48742693ac Replace "can not" with "cannot" in docs, user messages, and tests (Jon Atack)
e670edd434 User-facing content fixups from transifex translator feedback (Jon Atack)
Pull request description:
Closes #24366.
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
Code review re-ACK 48742693ac
hebasto:
re-ACK 48742693ac, only suggested change since my previous [review](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24367#pullrequestreview-885938219).
Tree-SHA512: 4dcdcb417251a413e65fab6070515e13a1267c8e0dbcf521386b842511391f24c84a0c2168fe13458c977682034466509bf2a3453719d4d94d3c568fd9f4adb4
6ea5682784 Guard CBlockIndex::nStatus/nFile/nDataPos/nUndoPos by cs_main (Jon Atack)
5d59ae0ba8 Remove/inline ReadRawBlockFromDisk(block_data, pindex, message_start) (Hennadii Stepanov)
eaeeb88768 Require IsBlockPruned() to hold mutex cs_main (Jon Atack)
ca47b00577 Require CBlockIndex::IsValid() to hold cs_main (Vasil Dimov)
e9f3aa5f6a Require CBlockIndex::RaiseValidity() to hold cs_main (Vasil Dimov)
8ef457cb83 Require CBlockIndex::IsAssumedValid() to hold cs_main (Vasil Dimov)
572393448b Require CBlockIndex::GetUndoPos() to hold mutex cs_main (Jon Atack)
2e557ced28 Require WriteUndoDataForBlock() to hold mutex cs_main (Jon Atack)
6fd4341c10 Require CBlockIndex::GetBlockPos() to hold mutex cs_main (Jon Atack)
Pull request description:
Issues:
- `CBlockIndex` member functions `GetBlockPos()`, `GetUndoPos()`, `IsAssumedValid()`, `RaiseValidity()`, and `IsValid()` and block storage functions `WriteUndoDataForBlock()` and `IsBlockPruned()` are missing thread safety lock annotations to help ensure that they are called with mutex cs_main to avoid bugs like #22895. Doing this also enables the next step:
- `CBlockIndex::nStatus` may be racy, i.e. potentially accessed by multiple threads, see #17161. A solution is to guard it by cs_main, along with fellow data members `nFile`, `nDataPos` and `nUndoPos`.
This pull:
- adds thread safety lock annotations for the functions listed above
- guards `CBlockIndex::nStatus`, `nFile`, `nDataPos` and `nUndoPos` by cs_main
How to review and test:
- debug build with clang and verify there are no `-Wthread-safety-analysis` warnings
- review the code to verify each annotation or lock is necessary and sensible, or if any are missing
- look for whether taking a lock can be replaced by a lock annotation instead
- for more information about Clang thread safety analysis, see
- https://clang.llvm.org/docs/ThreadSafetyAnalysis.html
- https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/developer-notes.md#lockingmutex-usage-notes
- https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/developer-notes.md#threads-and-synchronization
Mitigates/potentially closes #17161.
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
Code review ACK 6ea5682784
Tree-SHA512: 3ebf429c8623c51f944a7245a2e48d2aa088dec4c4914b40aa6049e89856c1ee8586f6e2e3b65195190566637a33004468b51a781e61a082248748015167569b
c0405ee27f rpc: Document that DEFAULT is for Taproot, ALL for everything else (Andrew Chow)
d3992669df psbt: Actually use SIGHASH_DEFAULT (Andrew Chow)
eb9a1a2c59 psbt: Make sighash_type std::optional<int> (Andrew Chow)
Pull request description:
Make the behavior align with the help text by actually using SIGHASH_DEFAULT as the default sighash for signing PSBTs.
ACKs for top commit:
Sjors:
re-utACK c0405ee27f
Tree-SHA512: 5199fb41de416b2f10ac451f824e7c94b428ba11fdb9e50f0027c692e959ce5813a340c34a4e52d7aa128e12008303d80939a693eff36a869720e45442119828
dce8c4c381 rpc: getblockfrompeer (Sjors Provoost)
b884ababc2 rpc: move Ensure* helpers to server_util.h (Sjors Provoost)
Pull request description:
This adds an RPC method to fetch a block directly from a peer. This can used to fetch stale blocks with lower proof of work that are normally ignored by the node (`headers-only` in `getchaintips`).
Usage:
```
bitcoin-cli getblockfrompeer HASH peer_n
```
Closes #20155
Limitations:
* you have to specify which peer to fetch the block from
* the node must already have the header
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
ACK dce8c4c381
fjahr:
re-ACK dce8c4c381
Tree-SHA512: 843ba2b7a308f640770d624d0aa3265fdc5c6ea48e8db32269b96a082b7420f7953d1d8d1ef2e6529392c7172dded9d15639fbc9c24e7bfa5cfb79e13a5498c8
3333070208 refactor: Call type-solver earlier in decodescript (MarcoFalke)
fab0d998f4 style: Remove whitespace (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
The current logic is a bit confusing. First creating the `UniValue` return dict, then parsing it again to get the type as `std::string`.
Clean this up by using a strong type `TxoutType`. Also, remove whitespace.
ACKs for top commit:
shaavan:
ACK 3333070208
theStack:
Code-review ACK 3333070208
Tree-SHA512: 49db7bc614d2491cd3ec0177d21ad1e9924dbece1eb5635290cd7fd18cb30adf4711b891daf522e7c4f6baab3033b66393bbfcd1d4726f24f90a433124f925d6
As node operators are free to set their mempool policies however they
please, it's possible for package transaction(s) to already be in the
mempool. We definitely don't want to reject the entire package in that
case (as that could be a censorship vector).
We should still return the successful result to the caller, so add
another result type to MempoolAcceptResult.
0fdb619aaf [validation] Always call mempool.check() after processing a new transaction (John Newbery)
2c64270bbe [refactor] Don't call AcceptToMemoryPool() from outside validation.cpp (John Newbery)
92a3aeecf6 [validation] Add CChainState::ProcessTransaction() (John Newbery)
36167faea9 [logging/documentation] Remove reference to AcceptToMemoryPool from error string (John Newbery)
4c24142b1e [validation] Remove comment about AcceptToMemoryPool() (John Newbery)
5759fd12b8 [test] Don't set bypass_limits to true in txvalidation_tests.cpp (John Newbery)
497c9e2964 [test] Don't set bypass_limits to true in txvalidationcache_tests.cpp (John Newbery)
Pull request description:
Similarly to how #18698 added `ProcessNewBlock()` and `ProcessNewBlockHeaders()` methods to the `ChainstateManager` class, this PR adds a new `ProcessTransaction()` method. Code outside validation no longer calls `AcceptToMemoryPool()` directly, but calls through the higher-level `ProcessTransaction()` method. Advantages:
- The interface is simplified. Calling code no longer needs to know about the active chainstate or mempool object, since `AcceptToMemoryPool()` can only ever be called for the active chainstate, and that chainstate knows which mempool it's using. We can also remove the `bypass_limits` argument, since that can only be used internally in validation.
- responsibility for calling `CTxMemPool::check()` is removed from the callers, and run automatically by `ChainstateManager` every time `ProcessTransaction()` is called.
ACKs for top commit:
lsilva01:
tACK 0fdb619 on Ubuntu 20.04
theStack:
Code-review ACK 0fdb619aaf
ryanofsky:
Code review ACK 0fdb619aaf. Only changes since last review: splitting & joining commits, adding more explanations to commit messages, tweaking MEMPOOL_ERROR string, fixing up argument name comments.
Tree-SHA512: 0b395c2e3ef242f0d41d47174b1646b0a73aeece38f1fe29349837e6fb832f4bf8d57e1a1eaed82a97c635cfd59015a7e07f824e0d7c00b2bee4144e80608172
This is not only cleaner but also helps make sure we are always using
the virtual size measure that includes the sigop weight heuristic (which
is the vsize the mempool would return).
f685a13bef doc: GetTransaction()/getrawtransaction follow-ups to #22383 (John Newbery)
abc57e1f08 refactor: move `GetTransaction(...)` to node/transaction.cpp (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
~This PR is based on #22383, which should be reviewed first~ (merged by now).
In [yesterday's PR review club session to PR 22383](https://bitcoincore.reviews/22383), the idea of moving the function `GetTransaction(...)` from src/validation.cpp to src/node/transaction.cpp came up. With this, the circular dependency "index/txindex -> validation -> index/txindex" is removed (see change in `lint-circular-dependencies.sh`). Thanks to jnewbery for suggesting and to sipa for providing historical background.
Relevant IRC log:
```
17:52 <jnewbery> Was anyone surprised that GetTransaction() is in validation.cpp? It seems to me that node/transaction.cpp would be a more appropriate place for it.
17:53 <raj_> jnewbery, +1
17:53 <stickies-v> agreed!
17:54 <glozow> jnewbery ya
17:54 <jnewbery> seems weird that validation would call into txindex. I wonder if we remove this function, then validation would no longer need to #include txindex
17:54 <sipa> GetTransaction predates node/transaction.cpp, and even the generic index framework itself :)
17:55 <sipa> (before 0.8, validation itself used the txindex)
17:55 <jnewbery> (and GetTransaction() seems like a natural sibling to BroadcastTransaction(), which is already in node/transaction.cpp)
17:55 <jnewbery> sipa: right, this is not meant as a criticism of course. Just wondering if we can organize things a bit more rationally now that we have better separation between things.
17:55 <sipa> jnewbery: sure, just providing background
17:56 <sipa> seems very reasonable to move it elsewhere now
```
The commit should be trivial to review with `--color-moved`.
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
Code review ACK f685a13bef
rajarshimaitra:
tACK f685a13bef
mjdietzx:
crACK f685a13bef
LarryRuane:
Code review, test ACK f685a13bef
Tree-SHA512: 0e844a6ecb1be04c638b55bc4478c2949549a4fcae01c984eee078de74d176fb19d508fc09360a62ad130677bfa7daf703b67870800e55942838d7313246248c
78f4c8b98e prefer to use txindex if available for GetTransaction (Jameson Lopp)
Pull request description:
Fixes #22382
Motivation: prevent excessive disk reads if txindex is enabled.
Worth noting that this could be argued to be less of a bug and more of an issue of undefined behavior. If a user calls GetTransaction with the wrong block hash, what should happen?
ACKs for top commit:
jonatack:
ACK 78f4c8b98e
theStack:
Code review ACK 78f4c8b98e
LarryRuane:
tACK 78f4c8b98e
luke-jr:
utACK 78f4c8b98e
jnewbery:
utACK 78f4c8b98e
rajarshimaitra:
Code review ACK 78f4c8b98e
lsilva01:
Code Review ACK and Tested ACK 78f4c8b98e on Ubuntu 20.04
Tree-SHA512: af7db5b98cb2ae4897b28476b2fa243bf7e6f850750d9347062fe8013c5720986d1a3c808f80098e5289bd84b085de03c81a44e584dc28982f721c223651bfe0
Only allow "packages" with no conflicts, sorted in order of dependency,
and no more than 25 for now. Note that these groups of transactions
don't necessarily need to adhere to some strict definition of a package
or have any dependency relationships. Clients are free to pass in a
batch of 25 unrelated transactions if they want to.
6e2eb0d63b rpc/wallet: use OMITTED_NAMED_ARG instead of Default(VNULL) (Karl-Johan Alm)
4983f4cba4 rpc/createwallet: omitted named arguments (Karl-Johan Alm)
dc4db23b30 rpc: address:amount dictionaries are OBJ_USER_KEYS (Karl-Johan Alm)
c8cf0a3d51 rpc/getpeerinfo: bytesrecv_per_msg is a dynamic dictionary (Karl-Johan Alm)
eb4fb7e507 rpc/gettxoutsetinfo: hash_or_height is a named argument (Karl-Johan Alm)
Pull request description:
This is a follow-up to #21897, and I believe covers the remaining cases, at least that I could find.
Edited to remove unrelated information about a side project.
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
Documentation diff ACK 6e2eb0d63b
promag:
Code review ACK 6e2eb0d63b.
Tree-SHA512: d26f6e074e13d64bbca2a114a0adc7f905d47d238c4e9bc49f70ca0b775afbebf9879fc3794ab29dc316a6dbd00ba8cbeb01197e236ee4ab2e9854db25f23f04
fae196147b doc: Clarify that feerates are per virtual size (MarcoFalke)
fa83e95ac6 scripted-diff: Clarify that feerates are per virtual size (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
By implementing segwit, it is already clear that all feerates in Bitcoin Core are denoted in (amount/virtual size). Though, there is inconsistency, as some places use kvB, some use kB. Thus, replace all with "kvB".
See also commit 6da3afbaee, which did the replacement for wallet RPCs.
ACKs for top commit:
ryanofsky:
Code review ACK fae196147b. Checked instances where units were being added in the second commit and they all looked right.
Tree-SHA512: ab70d13cde7d55c1ac931bddc2b45aa218fc75ef46cb6ea9e5a30b1d4dbf27889c2b6357299a6c5427912443a46ec3592a4809dae335e03162bd2120a0f7f8ad
