that the node2's wallet
received the transactions created during all the 'do_multisig()'
calls.
It was created as a standalone function because 'getbalance()'
only returns something when transactions are confirmed. So,
the rationale on that time was to have a method mining blocks
to confirm the recently created transactions to be able to
check the incoming balance.
This is why we have the "moved" class field.
This change removes all the hardcoded amounts and verifies
node2 balance reception directly inside 'do_multisig()'.
Cleaning up the test in the following ways:
* Generate priv-pub key pairs used for testing only once (instead of doing it 4 times).
* Simplifies 'wmulti' wallet creation, load and unload process.
* Removes confusing class members initialized and updated inside a nested for-loop.
* Simplifies do_multisig() outpoint detection:
The outpoint index information is already contained in MiniWallet's
`send_to` return value dictionary as "sent_vout".
Co-authored-by: Sebastian Falbesoner <sebastian.falbesoner@gmail.com>
ffc674595c Replace remaining "520" magic numbers with MAX_SCRIPT_ELEMENT_SIZE (Jon Atack)
Pull request description:
Noticed these while reviewing BIPs yesterday.
It would be clearer and more future-proof to refer to their constant name.
ACKs for top commit:
instagibbs:
ACK ffc674595c
sipa:
ACK ffc674595c
achow101:
ACK ffc674595c
glozow:
ACK ffc674595c, agree it's clearer for these comments to refer to the greppable name of the limit rather than the number
Tree-SHA512: 462afc1c64543877ac58cb3acdb01d42c6d08abfb362802f29f3482d75401a2a8adadbc2facd222a9a9fefcaab6854865ea400f50ad60bec17831d29f7798afe
ec1f1abfef test:Validate UTXO snapshot with coin_height > base_height & amount > money_supply (jrakibi)
Pull request description:
### Ensure snapshot loading fails for coins exceeding base height
**Objective**: This test verifies that snapshot loading is correctly rejected for coins with a height greater than the base height.
**Update**:
- Added `test_invalid_snapshot_wrong_coin_code` to `feature_assumeutxo.py`.
- The test artificially sets a coin's height above 299 in a snapshot and checks for load failure.
- Edit: Added a test case for outputs whose amounts surpass the MAX_MONEY supply limit.
This implementation addresses the request for enhancing `assumeutxo` testing as outlined in issue #28648
---
**Edit: This is an explanation on how I arrive at content values: b"\x84\x58" and b"\xCA\xD2\x8F\x5A"**
You can use this tool to decode the utxo snapshot https://github.com/jrakibi/utxo-live
Here’s an overview of how it’s done:
The serialization format for a UTXO in the snapshot is as follows:
1. Transaction ID (txid) - 32 bytes
2. Output Index (outnum)- 4 bytes
3. VARINT (code) - A varible-length integer encoding the height and whether the transaction is a coinbase. The format of this VARINT is (height << 1) | coinbase_flag.
4. VARINT (amount_v) - A variable-length integer that represents a compressed format of the output amount (in satoshis).
For the test cases mentioned:
* **`b"\x84\x58"`** - This value corresponds to a VARINT representing the height and coinbase flag. Once we decode this code, we can extract the height and coinbase using `height = code_decoded >> 1` and `coinbase = code_decoded & 0x01`. In our case, with code_decoded = 728, it results in `height = 364` and `coinbase = 0`.
* **`b"\xCA\xD2\x8F\x5A"`** - This byte sequence represents a compressed amount value. The decompression function takes this value and translates it into a full amount in satoshis. In our case, the decompression of this amount translates to a number larger than the maximum allowed value of coins (21 million BTC)
ACKs for top commit:
fjahr:
re-ACK ec1f1abfef
maflcko:
ACK ec1f1abfef👑
achow101:
ACK ec1f1abfef
Tree-SHA512: 42b36fd1d76e9bc45861028acbb776bd2710c5c8bff2f75c751ed505995fbc1d4bc698df3be24a99f20bcf6a534615d2d9678fb3394162b88133eaec88ca2120
fa9be2f795 lint: [doc] Clarify Windows line endings (CR LF) not to be used (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
It has been this case since the linter was introduced years ago. Given a misunderstanding (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28074#issuecomment-2088028856), clarify the docs.
ACKs for top commit:
brunoerg:
ACK fa9be2f795
Tree-SHA512: be714db9df533e0962ed84102ffdb72717902949b930d58cf5a79cba36297f6b2b1f75e65a2c1f46bcb8e2f4ad5d025f3d15210f468a5ec9631a580b74f923ea
e504b1fa1f test: Add test case for spending bare multisig (Brandon Odiwuor)
Pull request description:
Fixes https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29113
ACKs for top commit:
ajtowns:
ACK e504b1fa1f ; LGTM and just checking the 1-of-3 case seems fine
maflcko:
utACK e504b1fa1f
achow101:
ACK e504b1fa1f
willcl-ark:
reACK e504b1fa1f
Tree-SHA512: 641a12599efa34e1a3eb65b125318df326628fef3e6886410ea9e63a044664fad7bcad46d1d6f41ddc59630746b9963cedb569c2682b5940b32b9225883da8f2
The RPC documentation for `getblockchaininfo`, `getmininginfo` and
`getnetworkinfo` states that "warnings" returns "any network and
blockchain warnings". In practice, only a single warning is returned.
Fix that by returning all warnings as an array.
As a side benefit, cleans up the GetWarnings() logic.
c6be144c4b Remove timedata (stickies-v)
92e72b5d0d [net processing] Move IgnoresIncomingTxs to PeerManagerInfo (dergoegge)
7d9c3ec622 [net processing] Introduce PeerManagerInfo (dergoegge)
ee178dfcc1 Add TimeOffsets helper class (stickies-v)
55361a15d1 [net processing] Use std::chrono for type-safe time offsets (stickies-v)
038fd979ef [net processing] Move nTimeOffset to net_processing (dergoegge)
Pull request description:
[An earlier approach](1d226ae1f9/) in #28956 involved simplifying and refactoring the network-adjusted time calculation logic, but this was eventually [left out](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28956#issuecomment-1904214370) of the PR to make it easier for reviewers to focus on consensus logic changes.
Since network-adjusted time is now only used for warning/informational purposes, cleaning up the logic (building on @dergoegge's approach in #28956) should be quite straightforward and uncontroversial. The main changes are:
- Previously, we would only calculate the time offset from the first 199 outbound peers that we connected to. This limitation is now removed, and we have a proper rolling calculation. I've reduced the set to 50 outbound peers, which seems plenty.
- Previously, we would automatically use the network-adjusted time if the difference was < 70 mins, and warn the user if the difference was larger than that. Since there is no longer any automated time adjustment, I've changed the warning threshold to ~~20~~ 10 minutes (which is an arbitrary number).
- Previously, a warning would only be raised once, and then never again until node restart. This behaviour is now updated to 1) warn to log for every new outbound peer for as long as we appear out of sync, 2) have the RPC warning toggled on/off whenever we go in/out of sync, and 3) have the GUI warn whenever we are out of sync (again), but limited to 1 messagebox per 60 minutes
- no more globals
- remove the `-maxtimeadjustment` startup arg
Closes#4521
ACKs for top commit:
sr-gi:
Re-ACK [c6be144](c6be144c4b)
achow101:
reACK c6be144c4b
dergoegge:
utACK c6be144c4b
Tree-SHA512: 1063d639542e882186cdcea67d225ad1f97847f44253621a8c4b36c4d777e8f5cb0efe86bc279f01e819d33056ae4364c3300cc7400c087fb16c3f39b3e16b96
e518a8bf8a [functional test] opportunistic 1p1c package submission (glozow)
87c5c524d6 [p2p] opportunistically accept 1-parent-1-child packages (glozow)
6c51e1d7d0 [p2p] add separate rejections cache for reconsiderable txns (glozow)
410ebd6efa [fuzz] break out parent functions and add GetChildrenFrom* coverage (glozow)
d095316c1c [unit test] TxOrphanage::GetChildrenFrom* (glozow)
2f51cd680f [txorphanage] add method to get all orphans spending a tx (glozow)
092c978a42 [txpackages] add canonical way to get hash of package (glozow)
c3c1e15831 [doc] restore comment about why we check if ptx HasWitness before caching rejected txid (glozow)
6f4da19cc3 guard against MempoolAcceptResult::m_replaced_transactions (glozow)
Pull request description:
This enables 1p1c packages to propagate in the "happy case" (i.e. not reliable if there are adversaries) and contains a lot of package relay-related code. See https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27463 for overall package relay tracking.
Rationale: This is "non-robust 1-parent-1-child package relay" which is immediately useful.
- Relaying 1-parent-1-child CPFP when mempool min feerate is high would be a subset of all package relay use cases, but a pretty significant improvement over what we have today, where such transactions don't propagate at all. [1]
- Today, a miner can run this with a normal/small maxmempool to get revenue from 1p1c CPFP'd transactions without losing out on the ones with parents below mempool minimum feerate.
- The majority of this code is useful for building more featureful/robust package relay e.g. see the code in #27742.
The first 2 commits are followups from #29619:
- https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29619#discussion_r1523094034
- https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29619#discussion_r1519819257
Q: What makes this short of a more full package relay feature?
(1) it only supports packages in which 1 of the parents needs to be CPFP'd by the child. That includes 1-parent-1-child packages and situations in which the other parents already pay for themselves (and are thus in mempool already when the package is submitted). More general package relay is a future improvement that requires more engineering in mempool and validation - see #27463.
(2) We rely on having kept the child in orphanage, and don't make any attempt to protect it while we wait to receive the parent. If we are experiencing a lot of orphanage churn (e.g. an adversary is purposefully sending us a lot of transactions with missing inputs), we will fail to submit packages. This limitation has been around for 12+ years, see #27742 which adds a token bucket scheme for protecting package-related orphans at a limited rate per peer.
(3) Our orphan-handling logic is somewhat opportunistic; we don't make much effort to resolve an orphan beyond asking the child's sender for the parents. This means we may miss packages if the first sender fails to give us the parent (intentionally or unintentionally). To make this more robust, we need receiver-side logic to retry orphan resolution with multiple peers. This is also an existing problem which has a proposed solution in #28031.
[1]: see this writeup and its links 02ec218c78/bip-0331.mediawiki (propagate-high-feerate-transactions)
ACKs for top commit:
sr-gi:
tACK e518a8bf8a
instagibbs:
reACK e518a8bf8a
theStack:
Code-review ACK e518a8bf8a📦
dergoegge:
light Code review ACK e518a8bf8a
achow101:
ACK e518a8bf8a
Tree-SHA512: 632579fbe7160cb763bbec6d82ca0dab484d5dbbc7aea90c187c0b9833b8d7c1e5d13b8587379edd3a3b4a02a5a1809020369e9cd09a4ebaf729921f65c15943
f8a141c2da test: Don't rely on incentive incompatible replacement in mempool_accept_v3.py (Suhas Daftuar)
Pull request description:
In the sibling eviction test, we're currently testing that a transaction with ancestor feerate (and mining score) of 179 s/b is able to replace a transaction with ancestor feerate (and mining score) of 300 s/b, due to a shortcoming in our current RBF rules.
In preparation for fixing our RBF rules to not allow such replacements, fix the test by bumping the fee of the replacement to be a bit higher.
ACKs for top commit:
glozow:
ACK f8a141c2da
instagibbs:
ACK f8a141c2da
Tree-SHA512: 0babe60be2f41634301e434fedb7abc765daaa37c2c280acb569eaf02a793369d81401ab02b8ae1689bda4872f475bd4c2f48cae4a54a61ece20db0a014e23ac
f19f0a2e5a test: Run framework unit tests in parallel (tdb3)
Pull request description:
Functional test framework unit tests are currently run prior to all other functional tests.
This PR enables execution of the test framework unit tests in parallel with the functional tests, rather than before the functional tests, saving runtime and more efficiently using available cores.
This is a follow up to https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29470#issuecomment-1962313977
### New behavior:
1) When running all tests, the framework unit tests are run in parallel with the other tests (unless explicitly skipped with `--exclude`). This parallelization introduces marginal time savings when running all tests, depending on the machine used. As an example, a 2-3% time savings (9 seconds) was observed on a machine using `--jobs=18` (with 18 available cores).
2) When running specific functional tests, framework unit tests are now skipped by default. Framework unit tests can be added by including `feature_framework_unit_tests.py` in the list of specific tests being executed. The rationale for skipping by default is that if the tester is running specific functional tests, there is a conscious decision to focus testing, and choosing to run all tests (where unit tests are run by default) would be a next step.
3) The `--skipunit` option is now removed since unit tests are parallelized (they no longer delay other tests). Unit tests are treated equally as functional tests.
### Implementation notes:
Since `TextTestRunner` can be noisy (even with verbosity=0, and therefore trigger job failure through the presence of non-failure stderr output), the approach taken was to send output to stdout, and forward test result (as determined by `TestResult` returned). This aligns with the previous check for unit test failure (`if not result.wasSuccessful():`).
This approach was tested by inserting `self.assertEquals(True, False)` into test_framework/address.py and seeing specifics of the failure reported.
```
135/302 - feature_framework_unit_tests.py failed, Duration: 0 s
stdout:
.F
======================================================================
FAIL: test_bech32_decode (test_framework.address.TestFrameworkScript.test_bech32_decode)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/home/dev/myrepos/bitcoin/test/functional/test_framework/address.py", line 228, in test_bech32_decode
self.assertEqual(True, False)
AssertionError: True != False
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ran 2 tests in 0.003s
FAILED (failures=1)
stderr:
```
There was an initial thought to parallelize the execution of the unit tests themselves (i.e. run the 12 unit test files in parallel), however, this is not anticipated to further reduce runtime meaningfully and is anticipated to add unnecessary complexity.
ACKs for top commit:
maflcko:
ACK f19f0a2e5a🌽
achow101:
ACK f19f0a2e5a
kevkevinpal:
Approach ACK f19f0a2e5a
Tree-SHA512: ab9f82c30371b2242bc7a263ea0e25d35e68e2ddf223d2a55498ad940d1e5b73bba76cce8b264d71e2ed31b753430d8ef8d57efc1e4fd9ced7fb845e27f4f47e
Peer protection is only given to outbound-full-relay peers. Add a negative
test to check that other type of outbound peers are not given protection under
the circumstances that outbound-full-relay would
3e9c736a26 test: fix accurate multisig sigop count (BIP16), add unit test (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
In the course of reviewing #29589 I noticed the following buggy call-site of `CScriptOp.decode_op_n` in the CScript's `GetSigOpCount` method:
4cc99df44a/test/functional/test_framework/script.py (L591-L593)
This should be `lastOpcode` rather than `opcode`. The latter is either OP_CHECKMULTISIG or OP_CHECKMULTISIGVERIFY at this point, so `decode_op_n` would result in an error. Also, in `CScript.raw_iter`, we have to return the op as `CScriptOp` type instead of a bare integer, otherwise we can't call the decode method on it. To prevent this in the future, add some simple unit tests for `GetSigOpCount`.
Note that this was unnoticed, as the code part was never hit so far in the test framework.
ACKs for top commit:
achow101:
ACK 3e9c736a26
Christewart:
ACK 3e9c736a26
rkrux:
tACK [3e9c736](3e9c736a26)
hernanmarino:
tACK 3e9c736a26
Tree-SHA512: 51647bb6d462fbd101effd851afdbd6ad198c0567888cd4fdcac389a9fb4bd3d7e648095c6944fd8875d36272107ebaabdc62d0e2423289055588c12294d05a7
c4f857cc30 test: Extends wait_for_getheaders so a specific block hash can be checked (Sergi Delgado Segura)
Pull request description:
Fixes https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18614
Previously, `wait_for_getheaders` would check whether a node had received **any** getheaders message. This implied that, if a test needed to check for a specific block hash within a headers message, it had to make sure that it was checking the desired message. This normally involved having to manually clear `last_message`. This method, apart from being too verbose, was error-prone, given an undesired `getheaders` would make tests pass.
This adds the ability to check for a specific block_hash within the last `getheaders` message.
ACKs for top commit:
achow101:
ACK c4f857cc30
BrandonOdiwuor:
crACK c4f857cc30
cbergqvist:
ACK c4f857cc30
stratospher:
tested ACK c4f857c. went through all getheaders messages sent in the tests and checked that it's the one we want.
Tree-SHA512: afc9a31673344dfaaefcf692ec2ab65958c3d4c005f5f3af525e9960f0622d8246d5311e59aba06cfd5c9e0ef9eb90a7fc8e210f030bfbe67b897c061efdeed1
3bf4f8db66 lint: scripted-diff verification also requires GNU grep (Sjors Provoost)
Pull request description:
I noticed while trying to verify all historical `scripted-diff:` commits on macOS that some scripts require GNU sed.
For example 0d6d2b650d uses `git grep --perl-regexp`.
ACKs for top commit:
hernanmarino:
cr ACK 3bf4f8db66
maflcko:
utACK 3bf4f8db66
achow101:
ACK 3bf4f8db66
alfonsoromanz:
Tested ACK 3bf4f8db66
kristapsk:
cr utACK 3bf4f8db66
Tree-SHA512: 09a060ab1bafad03df60d0f20c3dd1451850868dbd66ea38b18178b6230c1f06cf48622db82d9c51422d5689962ee0cd7aae0a31f84bd6d878215e6d73c1d47e
fa6ab0d020 rpc: Reword SighashFromStr error message (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Put quotes around the parameter. In theory, `std::quoted` should be used, but that seems overkill.
This should avoid error messages such as `A valid sighash parameter is not a valid sighash parameter. (code -8)`.
Also, it should fix fuzz false positives when searching for internal bugs in the `rpc` fuzz target. For example, `ZGVzY3JpcHRvcnByb2Nlc3Nwc2J0XP9ce1tdXOVJbnRlcm5hbCBidWcgZGV0ZWN0ZWQAXQ0AHfcAXQ1p7TJv`.
ACKs for top commit:
dergoegge:
ACK fa6ab0d020
brunoerg:
utACK fa6ab0d020
Tree-SHA512: e2c0cc0126de61873a863af38b7b0a23d2dadd596ca0418dae2ad091e8acfb6a9d657c376d59187bb008989dc78c6b44fe518590e5217e4049a867b220c9fb18
