Add ability to add and track multiple announcers per orphan transaction,
erasing announcers but not the entire orphan.
The tx creation code in orphanage_tests needs to be updated so that each
tx is unique, because the CountOrphans() check assumes that calling
EraseForPeer necessarily means its orphans are deleted.
Unused for now.
95a0104f2e test: Add tests for directories in place of config files (Hodlinator)
e85abe92c7 args: Catch directories in place of config files (Hodlinator)
e4b6b1822c test: Add tests for -noconf (Hodlinator)
483f0dacc4 args: Properly support -noconf (Hodlinator)
312ec64cc0 test refactor: feature_config_args.py - Stop nodes at the end of tests, not at the beginning (Hodlinator)
7402658bc2 test: -norpccookiefile (Hodlinator)
39cbd4f37c args: Support -norpccookiefile for bitcoind and bitcoin-cli (Hodlinator)
e82ad88452 logs: Use correct path and more appropriate macros in cookie-related code (Hodlinator)
6e28c76907 test: Harden testing of cookie file existence (Hodlinator)
75bacabb55 test: combine_logs.py - Output debug.log paths on error (Hodlinator)
bffd92f00f args: Support -nopid (Hodlinator)
12f8d848fd args: Disallow -nodatadir (Hodlinator)
6ff9662760 scripted-diff: Avoid printing version information for -noversion (Hodlinator)
e8a2054edc doc args: Document narrow scope of -color (Hodlinator)
Pull request description:
- Document `-color` as only applying to `-getinfo`, to be less confusing for bitcoin-cli users.
- No longer print version information when getting passed `-noversion`.
- Disallow `-nodatadir` as we cannot run without one. It was previously interpreted as a mix of unset and as a relative path of "0".
- Support `-norpccookiefile`
- Support `-nopid`
- Properly support `-noconf` (instead of working by accident). Also detect when directories are specified instead of files.
Prompted by investigation in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16545#pullrequestreview-2316714013.
ACKs for top commit:
l0rinc:
utACK 95a0104f2e
achow101:
ACK 95a0104f2e
ryanofsky:
Code review ACK 95a0104f2e. Looks good! Thanks for all your work on this breaking the changes down and making them simple.
Tree-SHA512: 5174251e6b9196a9c6d135eddcb94130295c551bcfccc78e633d9e118ff91523b1be0d72828fb49603ceae312e6e1f8ee2651c6a2b9e0f195603a73a9a622785
32fc59796f rpc: Allow single transaction through submitpackage (glozow)
Pull request description:
There's no particular reason to restrict single transaction submissions with submitpackage. This change relaxes the RPC checks as enables the `AcceptPackage` flow to accept packages of a single transaction.
Resolves #31085
ACKs for top commit:
naumenkogs:
ACK 32fc59796f
achow101:
ACK 32fc59796f
glozow:
ACK 32fc59796f
Tree-SHA512: ffed353bfdca610ffcfd53b40b76da05ffc26df6bac4b0421492e067bede930380e03399d2e2d1d17f0e88fb91cd8eb376e3aabebbabcc724590bf068d09807c
73db95c65c kernel: Make bitcoin-chainstate's block validation mirror submitblock's (TheCharlatan)
bb53ce9bda tests: Add functional test for submitting a previously pruned block (Greg Sanders)
1f7fc73825 rpc: Remove submitblock duplicate pre-check (TheCharlatan)
e62a8abd7d rpc: Remove submitblock invalid-duplicate precheck (TheCharlatan)
36dbebafb9 rpc: Remove submitblock coinbase pre-check (TheCharlatan)
Pull request description:
With the introduction of a mining ipc interface and the potential future introduction of a kernel library API it becomes increasingly important to offer common behaviour between them. An example of this is ProcessNewBlock, which is used by ipc, rpc, net_processing and (potentially) the kernel library. Having divergent behaviour on suggested pre-checks and checks for these functions is confusing to both developers and users and is a maintenance burden.
The rpc interface for ProcessNewBlock (submitblock) currently pre-checks if the block has a coinbase transaction and whether it has been processed before. While the current example binary for how to use the kernel library, bitcoin-chainstate, imitates these checks, the other interfaces do not.
The coinbase check is repeated again early during ProcessNewBlock. Pre-checking it may also shadow more fundamental problems with a block. In most cases the block header is checked first, before validating the transactions. Checking the coinbase first therefore masks potential issues with the header. Fix this by removing the pre-check.
Similary the duplicate checks are repeated early in the contextual checks of ProcessNewBlock. If duplicate blocks are detected much of their validation is skipped. Depending on the constitution of the block, validating the merkle root of the block is part of the more intensive workload when validating a block. This could be an argument for moving the pre-checks into block processing. In net_processing this would have a smaller effect however, since the block mutation check, which also validates the merkle root, is done before.
Testing spamming a node with valid, but duplicate unrequested blocks seems to exhaust a CPU thread, but does not seem to significantly impact keeping up with the tip. The benefits of adding these checks to net_processing are questionable, especially since there are other ways to trigger the more CPU-intensive checks without submitting a duplicate block. Since these DOS concerns apply even less to the RPC interface, which does not have banning mechanics built in, remove them too.
Finally, also remove the pre-checks from `bitcoin-chainstate.cpp`.
---
This PR is part of the [libbitcoinkernel project](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27587).
ACKs for top commit:
Sjors:
re-utACK 73db95c65c
achow101:
ACK 73db95c65c
instagibbs:
ACK 73db95c65c
mzumsande:
ACK 73db95c65c
Tree-SHA512: 2d02e851cf402ecf6a1968c058df3576aac407e200cbf922a1a6391b7f97b4f42c6d9f6b0a78b9d1af0a6d40bdd529a7b11a1e6d88885bd7b8b090f6d1411861
37a5c5d836 doc: update descriptors.md for getdescriptoractivity (James O'Beirne)
ee3ce6a4f4 test: rpc: add no address case for getdescriptoractivity (James O'Beirne)
811f76f3a5 rpc: add getdescriptoractivity (James O'Beirne)
25fe087de5 rpc: move-only: move ScriptPubKeyDoc to utils (James O'Beirne)
Pull request description:
The RPC command `scanblocks` provides a useful way to get a set of blockhashes that have activity relevant to a set of descriptors (`relevant_blocks`). However actually extracting the activity from those blocks is left as an exercise to the end user.
This process involves not only generating the (potentially ranged) set of scripts for the descriptor set on the client side (maybe via `deriveaddresses`), but then the user must retrieve each block's contents one-by-one using `getblock <hash>`, which is transmitted over a network link. And that's all before they perform the actual search over block content. There's even more work required to incorporate unconfirmed transactions.
This PR introduces an RPC `getdescriptoractivity` that [dovetails](https://bitcoin-irc.chaincode.com/bitcoin-core-dev/2024-08-16#1046393;) with `scanblocks` output, handling the process described above. Users specify the blockhashes (perhaps from `relevant_blocks`) and a set of descriptors; they are then given all spend/receive activity in that set of blocks.
This is a very useful tool when implementing lightweight wallets that want neither to require a third-party indexer like electrs, nor the overhead of creating and managing watch-only wallets in Core. This allows Core to be more easily used in a "stateless" manner by wallets, with potentially many nodes interchangeably acting as backends.
### Example usage
```
% ./src/bitcoin-cli scanblocks start \
'["addr(bc1p0cp0vyag6snlta2l7c4am3rue7eef9f72l7uhx52m4v27vfydx9s8tfs7t)"]' \
857263
{
"from_height": 857263,
"to_height": 858263,
"relevant_blocks": [
"00000000000000000002bc5cc78f5b0913a5230a8f4b0d5060bc9a60900a5a88",
"00000000000000000001c5291ed6a40c06d3db5c8fb738567654b24a14b24ecb"
],
"completed": true
}
% ./src/bitcoin-cli getdescriptoractivity \
'["00000000000000000002bc5cc78f5b0913a5230a8f4b0d5060bc9a60900a5a88", "00000000000000000001c5291ed6a40c06d3db5c8fb738567654b24a14b24ecb"]' \
'["addr(bc1p0cp0vyag6snlta2l7c4am3rue7eef9f72l7uhx52m4v27vfydx9s8tfs7t)"]'
{
"activity": [
{
"type": "receive",
"amount": 0.00002900,
"blockhash": "00000000000000000002bc5cc78f5b0913a5230a8f4b0d5060bc9a60900a5a88",
"height": 857907,
"txid": "c9d34f202c1f66d80cae76f305350f5fdde910b97cf6ae6bf79f5bcf2a337d06",
"vout": 254,
"output_spk": {
"asm": "1 7e02f613a8d427f5f55ff62bddc47ccfb394953e57fdcb9a8add58af3124698b",
"desc": "rawtr(7e02f613a8d427f5f55ff62bddc47ccfb394953e57fdcb9a8add58af3124698b)#yewcd80j",
"hex": "51207e02f613a8d427f5f55ff62bddc47ccfb394953e57fdcb9a8add58af3124698b",
"address": "bc1p0cp0vyag6snlta2l7c4am3rue7eef9f72l7uhx52m4v27vfydx9s8tfs7t",
"type": "witness_v1_taproot"
}
},
{
"type": "spend",
"amount": 0.00002900,
"blockhash": "00000000000000000001c5291ed6a40c06d3db5c8fb738567654b24a14b24ecb",
"height": 858260,
"spend_txid": "7f61d1b248d4ee46376f9c6df272f63fbb0c17039381fb23ca5d90473b823c36",
"spend_vin": 0,
"prevout_txid": "c9d34f202c1f66d80cae76f305350f5fdde910b97cf6ae6bf79f5bcf2a337d06",
"prevout_vout": 254,
"prevout_spk": {
"asm": "1 7e02f613a8d427f5f55ff62bddc47ccfb394953e57fdcb9a8add58af3124698b",
"desc": "rawtr(7e02f613a8d427f5f55ff62bddc47ccfb394953e57fdcb9a8add58af3124698b)#yewcd80j",
"hex": "51207e02f613a8d427f5f55ff62bddc47ccfb394953e57fdcb9a8add58af3124698b",
"address": "bc1p0cp0vyag6snlta2l7c4am3rue7eef9f72l7uhx52m4v27vfydx9s8tfs7t",
"type": "witness_v1_taproot"
}
}
]
}
```
ACKs for top commit:
instagibbs:
reACK 37a5c5d836
achow101:
ACK 37a5c5d836
tdb3:
Code review and light retest ACK 37a5c5d836
rkrux:
re-ACK 37a5c5d836
Tree-SHA512: 04aa51e329c6c2ed72464b9886281d5ebd7511a8a8e184ea81249033a4dad535a12829b1010afc2da79b344ea8b5ab8ed47e426d0bf2eb78ab395d20b1da8dbb
11f3bc229c refactor: Reserve vectors in fuzz tests (Lőrinc)
152fefe7a2 refactor: Preallocate PrevectorFillVector(In)Direct without vector resize (Lőrinc)
a774c7a339 refactor: Fix remaining clang-tidy performance-inefficient-vector errors (Lőrinc)
Pull request description:
PR inspired by https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29608#issuecomment-2437847307 (and https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29458, https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29606, https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29607, https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30093).
The `clang-tidy` check can be run via:
```bash
cmake -B build -DCMAKE_C_COMPILER=clang -DCMAKE_CXX_COMPILER=clang++ -DCMAKE_EXPORT_COMPILE_COMMANDS=ON -DBUILD_BENCH=ON -DBUILD_FUZZ_BINARY=ON -DBUILD_FOR_FUZZING=ON && cmake --build build -j$(nproc)
run-clang-tidy -quiet -p build -j $(nproc) -checks='-*,performance-inefficient-vector-operation' | grep -v 'clang-tidy'
```
which revealed 3 tests and 1 prod warning (+ fuzz and benching, found by hebasto).
Even though the tests aren't performance critical, getting rid of these warnings (for which the checks were already enabled via https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/.clang-tidy#L18, see below), the fix was quite simple.
<details>
<summary>clang-tidy -list-checks</summary>
```bash
cd src && clang-tidy -list-checks | grep 'vector'
performance-inefficient-vector-operation
```
</details>
<details>
<summary>Output before the change</summary>
```
src/test/rpc_tests.cpp:434:9: error: 'emplace_back' is called inside a loop; consider pre-allocating the container capacity before the loop [performance-inefficient-vector-operation,-warnings-as-errors]
433 | for (int64_t i = 0; i < 100; i++) {
434 | feerates.emplace_back(1 ,1);
| ^
src/test/checkqueue_tests.cpp:366:13: error: 'emplace_back' is called inside a loop; consider pre-allocating the container capacity before the loop [performance-inefficient-vector-operation,-warnings-as-errors]
365 | for (size_t i = 0; i < 3; ++i) {
366 | tg.emplace_back(
| ^
src/test/cuckoocache_tests.cpp:231:9: error: 'emplace_back' is called inside a loop; consider pre-allocating the container capacity before the loop [performance-inefficient-vector-operation,-warnings-as-errors]
228 | for (uint32_t x = 0; x < 3; ++x)
229 | /** Each thread is emplaced with x copy-by-value
230 | */
231 | threads.emplace_back([&, x] {
| ^
src/rpc/output_script.cpp:127:17: error: 'push_back' is called inside a loop; consider pre-allocating the container capacity before the loop [performance-inefficient-vector-operation,-warnings-as-errors]
126 | for (unsigned int i = 0; i < keys.size(); ++i) {
127 | pubkeys.push_back(HexToPubKey(keys[i].get_str()));
| ^
```
And the fuzz and benchmarks, noticed by hebasto: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31305#issuecomment-2483124499
</details>
ACKs for top commit:
maflcko:
review ACK 11f3bc229c🎦
achow101:
ACK 11f3bc229c
theuni:
ACK 11f3bc229c
hebasto:
ACK 11f3bc229c, tested with clang 19.1.5 + clang-tidy.
Tree-SHA512: 41691c19f35c63b922a95407617a54f9bff1af3f95f99d15642064f321df038aeb1ae5f061f854ed913f69036807cc28fa6222b2ff4c24ef43b909027fa0f9b3
And under the hood suppoert single transactions
in AcceptPackage. This simplifies user experience
and paves the way for reducing number of codepaths
for transaction acceptance in the future.
Co-Authored-By: instagibbs <gsanders87@gmail.com>
The duplicate checks are repeated early in the contextual checks of
ProcessNewBlock. If duplicate blocks are detected much of their
validation is skipped. Depending on the constitution of the block,
validating the merkle root of the block is part of the more intensive
workload when validating a block. This could be an argument for moving
the pre-checks into block processing. In net_processing this would have
a smaller effect however, since the block mutation check, which also
validates the merkle root, is done before.
A side effect of this change is that a duplicate block is persisted
again on disk even when pruning is activated. This is similar to the
behaviour with getblockfrompeer. Add a release note for this change in
behaviour.
Testing spamming a node with valid, but duplicate unrequested blocks
seems to exhaust a CPU thread, but does not seem to significantly impact
keeping up with the tip. The benefits of adding these checks to
net_processing are questionable, especially since there are other ways
to trigger the more CPU-intensive checks without submitting a duplicate
block. Since these DOS concerns apply even less to the RPC interface,
which does not have banning mechanics built in, remove them too.
---
With the introduction of a mining ipc interface and the potential future
introduction of a kernel library API it becomes increasingly important
to offer common behaviour between them. An example of this is
ProcessNewBlock, which is used by ipc, rpc, net_processing and
(potentially) the kernel library. Having divergent behaviour on
suggested pre-checks and checks for these functions is confusing to both
developers and users and is a maintenance burden.
The rpc interface for ProcessNewBlock (submitblock) currently pre-checks
if the block has a coinbase transaction and whether it has been
processed before. While the current example binary for how to use the
kernel library, bitcoin-chainstate, imitates these checks, the other
interfaces do not.
ProcessNewBlock fails if an invalid duplicate block is passed in through
its call to AcceptBlock and AcceptBlockHeader. The failure in
AcceptBlockHeader makes AcceptBlock return early. This makes the
pre-check in submitblock redundant.
---
With the introduction of a mining ipc interface and the potential future
introduction of a kernel library API it becomes increasingly important
to offer common behaviour between them. An example of this is
ProcessNewBlock, which is used by ipc, rpc, net_processing and
(potentially) the kernel library. Having divergent behaviour on
suggested pre-checks and checks for these functions is confusing to both
developers and users and is a maintenance burden.
The rpc interface for ProcessNewBlock (submitblock) currently pre-checks
if the block has a coinbase transaction and whether it has been
processed before. While the current example binary for how to use the
kernel library, bitcoin-chainstate, imitates these checks, the other
interfaces do not.
The coinbase check is repeated again early during ProcessNewBlock.
Pre-checking it may also shadow more fundamental problems with a block.
In most cases the block header is checked first, before validating the
transactions. Checking the coinbase first therefore masks potential
issues with the header. Fix this by removing the pre-check.
The pre-check was likely introduced on top of
ada0caa165 to fix UB in
GetWitnessCommitmentIndex in case a block's transactions are empty. This
code path could only be reached because of the call to
UpdateUncommittedBlockStructures in submitblock, but cannot be reached
through net_processing.
Add some functional test cases to cover the previous conditions that
lead to a "Block does not start with a coinbase" json rpc error being
returned.
---
With the introduction of a mining ipc interface and the potential future
introduction of a kernel library API it becomes increasingly important
to offer common behaviour between them. An example of this is
ProcessNewBlock, which is used by ipc, rpc, net_processing and
(potentially) the kernel library. Having divergent behaviour on
suggested pre-checks and checks for these functions is confusing to both
developers and users and is a maintenance burden.
The rpc interface for ProcessNewBlock (submitblock) currently pre-checks
if the block has a coinbase transaction and whether it has been
processed before. While the current example binary for how to use the
kernel library, bitcoin-chainstate, imitates these checks, the other
interfaces do not.
0bd53d913c test: add test for getchaintips behavior with invalid chains (Martin Zumsande)
ccd98ea4c8 test: cleanup rpc_getchaintips.py (Martin Zumsande)
f5149ddb9b validation: mark blocks building on an invalid block as BLOCK_FAILED_CHILD (Martin Zumsande)
783cb7337f validation: call RecalculateBestHeader in InvalidChainFound (Martin Zumsande)
9275e9689a rpc: call RecalculateBestHeader as part of reconsiderblock (Martin Zumsande)
a51e91783a validation: add RecalculateBestHeader() function (Martin Zumsande)
Pull request description:
`m_best_header` (the most-work header not known to be on an invalid chain) can be wrong in the context of invalidation / reconsideration of blocks. This can happen naturally (a valid header is received and stored in our block tree db; when the full block arrives, it is found to be invalid) or triggered by the user with the `invalidateblock` / `reconsiderblock` rpc.
We don't currently use `m_best_header` for any critical things (see OP of #16974 for a list that still seems up-to-date), so it being wrong affects mostly rpcs.
This PR proposes to recalculate it if necessary by looping over the block index and finding the best header. It also suggest to mark headers between an invalidatetd block and the previous `m_best_header` as invalid, so they won't be considered in the recalculation.
It adds tests to `rpc_invalidateblock.py` and `rpc_getchaintips.py` that fail on master.
One alternative to this suggested in the past would be to introduce a continuous tracking of header tips (#12138).
While this might be more performant, it is also more complicated, and situations where we need this data are only be remotely triggerable by paying the cost of creating a valid PoW header for an invalid block.
Therefore I think it isn't necessary to optimise for performance here, plus the solution in this PR doesn't perform any extra steps in the normal node operation where no invalidated blocks are encountered.
Fixes #26245
ACKs for top commit:
fjahr:
reACK 0bd53d913c
achow101:
ACK 0bd53d913c
TheCharlatan:
Re-ACK 0bd53d913c
Tree-SHA512: 23c2fc42d7c7bb4f9b4ba4949646b3d0031dd29ed15484e436afd66cd821ed48e0f16a1d02f45477b5d0d73a006f6e81a56b82d9721e0dee2e924219f528b445
4120c7543e scripted-diff: get rid of remaining "command" terminology in protocol.{h,cpp} (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
The confusing "command" terminology for the 12-byte field in the (v1) p2p message header was replaced with the more proper term "message type" in other modules already years ago, see eg #18533, #18937, #24078, #24141. This PR does the same for the protocol.{h,cpp} module to complete the replacements. Note that "GetCommand" is a method name also used in the `ArgsManager` (there it makes much more sense), so the scripted-diff lists for this replacement the files explicitly, rather than using `$(git grep -l ...)`.
ACKs for top commit:
maflcko:
review ACK 4120c7543e🛒
fjahr:
Code review ACK 4120c7543e
rkrux:
tACK 4120c7543e
Tree-SHA512: 7b4dd30136392a145da95d2f3ba181c18c155ba6f3158e49e622d76811c6a45ef9b5c7539a979a04d8404faf18bb27f11457aa436d4e2998ece3deb2c9e59748
c189eec848 doc: release note for mempoolrullrbf removal (Greg Sanders)
d47297c6aa rpc: Mark fullrbf and bip125-replaceable as deprecated (Greg Sanders)
04a5dcee8a docs: remove requirement to signal bip125 (Greg Sanders)
111a23d9b3 Remove -mempoolfullrbf option (Greg Sanders)
Pull request description:
Given https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30493 and the related discussion on network uptake it's probably not helpful to have an option for a feature that will not be respected by the network in any meaningful way.
Wallet changes can be done in another PR on its own cadence to account for possible fingerprinting, waiting for fullrbf logic to permeate the network, etc.
ACKs for top commit:
stickies-v:
re-ACK c189eec848
achow101:
ACK c189eec848
murchandamus:
ACK c189eec848
rkrux:
reACK c189eec848
Tree-SHA512: 9447f88f8f291c56c5bde70af0a91b0a4f5163aaaf173370fbfdaa3c3fd0b44120b14d3a1977f7ee10e27ffe9453f8a70dd38aad0ffb8c39cf145049d2550730
0ea84bc362 test: explicitly check boolean verbosity is disallowed (tdb3)
7a2e6b68cd doc: add rpc guidance for boolean verbosity avoidance (tdb3)
698f302df8 rpc: disallow boolean verbosity in getorphantxs (tdb3)
63f5e6ec79 test: add entry and expiration time checks (tdb3)
808a708107 rpc: add entry time to getorphantxs (tdb3)
56bf302714 refactor: rename rpc_getorphantxs to rpc_orphans (tdb3)
7824f6b077 test: check that getorphantxs is hidden (tdb3)
ac68fcca70 rpc: disallow undefined verbosity in getorphantxs (tdb3)
Pull request description:
Implements follow-up suggestions from #30793.
- Now disallows undefined verbosity levels (below and above valid values) (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30793#discussion_r1786093549)
- Disallows boolean verbosity (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30793#discussion_r1788273274) and adds guidance to developer-notes
- Checks that `getorphantxs` is a hidden rpc (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30793#discussion_r1786107786)
- Adds a test for `expiration` time
- Adds `entry` time to the returned orphan objects (verbosity >=1) to relieve the user from having to calculate it from `expiration`. Also adds associated test. (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30793#discussion_r1743687732)
- Minor cleanup (blank line removal and log message move) (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30793#discussion_r1786092641)
Included a commit to rename the test to a more generic `get_orphans` to better accommodate future orphanage-related RPCs (e.g. `getorphanangeinfo`). Can drop the refactor commit from this PR if people feel strongly about it.
ACKs for top commit:
achow101:
ACK 0ea84bc362
glozow:
utACK 0ea84bc362
rkrux:
tACK 0ea84bc362
itornaza:
tACK 0ea84bc362
Tree-SHA512: e48a088f333ebde132923072da58e970461e74362d0acebbc799c3043d5727cdf5f28e82b43cb38bbed27c603df6710695dba91ff0695e623ad168e985dce08e
4feaa28728 refactor: Rely on returned value of GetCoin instead of parameter (Lőrinc)
46dfbf169b refactor: Return optional of Coin in GetCoin (Lőrinc)
e31bfb26c2 refactor: Remove unrealistic simulation state (Lőrinc)
Pull request description:
While reviewing [the removal of the unreachable combinations from the Coin cache logic](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30673#discussion_r1721727681), we've noticed that the related tests often [reflect impossible states](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30673/files#r1740154464).
Browsing the Coin cache refactoring history revealed that migrating `bool GetCoin` to `optional<Coin> GetCoin` was [already proposed a few times before](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18746#issuecomment-842393167).
This refactor makes certain invalid states impossible, reducing the possibility of errors and making the code easier to understand. This will let us remove test code that exercises the impossible states as well.
The PR is done in multiple small steps, first swapping the new `optional` return value, slowly strangling out the usages of the return parameter, followed by the removal of the parameter.
Most of the invalid test states were still kept, except for https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30673/files#r1748087322, where the new design prohibits invalid usage and https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30673/files#r1749350258 was just marked with a TODO, will be removed in a follow-up PR.
ACKs for top commit:
andrewtoth:
re-ACK 4feaa28728
achow101:
ACK 4feaa28728
laanwj:
Code review ACK 4feaa28728
theStack:
Code-review ACK 4feaa28728
Tree-SHA512: 818d60b2e97f58c489a61120fe761fb67a08dffbefe7a3fce712d362fc9eb8c2cced23074f1bec55fe71c616a3561b5a8737919ad6ffb2635467ec4711683df7
a16917fb59 rpc, net: improve `mapped_as` doc for getrawaddrman/getpeerinfo (brunoerg)
bdad0243be rpc, net: getrawaddrman "mapped_as" follow-ups (brunoerg)
Pull request description:
- Change `addrman` to reference to const since it isn't modified (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30062#discussion_r1612272793).
- Improve documentation of `mapped_as`/`source_mapped_as` in `getrawaddrman` RPC by mentioning that both fields will be only available if asmap flag is set. It is the same message for `mapped_as` field in `getpeerinfo`.
ACKs for top commit:
fjahr:
re-ACK a16917fb59
0xB10C:
re-ACK a16917fb59
laanwj:
re-ACK a16917fb59
Tree-SHA512: c66b2ee9d24da93d443be83f6ef3b2d39fd5bf3f73e2974574cad238ffb82035704cf4fbf1bac22a63734948e285e8e091c2884bb640202efdb473315e770233
Before, we did not explicity say that both fields
`{source_}mapped_as` (that are optional in getrawaddrman)
will be only available if the asmap config flag is set.
Co-authored-by: Jon Atack <jon@atack.com>
fa22e5c430 refactor: Remove dead code that assumed tip == nullptr (MarcoFalke)
fa2e443965 refactor: Replace g_genesis_wait_cv with m_tip_block_cv (MarcoFalke)
fa7f52af1a refactor: Use wait_for predicate to check for interrupt (MarcoFalke)
5ca28ef28b refactor: Split up NodeContext shutdown_signal and shutdown_request (Ryan Ofsky)
fad8e7fba7 bugfix: Mark m_tip_block_cv as guarded by m_tip_block_mutex (MarcoFalke)
fa18586c29 refactor: Add missing GUARDED_BY(m_tip_block_mutex) (MarcoFalke)
fa4c075033 doc: Clarify waitTipChanged docs (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
`g_genesis_wait_cv` is similar to `m_tip_block_cv` but shuffling everything through a redundant `boost::signals2`.
So remove it, along with some other dead code, as well as minor fixups.
ACKs for top commit:
ryanofsky:
Code review ACK fa22e5c430 (just rebased since last review)
Sjors:
ACK fa22e5c430
TheCharlatan:
ACK fa22e5c430
Tree-SHA512: a2cb59b651aaf85a3574723adfe403487566788ad945933b0458816ccc841fce08ca77b31afbd2d6adb5bf1deed7229c028bee74fb4bbaf6576e9edcfa0ad817
Instead of having a single NodeContext::shutdown member that is used both to
request shutdowns and check if they have been requested, use separate members
for each. Benefits of this change:
1. Should make code a little clearer and easier to search because it is easier
to see which parts of code are triggering shutdowns and which parts are just
checking to see if they were triggered.
2. Makes it possible for init.cpp to specify additional code to run when a
shutdown is requested, like signalling the m_tip_block_cv condition variable.
Motivation for this change was to remove hacky NodeContext argument and
m_tip_block_cv access from the StopRPC function, so StopRPC can just be
concerned with RPC functionality, not other node functionality.
This is not strictly required, but all places using m_tip_block_cv
(except shutdown) already take the lock. The annotation makes it easier
to catch potential deadlocks before review.
Adding the missing lock to the shutdown sequence is a bugfix.
An alternative would be to take the lock and release it before
notifying, see
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30967#discussion_r1778899716
The current order is incorrect:
```bash
./build/src/bitcoin-cli loadtxoutset -rpcclienttimeout=0 utxo-840000.dat
error code: -1
error message:
loadtxoutset "path"
```
The waitforblock RPC method takes a hash argument and waits for that specific block. The waitfornewblock waits for any new block. This commit fixes the documentation.
