fa40168ab3 Remove unused bits from service flags enum (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Remove service bits that haven't been observed on the active network for years and won't ever be observed on the network with this meaning. Keeping this dead assignment in our source code forever doesn't add any value.
I somehow forgot to do this in commit fa0d0ff6e1.
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
Code review ACK fa40168ab3
practicalswift:
cr ACK fa40168ab3
fanquake:
ACK fa40168ab3
Tree-SHA512: 376e5ac05940493cf2209fea60515c843e978c4b476f2524f6bf7a37a646d237c3ddcf6c0fa23641f9ba550f625609703d9b51b4be631a7f2a90e1092b557232
1583498fb6 Send and require SENDADDRV2 before VERACK (Pieter Wuille)
c5a8919660 Don't send 'sendaddrv2' to pre-70016 software (Pieter Wuille)
Pull request description:
BIP155 defines addrv2 and sendaddrv2 for all protocol versions, but some implementations reject messages they don't know. As a courtesy, don't send it to nodes with a version before 70016, as no software is known to support BIP155 that doesn't announce at least that protocol version number.
Also move the sending of sendaddrv2 earlier (before sending verack), as proposed in https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1043. This has the side effect that local address broadcast of torv3 will work (as it'll only trigger after we know whether or not the peer supports addrv2).
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
ACK 1583498fb6
jnewbery:
ACK 1583498fb6
jonatack:
ACK 1583498fb6
vasild:
ACK 1583498
Tree-SHA512: 3bd5833fa8c8567b6dedd99e4a9b6bb71c127aa66d5284b217503c86d597dc59aa7382c41f3a4bf561bb658b89db81d1a7703a700eef4ffc17cb916660e23a82
fa275e1539 test: Fix intermittent feature_taproot issue (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
The nodes might disconnect (e.g. due to "Timeout downloading block" https://cirrus-ci.com/task/5313800947630080?command=ci#L1763) and the test fails to continue.
Fix that by reconnecting the nodes.
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
code review ACK fa275e1539
Tree-SHA512: 2871183c8058d8292c9c4ef56ea3d19d5616ca712ebdaabb6609f8c9cd2e16c9ac2ce26aa1e94b346872b7b6fec56b59af151af83de3a5aa08bed01bfcc7187a
fa8abdc995 rpc: Use FeeModes doc helper in estimatesmartfee (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Not sure why this doesn't use the doc helper, probably an oversight?
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
Code review ACK fa8abdc995
Tree-SHA512: 1f2dc8356e3476ddcf9cafafa7f9865ad95bed1e3067c0edab8e3c483e374bdbdbecc066167554b4a1b479e28f6a52c4ae6a75a70c67ee4e1ff4f3ba36b04001
4e28753f60 feestimator: encapsulate estimation file logic (Antoine Poinsot)
e8ea6ad9c1 init: don't create a CBlockPolicyEstimator if we don't relay transactions (Antoine Poinsot)
86ff2cf202 Remove the remaining fee estimation globals (Antoine Poinsot)
03bfeee957 interface: remove unused estimateSmartFee method from node (Antoine Poinsot)
Pull request description:
If the `blocksonly` mode is turned on after running with transaction
relay enabled for a while, the fee estimation will serve outdated data
to both the internal wallet and to external applications that might be
feerate-sensitive and make use of `estimatesmartfee` (for example a
Lightning Network node).
This has already caused issues (for example https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16840 (C-lightning), or https://github.com/lightningnetwork/lnd/issues/2562 (LND)) and it seems prudent to fail rather than to give inaccurate values.
This fixes#16840, and closes#16890 which tried to fix the symptoms (RPC) but not the cause as mentioned by sdaftuar :
> If this is a substantial problem, then I would think we should take action to protect our own wallet users as well (rather than hide the results of what our fee estimation would do!).
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
re-ACK 4e28753f60👋
jnewbery:
utACK 4e28753f60
Tree-SHA512: c869cf03b86d8194002970bbc84662dae76874967949b9be0d9a4511a1eabcb1627c38aca3154da9dcece1a4c49ec02bd4f9fcca2ec310986e07904559e63ba8
fa6af31227 test: Document why syncwithvalidationinterfacequeue is needed in tests (MarcoFalke)
fa135a13b8 Revert "test: Add missing sync_all to wallet_balance test" (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
syncwithvalidationinterfacequeue is a hidden test-only RPC, so it should not be used when it is not needed. Thus, either remove it or explain why it is needed.
ACKs for top commit:
fjahr:
Code review ACK fa6af31227
Tree-SHA512: de30db4ab521184091ee5beeab02989138cf7cf05088f766a2fb106151b239310b63d5380cb79e2a072f72c5ae9513aecae8eb9c1c7be713771585c3cb04d63a
This adds a brief help text to `git-subtree-check.sh` and adds and an
option to do a full remote check instead of having two different code
paths with a successful exit status. Also make it explicit that the CI
is not doing this.
Tests that a fully signed transaction given to
signrawtransactionwithwallet is both unchanged and marked as complete.
This tests for a regression in 0.20 where the transaction would not be
marked as complete.
This moves the CBlockPolicyEstimator to the NodeContext, which get rids
of two globals and allows us to conditionally create the
CBlockPolicyEstimator (and to remove a circular dep).
Signed-off-by: Antoine Poinsot <darosior@protonmail.com>
fad7be584f test: Fix intermittent p2p_finerprint issue (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
A single sync_with_ping can't be used to drop a block announcement, as the block might be sent *after* the ping has been responded to.
Fix that by waiting for the block.
ACKs for top commit:
theStack:
ACK fad7be584f
Tree-SHA512: d43ba9d07273486858f65a26326cc6637ef743bf7b400e5048ba7eac266fb1893283e6503dd49f179caa1abab2977315fb70ba9fba34be9a817a74259d8e4034
1e62350ca2 refactor: Improve use of explicit keyword (Fabian Jahr)
c502a6dbfb lint: Use c++17 std in cppcheck linter (Fabian Jahr)
Pull request description:
I found the `extended-lint-cppcheck` linter still uses `std=c++11` when reviewing #20471. The only difference in the output after this change is one line is missing:
```
src/script/descriptor.cpp:159:5: warning: Struct 'PubkeyProvider' has a constructor with 1 argument that is not explicit. [noExplicitConstructor]
```
After some digging, I am still not sure why this one is ignored with c++17 when 40 other`noExplicitConstructor` warnings were still appearing.
In the second commit, I fix these warnings, adding `explicit` where appropriate and adding fixes to ignore otherwise.
ACKs for top commit:
practicalswift:
cr ACK 1e62350ca2: patch looks correct!
MarcoFalke:
review ACK 1e62350ca2
Tree-SHA512: dff7b324429a57160e217cf38d9ddbb6e70c6cb3d3e3e0bd4013d88e07afc2292c3df94d0acf7122e9d486322821682ecf15c8f2724a78667764c05d47f89a12
053b4fbad8 doc: Release note regarding -rpcauth validation (João Barbosa)
46001323b1 rpc: Validate -rpcauth arguments (João Barbosa)
d37c813a43 rpc: Refactor to process -rpcauth once (João Barbosa)
Pull request description:
Invalid `-rpcauth` arguments are currently silently ignored. This make server initialization fail if any `-rpcauth` is invalid.
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
review ACK 053b4fbad8
jonatack:
ACK 053b4fbad8
ryanofsky:
Code review ACK 053b4fbad8. Only changes since last review are moving a variable declaration and adding a comment, release notes, and a `const`.
Tree-SHA512: c99923d4a121f0c9f882b07f5402ea53e9b2d9455ad34468a094ffab1d64df26c82e1279734c0d42bc2e113eae7b581fbc3be52f3ed4a2d7450d11793afcf406
fada2dfcac 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 fada2dfcac. Although it could ignore (don't log) directories that lead to no permission error.
fanquake:
ACK fada2dfcac
Tree-SHA512: b475162cc3cd1574209d916605b229a79c8089714295f5e16569b71f958f0007d54dc76833938492d931387784588b11b73e3ef00f963540af42c079417f8d72
3ebde2143a [test] Fix wait condition in disconnect_p2ps (Amiti Uttarwar)
Pull request description:
#19315 currently has a [test failure](https://cirrus-ci.com/task/4545582645641216) because of a race. `disconnect_p2ps` is intended to have a `wait_until` clause that prevents this race, but the conditional doesn't match since its comparing two different object types. `MY_SUBVERSION` is defined in messages.py as a byte string, but is compared to the value returned by the RPC. This PR simply converts types to ensure they match, which should prevent the race from occurring.
HUGE PROPS TO jnewbery for discovering the issue 🔎
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
ACK 3ebde2143a
glozow:
Code review ACK 3ebde2143a
Tree-SHA512: ca096b80a3e4d757a645f38846d6dc89d6a3d35c3435513a72d278e305faddd4aff9e75a767941b51b2abbf59c82679bac1e9a0140d6f285efe3053e51bcc2a8
89bdad5b25 RPC/Wallet: unloadwallet: Allow specifying wallet_name param matching RPC endpoint (Luke Dashjr)
Pull request description:
Allow specifying the `wallet_name` param to `unloadwallet` on RPC wallet endpoints, so long as it matches the endpoint wallet.
ACKs for top commit:
jonatack:
ACK 89bdad5b25
MarcoFalke:
review ACK 89bdad5b25
Tree-SHA512: efb399c33f7b5596870a26a8680f453ca47aa7a6db4e550f9435d13044f1c4bad0ae11e8f0205213409d08b75c4188c3be782e54aafab1f65b97eb8cf5c252a9
MY_SUBVERSION is defined in messages.py as a byte string, but here we were
comparing this value to the value returned by the RPC. Convert to ensure the
types match.
3eb6f8b2e6 wallet (not for backport): improve upgradewallet error messages (Jon Atack)
ca8cd893bb wallet: fix and improve upgradewallet error responses (Jon Atack)
99d56e3571 wallet: fix and improve upgradewallet result responses (Jon Atack)
2498b04ce8 Don't upgrade to HD split if it is already supported (Andrew Chow)
c46c18b788 wallet: refactor GetClosestWalletFeature() (Jon Atack)
Pull request description:
This follows up on #18836 and #20282 to fix and improve the as-yet unreleased `upgradewallet` feature and also implement review follow-up in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18836#discussion_r519328607.
This PR fixes 4 upgradewallet issues:
- this bug: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20403#discussion_r526063920
- it returns nothing in the absence of an RPC error, which isn't reassuring for users
- it returns the same thing both in the case of a successful upgrade and when no upgrade took place
- the error message object is currently dead code
This PR fixes the above and provides:
...user feedback to not silently return without upgrading
```
{
"wallet_name": "disable private keys",
"previous_version": 169900,
"current_version": 169900,
"result": "Already at latest version. Wallet version unchanged."
}
```
...better feedback after successfully upgrading
```
{
"wallet_name": "watch-only",
"previous_version": 159900,
"current_version": 169900,
"result": "Wallet upgraded successfully from version 159900 to version 169900."
}
```
...helpful error responses
```
{
"wallet_name": "blank",
"previous_version": 169900,
"current_version": 169900,
"error": "Cannot downgrade wallet from version 169900 to version 159900. Wallet version unchanged."
}
{
"wallet_name": "blank",
"previous_version": 130000,
"current_version": 130000,
"error": "Cannot upgrade a non HD split wallet from version 130000 to version 169899 without upgrading to support pre-split keypool. Please use version 169900 or no version specified."
}
```
updated help:
```
upgradewallet ( version )
Upgrade the wallet. Upgrades to the latest version if no version number is specified.
New keys may be generated and a new wallet backup will need to be made.
Arguments:
1. version (numeric, optional, default=169900) The version number to upgrade to. Default is the latest wallet version.
Result:
{ (json object)
"wallet_name" : "str", (string) Name of wallet this operation was performed on
"previous_version" : n, (numeric) Version of wallet before this operation
"current_version" : n, (numeric) Version of wallet after this operation
"result" : "str", (string, optional) Description of result, if no error
"error" : "str" (string, optional) Error message (if there is one)
}
```
ACKs for top commit:
achow101:
ACK 3eb6f8b
MarcoFalke:
review ACK 3eb6f8b2e6 🛡
Tree-SHA512: b767314069e26b5933b123acfea6aa40708507f504bdb22884da020a4ca1332af38a7072b061e36281533af9f4e236d94d3c129daf6fe5b55241127537038eed
fa69c2c784 wallet: Do not treat default constructed types as None-type (MarcoFalke)
fac4e136fa refactor: Change pointer to reference because it can not be null (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Equating `0==None` and `""==None` is confusing, unneeded and undocumented
ACKs for top commit:
jonatack:
ACK fa69c2c784
achow101:
ACK fa69c2c784
Sjors:
tACK fa69c2c784 modulo `unset`
Tree-SHA512: c4c8d0ad80c6697621d356a9545caf28ca2facc82bb2fa8e70eceb52372d25f0685237c73688c4b01da0e75d213c77c0d45011a8bdfe81ea783d85f045786dac
b1f59d55d9 RPC/Wallet: unloadwallet: Clarify docs/error when both the RPC endpoint and wallet_name parameter specify a wallet (Luke Dashjr)
Pull request description:
Just documentation clarifications from #20448
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
review ACK b1f59d55d9
jonatack:
re-ACK b1f59d55d9 per `git diff e8303a0 b1f59d5`
Tree-SHA512: ac068b0aa7ceed49496367fdd9425b59dbba18b56e89b26afc22a6c8ece51f0b92a169cacd55740b1cadab2b32f4f8e8700e609066ab7e59d3b53c7891da585e
9f08780dd7 Use the correct incremental fee constant in bumpfee help (Jon Atack)
3f1e10b2b1 Update feeRate (BTC/kvB) to fee_rate (sat/vB) in wallet_bumpfee (Jon Atack)
1b3d700928 Allow zero-fee fundrawtxn and walletcreatefundedpsbt calls (Jon Atack)
Pull request description:
- Fixes https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20305/files#r525406176. A check to raise an error on zero-fee txns was mistakenly extended in a0d4957 from the bumpfee and send{toaddress, many} RPCs to also include fundrawtransaction and walletcreatefundedpsbt. This commit re-overrides zero fee rate checking for these two RPCs, not only for the feeRate (BTC/kvB) arg to return to previous behavior, but also for the new fee_rate (sat/vB) arg. Negative fee rates will still raise "amount out of range" by the MoneyRange check in src/bitcoin-tx.cpp::AmountFromValue.
- Updates a wallet bumpfee test from feeRate (BTC/kvB) to fee_rate (sat/vB)
- Fixes https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20305/files#r525405363 to use the correct incremental fee rate constant in the bumpfee help (thanks Marco Falke for the catch) and rectifies "1.000 sat/vB sat/vB" in the help to "1.000 sat/vB"
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
review ACK 9f08780dd7🐾
promag:
Code review ACK 9f08780dd7.
Xekyo:
Code review reACK 9f08780dd7.
Tree-SHA512: 413dfb4f23ebaf3d2ef210dd04610a843272e64eabba428699f5de4d646a86ac4911dab66b5e2f5ebea53b76e4be8347ef40824c1592c750d5eaa12579d3cdf6
8f7b930475 Drop the leading 0 from the version number (Andrew Chow)
Pull request description:
Removes the leading 0 from the version number. The minor version, which we had been using as the major version, is now the major version. The revision, which we had been using as the minor version, is now the minor version. The revision number is dropped. The build number is promoted to being part of the version number. This also avoids issues where it was accidentally not included in the version number.
The CLIENT_VERSION remains the same format as previous as previously, as the Major version was 0 so it never actually got included in it.
The user agent string formatter is updated to follow this new versioning.
***
Honestly I'm just tired of all of the people asking for "1.0" that maybe this'll shut them up. Skip the whole 1.0 thing and go straight to version 22.0!
Also, this means that the terminology we commonly use lines up with how the variables are named. So major versions are actually bumping the major version number, etc.
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
Code review ACK 8f7b930475
MarcoFalke:
review ACK 8f7b930475🎻
Tree-SHA512: b5c3fae14d4c0a9c0ab3b1db7c949ecc0ac3537646306b13d98dd0efc17c489cdd16d43f0a24aaa28e9c4a92ea360500e05480a335b03f9fb308010cdd93a436
as the feeRate argument should soon be deprecated.
Also loosen one test (and a similar one) that caused a one-off CI failure with:
expected message
'Insufficient total fee 0.00000141, must be at least 0.00001704 (oldFee 0.00000999 + incrementalFee 0.00000705)'
actual message
'Insufficient total fee 0.00000141, must be at least 0.00001712 (oldFee 0.00001007 + incrementalFee 0.00000705)'
A check to raise an error on zero-fee txns was mistakenly extended in commit
a0d4957 from the bumpfee and send{toaddress, many} RPCs to also include
fundrawtransaction and walletcreatefundedpsbt.
This commit overrides zero fee rate checking for these two RPCs, not only for
the feeRate (BTC/kvB) arg to return to previous behavior, but also for the new
fee_rate (sat/vB) arg.
