fabf1cdb20 Use steady clock for bench logging (MacroFake)
faed342a23 scripted-diff: Rename time symbols (MacroFake)
Pull request description:
Instead of using `0.001` and similar constants to "convert" an int64_t to milliseconds, use the type-safe `Ticks<>` helper. Also, use steady clock instead of system clock, since the durations are used for benchmarking.
ACKs for top commit:
fanquake:
ACK fabf1cdb20 - validation bench output still looks sane.
Tree-SHA512: e6525b5fdad6045ca500c56014897d7428ad288aaf375933d3b5939feddf257f6910d562eb66ebcde9186bef9a604ee8d763a318253838318d59df2a285be7c2
33b12e5df6 docs: improve docs where MemPoolLimits is used (stickies-v)
6945853c0b test: use NoLimits() in MempoolIndexingTest (stickies-v)
3a86f24a4c refactor: mempool: use CTxMempool::Limits (stickies-v)
b85af25f87 refactor: mempool: add MemPoolLimits::NoLimits() (stickies-v)
Pull request description:
Mempool currently considers 4 limits regarding ancestor and descendant count and size, which get passed around between functions quite a bit. This PR uses `CTxMemPool::Limits` introduced in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25290 to simplify those signatures and callsites.
The purpose of this PR is to improve readability and maintenance, without behaviour change.
As noted in the first commit "refactor: mempool: change MemPoolLimits members to uint", we currently have an underflow issue where a user could pass a negative `-limitancestorsize`, which is eventually cast to an unsigned integer. This behaviour already exists. Because it's orthogonal and to minimize scope, I think this should be fixed in a separate PR.
ACKs for top commit:
hebasto:
ACK 33b12e5df6, I have reviewed the code and it looks OK, I agree it can be merged.
glozow:
reACK 33b12e5df6
Tree-SHA512: 591c6dcee1894f1c3ca28b34a680eeadcf0d40cda92451b4a422c03087b27d682b5e30ba4367abd75a99b5ccb115b7884b0026958d3c7dddab030549db5a4056
0f40d65321 refactor: remove duplicate code from BlockAssembler (James O'Beirne)
Pull request description:
Found while reminding myself how transactions are chosen for blocks. Take it or leave it!
ACKs for top commit:
glozow:
ACK 0f40d65321
theStack:
Concept and code-review ACK 0f40d65321
Tree-SHA512: 8a2694e670ce3fe897ab8f64f64c8df5f8487fc1264527a3abbcba0e5b921fb693416497ccd62508295bc33f202c65556b91b6af463acb91aab43138d2492c14
Simplifies function signatures by removing repetition of all the
ancestor/descendant limits, and increases readability by being
more verbose by naming the limits, while still reducing the LoC.
...also adjust callers
Changes:
- In BlockAssembler::CreateNewBlock, we now only lock m_mempool->cs and
call addPackageTxs if m_mempool is not nullptr
- BlockAssembler::addPackageTxs now takes in a mempool reference, and is
annotated to require that mempool's lock.
- In TestChain100Setup::CreateBlock and generateblock, don't construct
an empty mempool, just pass in a nullptr for mempool
Since UpdatePackagesForAdded is a helper function that's only used in
addPackageTxs we can make it static and avoid the unnecessary interface
and in-header lock annotation.
SkipMapTxEntry is a short helper function that's only used in
addPackageTxs, we can just inline it, keep the comments, and avoid the
unnecessary interface and lock annotations.
7036cf52aa Delete UpdatePackagesForAdded at beginning of addPackageTxs. (KevinMusgrave)
Pull request description:
In `CreateNewBlock` (in miner.cpp), `inBlock` is cleared before `addPackageTxs`, so `inBlock` will be empty in the first call to `UpdatePackagesForAdded`. I saw this brought up in these [PR review club logs](https://bitcoincore.reviews/24538) and there didn't seem to be a definitive answer for why the call is necessary. There's also an [old PR](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10200) where this change was going to be applied, but it got closed.
If `addPackageTxs` can be called when `inBlock` is not empty, then maybe a test should be added for that case. All the tests seem to pass with this deletion.
ACKs for top commit:
glozow:
utACK 7036cf52aa
Tree-SHA512: 9e757b71b9035f68a0c6fef229b8cd83f1bdbe23f05bb02cc1bab8c3c177805b388bceb2bb1f0bce354791ccb29f351a6c51979b96ffe4d9fc6c978f83e36afc
This decouples validation.cpp from netaddress.cpp (transitively,
timedata.cpp, and asmap.cpp).
This is important for libbitcoinkernel as:
- There is no reason for the consensus engine to be coupled with
netaddress, timedata, and asmap
- Users of libbitcoinkernel can now easily supply their own
std::function that provides the adjusted time.
See the src/Makefile.am changes for some satisfying removals.
f865cf8ded Add and use BlockManager::GetAllBlockIndices (Carl Dong)
28ba0313ea Add and use CBlockIndexHeightOnlyComparator (Carl Dong)
12eb05df63 move-only: Move CBlockIndexWorkComparator to blockstorage (Carl Dong)
c600ee3816 Only load BlockMan in BlockMan member functions (Carl Dong)
42e56d9b18 style-only: No need for std::pair for vSortedByHeight (Carl Dong)
3bbb6fea05 style-only: Various blockstorage.cpp cleanups (Carl Dong)
5be9ee3c54 refactor: more const annotations for uses of CBlockIndex* (Anthony Towns)
Pull request description:
The only important commit is "Only load BlockMan in BlockMan member functions", everything else is all just small style changes.
Here's the commit message, reproduced:
```
This commit effectively splits the "load block index itself" logic from
"derive Chainstate variables from loaded block index" logic.
This means that BlockManager::LoadBlockIndex{,DB} will only load what's
relevant to the BlockManager.
```
ACKs for top commit:
ajtowns:
ACK f865cf8ded ; code review only
MarcoFalke:
review ACK f865cf8ded 🗂
Tree-SHA512: 7b204d782834e06fd7329d022e2ae860181b4e8105c33bfb928539a4ec24161dc7438a9c4d4ee279dcad77de310c160b997bb8aa18923243d0fd55ccf4ad7c3a
Given the low possibility of a reorg reverting the segwit soft fork,
there is no need to check whether segwit is active here. Also,
TestBlockValidity is run on the block template after it has been
created.
in src/node/miner to:
- BlockAssembler::addPackageTxs()
- BlockAssembler::SkipMapTxEntry()
- BlockAssembler::UpdatePackagesForAdded()
These functions have thread safety lock annotations in
their declarations but are missing the corresponding
run-time lock assertions in their definitions.
Per doc/developer-notes.md: "Combine annotations in function
declarations with run-time asserts in function definitions."
