This adds a fuzz test that reimplements a naive reimplementation of
TxRequestTracker (with up to 16 fixed peers and 16 fixed txhashes),
and compares the real implementation against it.
Note that with this change we are no-longer including PTHREAD_* flags
when building libbitcoinconsensus.
Also note that we are including PTHREAD_LIBS in AM_PTHREAD_FLAGS
46fcac1e4b tests: Add fuzzing harness for ec_seckey_import_der(...) and ec_seckey_export_der(...) (practicalswift)
b667a90389 tests: Add fuzzing harness for SigHasLowR(...) and ecdsa_signature_parse_der_lax(...) (practicalswift)
Pull request description:
Add fuzzing harness for `SigHasLowR(...)` and `ecdsa_signature_parse_der_lax(...)`.
See [`doc/fuzzing.md`](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/fuzzing.md) for information on how to fuzz Bitcoin Core. Don't forget to contribute any coverage increasing inputs you find to the [Bitcoin Core fuzzing corpus repo](https://github.com/bitcoin-core/qa-assets).
Happy fuzzing :)
ACKs for top commit:
Crypt-iQ:
ACK 46fcac1e4b
Tree-SHA512: 11a4856a1efd9a04030a8c8aee2413fd5be1ea248147e649a48a55bacdf732bb48a19ee1ce2761d47d4dd61c9598aec53061b961b319ad824d539dda11a8ccf4
With this commit, make clean now removes coverage files from the
fuzzing directory. Without this, subsequent fuzzing runs would have
garbled coverage signals for files in the fuzz directory as
they were never deleted with make clean.
78c312c983 Replace current benchmarking framework with nanobench (Martin Ankerl)
Pull request description:
Replace current benchmarking framework with nanobench
This replaces the current benchmarking framework with nanobench [1], an
MIT licensed single-header benchmarking library, of which I am the
autor. This has in my opinion several advantages, especially on Linux:
* fast: Running all benchmarks takes ~6 seconds instead of 4m13s on
an Intel i7-8700 CPU @ 3.20GHz.
* accurate: I ran e.g. the benchmark for SipHash_32b 10 times and
calculate standard deviation / mean = coefficient of variation:
* 0.57% CV for old benchmarking framework
* 0.20% CV for nanobench
So the benchmark results with nanobench seem to vary less than with
the old framework.
* It automatically determines runtime based on clock precision, no need
to specify number of evaluations.
* measure instructions, cycles, branches, instructions per cycle,
branch misses (only Linux, when performance counters are available)
* output in markdown table format.
* Warn about unstable environment (frequency scaling, turbo, ...)
* For better profiling, it is possible to set the environment variable
NANOBENCH_ENDLESS to force endless running of a particular benchmark
without the need to recompile. This makes it to e.g. run "perf top"
and look at hotspots.
Here is an example copy & pasted from the terminal output:
| ns/byte | byte/s | err% | ins/byte | cyc/byte | IPC | bra/byte | miss% | total | benchmark
|--------------------:|--------------------:|--------:|----------------:|----------------:|-------:|---------------:|--------:|----------:|:----------
| 2.52 | 396,529,415.94 | 0.6% | 25.42 | 8.02 | 3.169 | 0.06 | 0.0% | 0.03 | `bench/crypto_hash.cpp RIPEMD160`
| 1.87 | 535,161,444.83 | 0.3% | 21.36 | 5.95 | 3.589 | 0.06 | 0.0% | 0.02 | `bench/crypto_hash.cpp SHA1`
| 3.22 | 310,344,174.79 | 1.1% | 36.80 | 10.22 | 3.601 | 0.09 | 0.0% | 0.04 | `bench/crypto_hash.cpp SHA256`
| 2.01 | 496,375,796.23 | 0.0% | 18.72 | 6.43 | 2.911 | 0.01 | 1.0% | 0.00 | `bench/crypto_hash.cpp SHA256D64_1024`
| 7.23 | 138,263,519.35 | 0.1% | 82.66 | 23.11 | 3.577 | 1.63 | 0.1% | 0.00 | `bench/crypto_hash.cpp SHA256_32b`
| 3.04 | 328,780,166.40 | 0.3% | 35.82 | 9.69 | 3.696 | 0.03 | 0.0% | 0.03 | `bench/crypto_hash.cpp SHA512`
[1] https://github.com/martinus/nanobench
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
ACK 78c312c983
Tree-SHA512: 9e18770b18b6f95a7d0105a4a5497d31cf4eb5efe6574f4482f6f1b4c88d7e0946b9a4a1e9e8e6ecbf41a3f2d7571240677dcb45af29a6f0584e89b25f32e49e
f19fdd47a6 test: add test for CChainState::ResizeCoinsCaches() (James O'Beirne)
8ac3ef4699 add ChainstateManager::MaybeRebalanceCaches() (James O'Beirne)
f36aaa6392 Add CChainState::ResizeCoinsCaches (James O'Beirne)
b223111da2 txdb: add CCoinsViewDB::ChangeCacheSize (James O'Beirne)
Pull request description:
This is part of the [assumeutxo project](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/projects/11):
Parent PR: #15606
Issue: #15605
Specification: https://github.com/jamesob/assumeutxo-docs/tree/master/proposal
---
In the assumeutxo implementation draft (#15056), once a UTXO snapshot is loaded, a new chainstate object is created after initialization. This means that we have to reclaim some of the cache that we've allocated to the original chainstate (per `dbcache=`) to repurpose for the snapshot chainstate.
Furthermore, it makes sense to have different cache allocations depending on which chainstate is more active. While the snapshot chainstate is working to get to the network tip (and the background validation chainstate is idle), it makes sense that the snapshot chainstate should have the majority of cache allocation. And contrariwise once the snapshot has reached network tip, most of the cache should be given to the background validation chainstate.
This set of changes (detailed in the commit messages) allows us to dynamically resize the various coins caches. None of the functionality introduced here is used at the moment, but will be in the next AU PR (which introduces `ActivateSnapshot`).
`ChainstateManager::MaybeRebalanceCaches()` defines the (somewhat normative) cache allocations between the snapshot and background validation chainstates. I'd be interested in feedback if anyone has thoughts on the proportions I've set there.
ACKs for top commit:
ajtowns:
weak utACK f19fdd47a6 -- didn't find any major problems, but not super confident that I didn't miss anything
fjahr:
Code review ACK f19fdd4
ryanofsky:
Code review ACK f19fdd47a6. Only change since last review is constructor cleanup (no change in behavior). I think the suggestions here from ajtowns and others are good, but shouldn't delay merging the PR (and hold up assumeutxo)
Tree-SHA512: fffb7847fb6993dd4a1a41cf11179b211b0b20b7eb5f7cf6266442136bfe9d43b830bbefcafd475bfd4af273f5573500594aa41fff03e0ed5c2a1e8562ff9269
ad6c34881d tests: Add fuzzing harness for CBlockPolicyEstimator::{Read,Write} (policy/fees.h) (practicalswift)
614e0807a8 tests: Add fuzzing harness for CBufferedFile::{SetPos,GetPos,GetType,GetVersion} (stream.h) (practicalswift)
7bcc71e5f8 tests: Add fuzzing harness for LoadExternalBlockFile(...) (validation.h) (practicalswift)
9823376030 tests: Add fuzzing harness for CBufferedFile (streams.h) (practicalswift)
f3aa659be6 tests: Add fuzzing harness for CAutoFile (streams.h) (practicalswift)
e507c0799d tests: Add serialization/deserialization fuzzing helpers WriteToStream(…)/ReadFromStream(…) (practicalswift)
e48094a506 tests: Add FuzzedAutoFileProvider which provides a CAutoFile interface to FuzzedDataProvider (practicalswift)
9dbcd6854c tests: Add FuzzedFileProvider which provides a FILE* interface to FuzzedDataProvider using fopencookie (practicalswift)
Pull request description:
Add fuzzing harnesses for `CAutoFile`, `CBufferedFile`, `LoadExternalBlockFile` and other `FILE*` consumers:
* Add `FuzzedFileProvider` which provides a `FILE*` interface to `FuzzedDataProvider` using `fopencookie`
* Add `FuzzedAutoFileProvider` which provides a `CAutoFile` interface to `FuzzedDataProvider`
* Add serialization/deserialization fuzzing helpers `WriteToStream(…)`/`ReadFromStream(…)`
* Add fuzzing harness for `CAutoFile` (`streams.h`)
* Add fuzzing harness for `CBufferedFile` (`streams.h`)
* Add fuzzing harness for `LoadExternalBlockFile(...)` (`validation.h`)
* Add fuzzing harness for `CBlockPolicyEstimator::Read` and `CBlockPolicyEstimator::Write` (`policy/fees.h`)
See [`doc/fuzzing.md`](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/fuzzing.md) for information on how to fuzz Bitcoin Core. Don't forget to contribute any coverage increasing inputs you find to the [Bitcoin Core fuzzing corpus repo](https://github.com/bitcoin-core/qa-assets).
Happy fuzzing :)
ACKs for top commit:
Crypt-iQ:
Tested ACK ad6c348
Tree-SHA512: a38e142608218496796a527d7e59b74e30279a2815450408b7c27a76ed600cebc6b88491e831665a0639671e2d212453fcdca558500bbadbeb32b267751f8f72
cca7c577d5 tests: Add fuzzing harness for ChaCha20Poly1305AEAD (practicalswift)
2fc4e5916c tests: Add fuzzing harness for ChaCha20 (practicalswift)
e9e8aac029 tests: Add fuzzing harness for CHKDF_HMAC_SHA256_L32 (practicalswift)
ec86ca1aaa tests: Add fuzzing harness for poly1305_auth(...) (practicalswift)
4cee53bba7 tests: Add fuzzing harness for AES256CBCEncrypt/AES256CBCDecrypt (practicalswift)
9352c32325 tests: Add fuzzing harness for AES256Encrypt/AES256Decrypt (practicalswift)
Pull request description:
Add fuzzing harness for `AES{CBC,}256{Encrypt,Decrypt}`, `poly1305_auth`, `CHKDF_HMAC_SHA256_L32`, `ChaCha20` and `ChaCha20Poly1305AEAD`.
See [`doc/fuzzing.md`](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/fuzzing.md) for information on how to fuzz Bitcoin Core. Don't forget to contribute any coverage increasing inputs you find to the [Bitcoin Core fuzzing corpus repo](https://github.com/bitcoin-core/qa-assets).
Happy fuzzing :)
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
ACK cca7c577d5
Tree-SHA512: cff9acefe370c12a3663aa55145371df835479c6ab8f6d81bbf84e0f81a9d6b0d94e45ec545f9dd5e1702744eaa7947a1f4ffed0171f446fc080369161afd740
fa525e4d1c net: Avoid wasting inv traffic during IBD (MarcoFalke)
fa06d7e934 refactor: block import implies IsInitialBlockDownload (MarcoFalke)
faba65e696 Add ChainstateManager::ActiveChainstate (MarcoFalke)
fabf3d64ff test: Add FeeFilterRounder test (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Tx-inv messages are ignored during IBD, so it would be nice if we told peers to not send them in the first place. Do that by sending two `feefilter` messages: One when the connection is made (and the node is in IBD), and another one when the node leaves IBD.
ACKs for top commit:
jamesob:
ACK fa525e4d1c ([`jamesob/ackr/19204.1.MarcoFalke.p2p_reduce_inv_traffic_d`](https://github.com/jamesob/bitcoin/tree/ackr/19204.1.MarcoFalke.p2p_reduce_inv_traffic_d))
naumenkogs:
utACK fa525e4
gzhao408:
ACK fa525e4d1c
jonatack:
re-ACK fa525e4 checked diff `git range-diff 19612ca fa8a66c fa525e4`, re-reviewed, ran tests, ran a custom p2p IBD behavior test at 9321e0f223.
hebasto:
re-ACK fa525e4d1c, only rebased since the [previous](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19204#pullrequestreview-429519667) review (verified with `git range-diff`).
Tree-SHA512: 2c22a5def9822396fca45d808b165b636f1143c4bdb2eaa5c7e977f1f18e8b10c86d4c180da488def38416cf3076a26de15014dfd4d86b2a7e5af88c74afb8eb
This replaces the current benchmarking framework with nanobench [1], an
MIT licensed single-header benchmarking library, of which I am the
autor. This has in my opinion several advantages, especially on Linux:
* fast: Running all benchmarks takes ~6 seconds instead of 4m13s on
an Intel i7-8700 CPU @ 3.20GHz.
* accurate: I ran e.g. the benchmark for SipHash_32b 10 times and
calculate standard deviation / mean = coefficient of variation:
* 0.57% CV for old benchmarking framework
* 0.20% CV for nanobench
So the benchmark results with nanobench seem to vary less than with
the old framework.
* It automatically determines runtime based on clock precision, no need
to specify number of evaluations.
* measure instructions, cycles, branches, instructions per cycle,
branch misses (only Linux, when performance counters are available)
* output in markdown table format.
* Warn about unstable environment (frequency scaling, turbo, ...)
* For better profiling, it is possible to set the environment variable
NANOBENCH_ENDLESS to force endless running of a particular benchmark
without the need to recompile. This makes it to e.g. run "perf top"
and look at hotspots.
Here is an example copy & pasted from the terminal output:
| ns/byte | byte/s | err% | ins/byte | cyc/byte | IPC | bra/byte | miss% | total | benchmark
|--------------------:|--------------------:|--------:|----------------:|----------------:|-------:|---------------:|--------:|----------:|:----------
| 2.52 | 396,529,415.94 | 0.6% | 25.42 | 8.02 | 3.169 | 0.06 | 0.0% | 0.03 | `bench/crypto_hash.cpp RIPEMD160`
| 1.87 | 535,161,444.83 | 0.3% | 21.36 | 5.95 | 3.589 | 0.06 | 0.0% | 0.02 | `bench/crypto_hash.cpp SHA1`
| 3.22 | 310,344,174.79 | 1.1% | 36.80 | 10.22 | 3.601 | 0.09 | 0.0% | 0.04 | `bench/crypto_hash.cpp SHA256`
| 2.01 | 496,375,796.23 | 0.0% | 18.72 | 6.43 | 2.911 | 0.01 | 1.0% | 0.00 | `bench/crypto_hash.cpp SHA256D64_1024`
| 7.23 | 138,263,519.35 | 0.1% | 82.66 | 23.11 | 3.577 | 1.63 | 0.1% | 0.00 | `bench/crypto_hash.cpp SHA256_32b`
| 3.04 | 328,780,166.40 | 0.3% | 35.82 | 9.69 | 3.696 | 0.03 | 0.0% | 0.03 | `bench/crypto_hash.cpp SHA512`
[1] https://github.com/martinus/nanobench
* Adds support for asymptotes
This adds support to calculate asymptotic complexity of a benchmark.
This is similar to #17375, but currently only one asymptote is
supported, and I have added support in the benchmark `ComplexMemPool`
as an example.
Usage is e.g. like this:
```
./bench_bitcoin -filter=ComplexMemPool -asymptote=25,50,100,200,400,600,800
```
This runs the benchmark `ComplexMemPool` several times but with
different complexityN settings. The benchmark can extract that number
and use it accordingly. Here, it's used for `childTxs`. The output is
this:
| complexityN | ns/op | op/s | err% | ins/op | cyc/op | IPC | total | benchmark
|------------:|--------------------:|--------------------:|--------:|----------------:|----------------:|-------:|----------:|:----------
| 25 | 1,064,241.00 | 939.64 | 1.4% | 3,960,279.00 | 2,829,708.00 | 1.400 | 0.01 | `ComplexMemPool`
| 50 | 1,579,530.00 | 633.10 | 1.0% | 6,231,810.00 | 4,412,674.00 | 1.412 | 0.02 | `ComplexMemPool`
| 100 | 4,022,774.00 | 248.58 | 0.6% | 16,544,406.00 | 11,889,535.00 | 1.392 | 0.04 | `ComplexMemPool`
| 200 | 15,390,986.00 | 64.97 | 0.2% | 63,904,254.00 | 47,731,705.00 | 1.339 | 0.17 | `ComplexMemPool`
| 400 | 69,394,711.00 | 14.41 | 0.1% | 272,602,461.00 | 219,014,691.00 | 1.245 | 0.76 | `ComplexMemPool`
| 600 | 168,977,165.00 | 5.92 | 0.1% | 639,108,082.00 | 535,316,887.00 | 1.194 | 1.86 | `ComplexMemPool`
| 800 | 310,109,077.00 | 3.22 | 0.1% |1,149,134,246.00 | 984,620,812.00 | 1.167 | 3.41 | `ComplexMemPool`
| coefficient | err% | complexity
|--------------:|-------:|------------
| 4.78486e-07 | 4.5% | O(n^2)
| 6.38557e-10 | 21.7% | O(n^3)
| 3.42338e-05 | 38.0% | O(n log n)
| 0.000313914 | 46.9% | O(n)
| 0.0129823 | 114.4% | O(log n)
| 0.0815055 | 133.8% | O(1)
The best fitting curve is O(n^2), so the algorithm seems to scale
quadratic with `childTxs` in the range 25 to 800.
748977690e Add asmap_direct fuzzer that tests Interpreter directly (Pieter Wuille)
7cf97fda15 Make asmap Interpreter errors fatal and fuzz test it (Pieter Wuille)
c81aefc537 Add additional effiency checks to sanity checker (Pieter Wuille)
fffd8dca2d Add asmap sanity checker (Pieter Wuille)
5feefbe6e7 Improve asmap Interpret checks and document failures (Pieter Wuille)
2b3dbfa5a6 Deal with decoding failures explicitly in asmap Interpret (Pieter Wuille)
1479007a33 Introduce Instruction enum in asmap (Pieter Wuille)
Pull request description:
This improves/documents the failure cases inside the asmap interpreter. None of the changes are bug fixes (they only change behavior for corrupted asmap files), but they may make things easier to follow.
In a second step, a sanity checker is added that effectively executes every potential code path through the asmap file, checking the same failure cases as the interpreter, and more. It takes around 30 ms to run for me for a 1.2 MB asmap file.
I've verified that this accepts asmap files constructed by https://github.com/sipa/asmap/blob/master/buildmap.py with a large dataset, and no longer accepts it with 1 bit changed in it.
ACKs for top commit:
practicalswift:
ACK 748977690e modulo feedback below.
jonatack:
ACK 748977690e code review, regular build/tests/ran bitcoin with -asmap, fuzz build/ran both fuzzers overnight.
fjahr:
ACK 748977690e
Tree-SHA512: d876df3859735795c857c83e7155ba6851ce839bdfa10c18ce2698022cc493ce024b5578c1828e2a94bcdf2552c2f46c392a251ed086691b41959e62a6970821
38e49ded8b tests: Add fuzzing harness for MessageSign, MessageVerify and other functions in util/message.h (practicalswift)
Pull request description:
Add fuzzing harness for `MessageSign`, `MessageVerify` and other functions in `util/message.h`.
See [`doc/fuzzing.md`](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/fuzzing.md) for information on how to fuzz Bitcoin Core. Don't forget to contribute any coverage increasing inputs you find to the [Bitcoin Core fuzzing corpus repo](https://github.com/bitcoin-core/qa-assets).
Happy fuzzing :)
ACKs for top commit:
vasild:
utACK 38e49ded8b
Tree-SHA512: 4f83718365d9c7e772a4ccecb31817bf17117efae2bfaf6e9618ff17908def0c8b97b5fa2504d51ab38b2e6f82c046178dd751495cc37ab4779c0b1ac1a4d211
