is exact match
In the next commit, we start using BlockConnected/BlockDisconnected
callbacks to establish tx depth, rather than querying the chain
directly.
Currently, BlockUntilSyncedToCurrentChain will return early if
the best block processed by the wallet is a descendant of the node'tip.
That means that in the case of a re-org, it won't wait for the
BlockDisconnected callbacks that have been enqueued during the re-org
but have not yet been triggered in the wallet.
Change BlockUntilSyncedToCurrentChain to only return early if the
wallet's m_last_block_processed matches the tip exactly. This ensures
that there are no BlockDisconnected or BlockConnected callbacks
in-flight.
At wallet loading, we rely on chain state querying to retrieve
height of txn, to do so we ensure that lock order is respected
between cs_main and cs_wallet.
If wallet loaded is the wallet-tool one, all wallet txn will
show up with a height of zero. It doesn't matter as confirmation
height is not used by wallet-tool.
Reorder arguments and document Confirmation calls to avoid
ambiguity.
Fixes nits left from #16624
fa2c44c3cc test: Add ASSERT_DEBUG_LOG to unit test framework (MarcoFalke)
fa1936f57b logging: Add member for arbitrary print callbacks (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Similar to `assert_debug_log` in the functional test framework
Top commit has no ACKs.
Tree-SHA512: aa9eaeca386b61d806867c04a33275f6eb4624fa5bf50f2928d16c83f5634bac96bcac46f9e8eda3b00b4251c5f12d7b01d6ffd84ba8e05c09eeec810cc31251
To do so we update CValidationInterface::BlockDisconnect to take a
CBlockIndex pointing to the block being disconnected.
This new parameter will be use in the following commit to establish
wallet height.
Suggested https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/17304#discussion_r341194391
by Gregory Sanders <gsanders87@gmail.com>
Reason for keeping the `return true` `return false` verbosity is that more code
will be added after the ReserveKeyFromKeyPool() call before returning.
4671fc3d9e Expand on wallet_balance.py comment from https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16766\#issuecomment-527563982 (Jeremy Rubin)
91f3073f08 Update release notes to mention changes to IsTrusted and impact on wallet (Jeremy Rubin)
8f174ef112 Systematize style of IsTrusted single line if (Jeremy Rubin)
b49dcbedf7 update variable naming conventions for IsTrusted (Jeremy Rubin)
5ffe0d1449 Update comment in test/functional/wallet_balance.py (Jeremy Rubin)
a550c58267 Update wallet_balance.py test to reflect new behavior (Jeremy Rubin)
5dd7da4ccd Reuse trustedParents in looped calls to IsTrusted (Jeremy Rubin)
595f09d6de Cache tx Trust per-call to avoid DoS (Jeremy Rubin)
dce032ce29 Make IsTrusted scan parents recursively (Jeremy Rubin)
Pull request description:
This slightly modifies the behavior of IsTrusted to recursively check the parents of a transaction. Otherwise, it's possible that a parent is not IsTrusted but a child is. If a parent is not trusted, then a child should not be either.
This recursive scan can be a little expensive, so ~it might be beneficial to have a way of caching IsTrusted state, but this is a little complex because various conditions can change between calls to IsTrusted (e.g., re-org).~ I added a cache which works per call/across calls, but does not store the results semi-permanently. Which reduces DoS risk of this change. There is no risk of untrusted parents causing a resource exploitation, as we immediately return once that is detected.
This is a change that came up as a bug-fix esque change while working on OP_SECURETHEBAG. You can see the branch where this change is important here: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/master...JeremyRubin:stb-with-rpc?expand=1. Essentially, without this change, we can be tricked into accepting an OP_SECURETHEBAG output because we don't properly check the parents. As this was a change which, on its own, was not dependent on OP_SECURETHEBAG, I broke it out as I felt the change stands on its own by fixing a long standing wallet bug.
The test wallet_balance.py has been corrected to meet the new behavior. The below comment, reproduced, explains what the issue is and the edge cases that can arise before this change.
# Before `test_balance()`, we have had two nodes with a balance of 50
# each and then we:
#
# 1) Sent 40 from node A to node B with fee 0.01
# 2) Sent 60 from node B to node A with fee 0.01
#
# Then we check the balances:
#
# 1) As is
# 2) With transaction 2 from above with 2x the fee
#
# Prior to #16766, in this situation, the node would immediately report
# a balance of 30 on node B as unconfirmed and trusted.
#
# After #16766, we show that balance as unconfirmed.
#
# The balance is indeed "trusted" and "confirmed" insofar as removing
# the mempool transactions would return at least that much money. But
# the algorithm after #16766 marks it as unconfirmed because the 'taint'
# tracking of transaction trust for summing balances doesn't consider
# which inputs belong to a user. In this case, the change output in
# question could be "destroyed" by replace the 1st transaction above.
#
# The post #16766 behavior is correct; we shouldn't be treating those
# funds as confirmed. If you want to rely on that specific UTXO existing
# which has given you that balance, you cannot, as a third party
# spending the other input would destroy that unconfirmed.
#
# For example, if the test transactions were:
#
# 1) Sent 40 from node A to node B with fee 0.01
# 2) Sent 10 from node B to node A with fee 0.01
#
# Then our node would report a confirmed balance of 40 + 50 - 10 = 80
# BTC, which is more than would be available if transaction 1 were
# replaced.
The release notes have been updated to note the new behavior.
ACKs for top commit:
ariard:
Code Review ACK 4671fc3, maybe extend DoS protection in a follow-up PR.
fjahr:
Code review ACK 4671fc3d9e
ryanofsky:
Code review ACK 4671fc3d9e. Changes since last review: 2 new commits adding suggested release note and python test comment, also a clean rebase with no changes to the earlier commits. The PR description is more comprehensive now, too. Looks good!
promag:
Code review ACK 4671fc3d9e.
Tree-SHA512: 6b183ff425304fef49724290053514cb2770f4a2350dcb83660ef24af5c54f7c4c2c345b0f62bba60eb2d2f70625ee61a7fab76a7f491bb5a84be5c4cc86b92f
436ad43643 Fix issue with conflicted mempool tx in listsinceblock (Adam Jonas)
Pull request description:
Closes#8752 by bringing back abandoned #10470.
This now checks that returned transactions are not conflicting with any transactions that are filtered out by the given blockhash and add a functional test to prevent this in the future.
For more context, #8757 was closed in favor of #10470.
ACKs for top commit:
instagibbs:
utACK 436ad43643
kallewoof:
utACK 436ad43643
jonatack:
I'm not qualifed to give an ACK here but 436ad43643 appears reasonable. Built/ran tests/verified that this test fails without the change in rpcwallet.cpp:
Tree-SHA512: 63d75cd3d3f19fc84dc38899b200c96179b82b24db263cd0116ee5b715265be647157855c2e35912d2fbc49c7b37db9375d6aab0ac672f0f09bece8431de5ea9
c98bd13e67 replace asserts in RPC code with CHECK_NONFATAL and add linter (Adam Jonas)
Pull request description:
- Replace instances of assert in /rpc files and rpcwallet with CHECK_NONFATAL(condition)
- Add a linter to prevent future usage of assert being used in RPC code
ref https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/17192
ACKs for top commit:
practicalswift:
ACK c98bd13e67 -- diff looks correct
Tree-SHA512: a16036b6bbcca73a5334665f66e17e1756377d582317568291da1d727fc9cf8c84bac9d9bd099534e1be315345336e5f7b66b93793135155f320dc5862a2d875
ScriptPubKeyMan is only using UnsetWalletFlagWithDB to unset the blank
wallet flag. Just make that it's own function and not expose the flag
writing directly.
This does not change behavior.
d314e8a818 refactor: Replace all uses of boost::optional with our own Optional type (Wladimir J. van der Laan)
Pull request description:
Replace all uses of boost::optional with our own Optional type. Luckily, there aren't so many.
After this:
- `boost::optional` is no longer used directly (only through `Optional` which is an alias for it)
- `boost/optional.hpp` is only included in one place
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
ACK d314e8a818
practicalswift:
ACK d314e8a818 -- diff looks correct + satisfying to see incremental progress towards the goal of a Boost free future :)
jtimon:
ACK d314e8a818
fanquake:
ACK d314e8a818
Tree-SHA512: b43e0017af81b07b5851377cd09624f114510ac5b9018d037664b58ad0fc8e893e30946b61f8f5e21e39125925bf9998a81f2226b468aab2df653ee57ed3213d
After this:
- `boost::optional` is no longer used directly (only through `Optional`
which is an alias for it)
- `boost/optional.hpp` is only included in one place
362ded410b Avoid using g_rpc_node global in wallet code (Russell Yanofsky)
8922d7f6b7 scripted-diff: Remove g_connman, g_banman globals (Russell Yanofsky)
e6f4f895d5 Pass NodeContext, ConnMan, BanMan references more places (Russell Yanofsky)
4d5448c76b MOVEONLY: Move NodeContext struct to node/context.h (Russell Yanofsky)
301bd41a2e scripted-diff: Rename InitInterfaces to NodeContext (Russell Yanofsky)
Pull request description:
This change is mainly a naming / organization change intended to simplify #10102. It:
- Renames struct InitInterfaces to struct NodeContext and moves it from
src/init.h to src/node/context.h. This is a cosmetic change intended to make
the point of the struct more obvious.
- Gets rid of BanMan and ConnMan globals making them NodeContext members
instead. Getting rid of these globals has been talked about in past as a way
to implement testing and simulations. Making them NodeContext members is a
way of keeping them accessible without the globals.
- Splits g_rpc_interfaces global into g_rpc_node and g_rpc_chain globals. This
better separates node and wallet rpc methods. Node RPC methods should have
access NodeContext, while wallet RPC methods should only have indirect access
to node functionality via interfaces::Chain.
- Adds NodeContext& references to interfaces::Chain class and the
interfaces::MakeChain() function. This is needed to access ConnMan and BanMan
instances without the globals.
- Gets rid of redundant Node and Chain instances in Qt tests. This is
needed due to the previous MakeChain change, and also makes test setup a
little more straightforward. More cleanup could be done in the future, but it
will require deduplication of bitcoind, bitcoin-qt, and TestingSetup init
code.
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
ACK 362ded410b
Tree-SHA512: 9ae6ff1e33423291d1e52056bac95e0874538390892a6e83c4c115b3c73155a8827c0191b46eb3d14e3b3f6c23ccb08095490880fbc3188026319c71739f7db2
f3b51eb935 Fix occurences of c_str() used with size() to data() (Wladimir J. van der Laan)
Pull request description:
Using `data()` better communicates the intent here.
~~Also, depending on how `c_str()` is implemented, this fixes undefined behavior: The part of the string after the first NULL character might have undefined contents (or even be inaccessible, worst case).~~ Apparently [this is no longer an issue with C++11](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/17281#discussion_r339742128).
ACKs for top commit:
fjahr:
Code review ACK f3b51eb
practicalswift:
ACK f3b51eb935 -- diff looks correct, `data()` more idiomatic
ryanofsky:
Code review ACK f3b51eb935. Most of these calls (including one in crypter.cpp) are passing text strings, not binary strings likely to contain `\0` and were probably safe before, but much better to avoid the possibility of bugs like this.
Tree-SHA512: 842e1bdd37efc4ece2ecb87ca34962aafef0a192180051def630607e349dc9c8b4e562481fff3de474515f493b4ee3ea53b00269a801a66e625326a38dfce5b8
