fa1bf4e705 test: Fix intermittent timeout in p2p_permissions.py (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
The sync is based on `bytesrecv_per_msg["verack"]`. However, the bytes are counted before processing the message, so they are not sufficient to ensure the connection is fully up.
ACKs for top commit:
mzumsande:
ACK fa1bf4e705
aureleoules:
ACK fa1bf4e705
Tree-SHA512: eb1ed537032c76a449b1ed5e42ff062e9b8b3c7e11fde2a5b8183ae0d6fbe31dba39e2c758836160cd8157d9ac5cc1f5d1916415861b8d711b7370c88f5e9790
f9ce0eadf4 For feebump, ignore abandoned descendant spends (John Moffett)
Pull request description:
Closes#26667
To be eligible for fee-bumping, a transaction must not have any of its outputs (eg - change) spent in other unconfirmed transactions in the wallet. This behavior is currently [enforced](9e229a542f/src/wallet/feebumper.cpp (L25-L28)) and [tested](9e229a542f/test/functional/wallet_bumpfee.py (L270-L286)).
However, this check shouldn't apply to spends in abandoned descendant transactions, as explained by #26667.
`CWallet::IsSpent` already carves out an exception for abandoned transactions, so we can just use that.
I've also added a new test to cover this case.
ACKs for top commit:
Sjors:
re-utACK f9ce0eadf4
achow101:
ACK f9ce0eadf4
furszy:
ACK f9ce0ead
Tree-SHA512: 19d957d1cf6747668bb114e27a305027bfca5a9bed2b1d9cc9e1b0bd4666486c7c4b60b045a7fe677eb9734d746f5de76390781fb1e9e0bceb4a46d20acd1749
c467cfffce test: add coverage for `purpose` arg in `listlabels` (brunoerg)
Pull request description:
This PR adds test coverage for `listlabels` command when specifying the `purpose` (send and receive).
dcdfd72861/src/wallet/rpc/addresses.cpp (L698-L704)
ACKs for top commit:
kristapsk:
ACK c467cfffce
Tree-SHA512: 7e7143c1264692f7b22952e7c70dbe9ed3f5dcd2e3b69962a47be9f9c21b3f4a9089ca87962fbc8ff9116e7d2dbeb7f36d6a132c9ac13724a255cfe1b32373a8
264f9ef17f [validation] return MempoolAcceptResult for every tx on PCKG_TX failure (glozow)
dae81e01e8 [refactor] rename variables in AcceptPackage for clarity (glozow)
da484bc738 [doc] release note effective-feerate and effective-includes RPC results (glozow)
5eab397b98 [validation] remove PackageMempoolAcceptResult::m_package_feerate (glozow)
601bac88cb [rpc] return effective-includes in testmempoolaccept and submitpackage (glozow)
1691eaa818 [rpc] return effective-feerate in testmempoolaccept and submitpackage (glozow)
d6c7b78ef2 [validation] return wtxids of other transactions whose fees were used (glozow)
1605886380 [validation] return effective feerate from mempool validation (glozow)
5d35b4a7de [test] package validation quits early due to non-policy, non-missing-inputs failure (glozow)
be2e4d94e5 [validation] when quitting early in AcceptPackage, set package_state and tx result (glozow)
Pull request description:
This PR fixes a bug and improves the mempool accept interface to return information more predictably.
Bug: In package validation, we first try the transactions individually (see doc/policy/packages.md for more explanation) and, if they all failed for missing inputs and policy-related (i.e. fee) reasons, we'll try package validation. Otherwise, we'll just "quit early" since, for example, if a transaction had an invalid signature, adding a child will not help make it valid. Currently, when we quit early, we're not setting the `package_state` to be invalid, so the caller might think it succeeded. Also, we're returning no results - it makes more sense to return the individual transaction failure. Thanks instagibbs for catching https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25038#discussion_r1013293248!
Also, make the package results interface generally more useful/predictable:
- Always return the feerate at which a transaction was considered for `CheckFeeRate` in `MempoolAcceptResult::m_effective_feerate` when it was successful. This can replace the current `PackageMempoolAcceptResult::m_package_feerate`, which only sometimes exists.
- Always provide an entry for every transaction in `PackageMempoolAcceptResult::m_tx_results` when the error is `PCKG_TX`.
ACKs for top commit:
instagibbs:
reACK 264f9ef17f
achow101:
ACK 264f9ef17f
naumenkogs:
reACK 264f9ef17f
Tree-SHA512: ce7fd9927a80030317cc6157822596e85a540feff5dbf5eea7c62da2eb50c917cdddc9da1e2ff62cc18b98b27d360151811546bd9d498859679a04bbee090837
65e78bda7c test: Invalid label name coverage (Aurèle Oulès)
552b51e682 refactor: Add sanity checks in LabelFromValue (Aurèle Oulès)
67e7ba8e1a rpc: Sanitize label name in various RPCs (Aurèle Oulès)
Pull request description:
The following RPCs did not sanitize the optional label name:
- importprivkey
- importaddress
- importpubkey
- importmulti
- importdescriptors
- listsinceblock
Thus is was possible to import an address with a label `*` which should not be possible.
The wildcard label is used for backwards compatibility in the `listtransactions` rpc.
I added test coverage for these RPCs.
ACKs for top commit:
ajtowns:
ACK 65e78bda7c
achow101:
ACK 65e78bda7c
furszy:
diff ACK 65e78bd
stickies-v:
re-ACK 65e78bda7c
theStack:
re-ACK 65e78bda7c
Tree-SHA512: ad99f2824d4cfae352166b76da4ca0069b7c2eccf81aaa0654be25bbb3c6e5d6b005d93960f3f4154155f80e12be2d0cebd5529922ae3d2a36ee4eed82440b31
This value creates an extremely confusing interface as its existence is
dependent upon implementation details (whether something was submitted
on its own, etc). MempoolAcceptResult::m_effective_feerate is much more
helpful, as it always exists for submitted transactions.
c6119f4788 tests: Use unique port for ZMQ tests (Andrew Chow)
Pull request description:
The ZMQ interface tests should use unique ports as we do for the p2p and rpc ports so that multiple instances of the test can be run at the same time.
Without this, the test may hang until killed, or fail.
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
ACK c6119f4788
Tree-SHA512: 2ca3ed2f35e5a83d7ab83740674fed362a8d146dc751156cfe100133a591347cd1ac9d164046f1744d65451a57c52cb22d3bb2161105f421f8f655c4a2512c59
730e14a317 test: wallet: check that labels are migrated to watchonly wallet (Sebastian Falbesoner)
d5f4ae7fac wallet: fully migrate address book entries for watchonly/solvable wallets (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
Currently `migratewallet` migrates the address book (i.e. labels and purposes) for watchonly and solvable wallets only in RAM, but doesn't persist them on disk. Fix this by adding another loop for both of the special wallet types after which writes the corresponding NAME and PURPOSE entries to the database in a single batch. Also adds a corresponding test that checks if labels were migrated correctly for a watchonly wallet.
ACKs for top commit:
achow101:
ACK 730e14a317
furszy:
code ACK 730e14a3, left a non-blocking nit.
aureleoules:
ACK 730e14a317
Tree-SHA512: 159487e11e858924ef762e0190ccaea185bdff239e3d2280c8d63c4ac2649ec71714dc4d53dec644f03488f91c3b4bbbbf3434dad23bc0fcecb6657f353ea766
e6864fa157 contrib: remove builder keys (fanquake)
Pull request description:
This has been superseded by adding a builder-keys/ directory in
guix.sigs, where the presence of keys, and validity of signatures
is checked. Preventing issues like missing keys or invalid signatures.
New (or exisiting) Guix builders can add their key in the next PR
they open adding attestations.
Related to issues like #26566, #26563.
Also follows up with the comment here: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26565#issuecomment-1326053939.
ACKs for top commit:
hebasto:
ACK e6864fa157, modulo s/update/remove/ in the PR tittle.
Tree-SHA512: 095b4cf12ed0baeaf0ee7b8edcb3e2647e9c0f812e8fd63915ddb454f81dacc9c2d2b409de2773b7adb5ff643893d614d8aad1bc44c26da648e1bbbe19e11e05
21ad4e26ec test: add coverage for cross-chain wallet restore (Sebastian Falbesoner)
8c7222bda3 wallet: fix GUI crash on cross-chain legacy wallet restore (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
Restoring a wallet backup from another chain should result in a dedicated error message (we have _"Wallet files should not be reused across chains. Restart bitcoind with -walletcrosschain to override."_ for that). Unfortunately this is currently not the case for legacy wallet restores, as in the course of cleaning up the newly created wallet directory a `filesystem_error` exception is thrown due to the directory not being empty; the wallet database did indeed load successfully (otherwise we wouldn't know that the chain doesn't match) and hence BDB-related files and directories are already created in the wallet directory.
For bitcoind, this leads to a very confusing error message:
```
$ ./src/bitcoin-cli restorewallet test123 ~/.bitcoin/regtest/wallets/regtest_wallet/wallet.dat
error code: -1
error message: filesystem error: in remove: Directory not empty ["/home/thestack/.bitcoin/wallets/test123"]
```
Even worse, the GUI crashes in such a scenario:
```
libc++abi: terminating with uncaught exception of type std::__1::__fs::filesystem::filesystem_error: filesystem error: in remove: Directory not empty ["/home/thestack/.bitcoin/wallets/foobar"]
Abort trap (core dumped)
```
Fix this by simply deleting the whole folder via `fs::remove_all`. With this, the expected error message appears both for the `restorewallet` RPC call and in the GUI (as a message-box):
```
$ ./src/bitcoin-cli restorewallet test123 ~/.bitcoin/regtest/wallets/regtest_wallet/wallet.dat
error code: -4
error message:
Wallet loading failed. Wallet files should not be reused across chains. Restart bitcoind with -walletcrosschain to override.
```
ACKs for top commit:
achow101:
ACK 21ad4e26ec
aureleoules:
ACK 21ad4e26ec
furszy:
utACK 21ad4e26
Tree-SHA512: 313f6494c2fbe823bff9b975cb2d9410bb518977a1e59a5159ee9836bc012947fa50b56be0e41b1a2f50d9c0c7f4fddfdf4fbe479d8a59a6ee44bb389c804abc
f6eadaa413 Use same Python executable for subprocesses as for all-lint.py (Kristaps Kaupe)
Pull request description:
Before this all linters were ran by `/usr/bin/env python3`, no matter what was used to run `test/lint/all-lint.py`. This change allows to use non-default Python executable for `test/lint/all-lint.py` and then all subprocesses will also use same Python interpreter (for example, `python3.10 ./test/lint/all-lint.py`). See https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/26792#issuecomment-1369558866 as use case.
ACKs for top commit:
fanquake:
ACK f6eadaa413 - did not test
Tree-SHA512: 4da3b5581a0dd8ab9a6387829495019091a93a7ceaf2135d65d40a1983fd11a0b92b20891ef30d2a132abb0a690cd9b2f7eb5fcc38df06a340394ef449d640af
76dc547ee7 gui: create tx, launch error dialog if backend throws runtime_error (furszy)
f4d79477ff wallet: coin selection, add duplicated inputs checks (furszy)
0aa065b14e wallet: return accurate error messages from Coin Selection (furszy)
7e8340ab1a wallet: make SelectCoins flow return util::Result (furszy)
e5e147fe97 wallet: refactor eight consecutive 'AttemptSelection' calls into a loop (furszy)
Pull request description:
Work decoupled from #25806, which cleanup and improves the Coin Selection flow further.
Adding the capability to propagate specific error messages from the Coin Selection process to the user.
Instead of always returning the general "Insufficient funds" message which is not always accurate to what happened internally.
Letting us instruct the user how to proceed under certain circumstances.
The following error messages were added:
1) If the selection result exceeds the maximum transaction weight,
we now will return:
-> "The inputs size exceeds the maximum weight. Please try sending
a smaller amount or manually consolidating your wallet's UTXOs".
2) If the user pre-selected inputs and disallowed the automatic coin
selection process (no other inputs are allowed), we now will
return:
-> "The preselected coins total amount does not cover the transaction
target. Please allow other inputs to be automatically selected or include
more coins manually".
3) The double-counted preset inputs during Coin Selection error will now
throw an "internal bug detected" message instead of crashing the node.
The essence of this work comes from several comments:
1. https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26560#discussion_r1037395665
2. https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25729#discussion_r940619491
3. https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25269#pullrequestreview-1135240825
4. https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/23144 (which is connected to #24845)
ACKs for top commit:
ishaanam:
crACK 76dc547ee7
achow101:
ACK 76dc547ee7
aureleoules:
ACK 76dc547ee7
theStack:
ACK 76dc547ee7🌇
Tree-SHA512: 9de30792d7a5849cae77747aa978e70390b66ee9d082779a56088a024f82e725b0af050e6603aece0ac8229f6d73bc471ba97b4ab69dc7eddf419f5f56ae89a5
04609284ad rpc: Improve error when wallet is already loaded (Aurèle Oulès)
Pull request description:
Currently, trying to load a descriptor (sqlite) wallet that is already loaded throws the following error:
> error code: -4
> error message:
> Wallet file verification failed. SQLiteDatabase: Unable to obtain an exclusive lock on the database, is it being used by another instance of Bitcoin Core?
I don't think it is very clear what it means for a user.
While a legacy wallet would throw:
> error code: -35
> error message:
> Wallet file verification failed. Refusing to load database. Data file '/home/user/.bitcoin/signet/wallets/test_wallet/wallet.dat' is already loaded.
This PR changes the error message for both types of wallet to:
> error code: -35
> error message:
> Wallet file verification failed. Wallet "test_wallet" is already loaded.
ACKs for top commit:
achow101:
ACK 04609284ad
hernanmarino:
ACK 0460928
theStack:
Tested ACK 04609284ad
Tree-SHA512: a8f3d5133bfaef7417a6c05d160910ea08f32ac62bfdf7f5ec305ff5b62e9113b55f385abab4d5a4ad711aabcb1eb7ef746eb41f841b196e8fb5393ab3ccc01e
and not the general "Insufficient funds" when the wallet
actually have funds.
Two new error messages:
1) If the selection result exceeds the maximum transaction weight,
we now will return: "The inputs size exceeds the maximum weight".
2) If the user preselected inputs and disallowed the automatic coin
selection process (no other inputs are allowed), we now will
return: "The preselected coins total amount does not cover the
transaction target".
b2aa9e8528 Add release note for MIN_STANDARD_TX_NONWITNESS_SIZE relaxation (Greg Sanders)
8c5b3646b5 Relax MIN_STANDARD_TX_NONWITNESS_SIZE to 65 non-witness bytes (Greg Sanders)
Pull request description:
Since the original fix was set to be a "reasonable" transaction to reduce allocations and the true motivation later revealed, it makes sense to relax this check to something more principled.
There are more exotic transaction patterns that could take advantage of a relaxed requirement, such as 1 input, 1 output OP_RETURN to burn a utxo to fees for CPFP purposes when change isn't practical.
Two changes could be accomplished:
1) Anything not 64 bytes could be allowed
2) Anything above 64 bytes could be allowed
In the Great Consensus Cleanup, suggestion (2)
was proposed as a consensus change, and is the simpler of the two suggestions. It would not allow an "empty" OP_RETURN but would reduce the required padding from 22 bytes to 5.
The functional test is also modified to test the actual case
we care about: 64 bytes
Related mailing list discussions here:
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2022-October/020995.html
And a couple years earlier:
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2020-May/017883.html
ACKs for top commit:
achow101:
reACK b2aa9e8528
glozow:
reACK b2aa9e8528
pablomartin4btc:
re-ACK b2aa9e8528
jonatack:
ACK b2aa9e8528 with some suggestions
Tree-SHA512: c1ec1af9ddcf31b2272209a4f1ee0c5607399f8172e5a1dfd4604cf98bfb933810dd9369a5917ad122add003327c9fcf6ee26995de3aca41d5c42dba527991ad
dc12f2e212 test: improve error msg on previous release tarball extraction failure (kdmukai)
7121fd8fa7 test: self-sign previous release binaries for arm64 macOS (kdmukai)
Pull request description:
## The Problem
If you run `test/get_previous_releases.py -b` on an M1 or M2 mac, you'll get an unsigned v23.0 binary in the arm64 tarball. macOS [sets stricter requirements on ARM binaries](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26996578) so the unsigned arm64 binary is apparently completely unusable without being signed/notarized(?).
This means that any test that depends on a previous release (e.g. `wallet_backwards_compatibility.py`) will fail because the v23.0 node cannot launch:
```
TestFramework (ERROR): Assertion failed
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/Users/kdmukai/dev/bitcoin-core/test/functional/test_framework/test_framework.py", line 563, in start_nodes
node.wait_for_rpc_connection()
File "/Users/kdmukai/dev/bitcoin-core/test/functional/test_framework/test_node.py", line 231, in wait_for_rpc_connection
raise FailedToStartError(self._node_msg(
test_framework.test_node.FailedToStartError: [node 2] bitcoind exited with status -9 during initialization
```
This can also be confirmed by downloading bitcoin-23.0-arm64-apple-darwin.tar.gz (https://bitcoincore.org/bin/bitcoin-core-23.0/) and trying to run any of the binaries manually on an M1 or M2 mac.
## Solution in this PR
(UPDATED) Per @ hebasto, we can self-sign the arm64 binaries. This PR checks each binary in the previous release's "bin/" and verifies if the arm64 binary is signed. If not, attempt to self-sign and confirm success.
(note: an earlier version of this PR downloaded the x86_64 binary as a workaround but this approach has been discarded)
## Longer term solution
If possible, produce signed arm64 binaries in a future v23.x tarball?
Note that this same problem affects the new v24.0.1 arm64 tarball so perhaps a signed v24.x.x tarball would also be ideal?
That being said, this PR will check all current and future arm64 binaries and self-sign as needed, so perhaps we need not worry about pre-signing the tarball binaries. And I did test a version of `get_previous_releases.py` that includes the new v24.0.1 binaries and it successfully self-signed both v23.0 and v24.0.1, as expected.
## Further info:
Somewhat related to: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15774#issuecomment-1265164753
And @ fanquake noted on IRC that you can confirm which binaries are or are not signed via:
```
$ codesign -v -d bitcoin-qt
bitcoin-qt: code object is not signed at all
```
ACKs for top commit:
hebasto:
ACK dc12f2e212
Tree-SHA512: 644895f8e97f5ffb3c4754c1db2c48abd77fa100c2058e3c896af04806596fc2b9c807a3f3a2add5be53301ad40ca2b8171585bd254e691f6eb38714d938396b
31fdc54dba test: speed up wallet_fundrawtransaction.py and wallet_sendall.py (kdmukai)
Pull request description:
## Problem
`wallet_fundrawtransaction.py` and `wallet_sendall.py` are the two slowest functional tests *when running without a RAM disk*.
```
# M1 MacBook Pro timings
wallet_fundrawtransaction.py --descriptors | ✓ Passed | 55 s
wallet_fundrawtransaction.py --legacy-wallet | ✓ Passed | 381 s
wallet_sendall.py --descriptors | ✓ Passed | 43 s
wallet_sendall.py --legacy-wallet | ✓ Passed | 327 s
```
In each case, the majority of the time is spent iterating through 1500 to 1600 `getnewaddress()` calls. This is particularly slow in the `--legacy-wallet` runs.
see: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/test/functional/wallet_fundrawtransaction.py#L986-L987
see: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/test/functional/wallet_sendall.py#L324
## Solution
Pre-fill the keypool before iterating through those `getnewaddress()` calls.
With this change, the execution time drops to:
```
wallet_fundrawtransaction.py --descriptors | ✓ Passed | 52 s # -3s diff
wallet_fundrawtransaction.py --legacy-wallet | ✓ Passed | 291 s # -90s diff
wallet_sendall.py --descriptors | ✓ Passed | 27 s # -16s diff
wallet_sendall.py --legacy-wallet | ✓ Passed | 228 s # -99s diff
```
---
Tagging @ Sjors as he had encouraged me to take a look at speeding up the tests.
ACKs for top commit:
achow101:
ACK 31fdc54dba
Tree-SHA512: e8dd89323551779832a407d068977c827c09dff55c1079d3c19aab39fcce6957df22b1da797ed7aa3bc2f6dd22fdf9e6f5e1a9a0200fdb16ed6042fc5f6dd992
a4defcdd57 test, lint: add `crypted` to `ignore-words` (brunoerg)
Pull request description:
Fixes#26719
"Crypted" is used in some comments at `walletload_tests` because it refers to `DBKeys::CRYPTED_KEY`, it's not necessary
a mistake.
Obs: I can change the approach (changing `walletload_tests` comments to use `encrypted` word instead of adding it to the `ignore_words`) if reviewers think it makes more sense.
ACKs for top commit:
achow101:
ACK a4defcdd57
Tree-SHA512: 49f38eed30ffb0fda4e792566591c3455629379619eb9a5c4240c5b00e14cd27ba1faa36337192233752e642f0998373b86fcb8ca586508bbf15900d68b17950
This has been superseded by adding a builder-keys/ directory in
guix.sigs, where the presence of keys, and validity of signatures
is checked. Preventing issues like missing keys or invalid signatures.
New (or exisiting) Guix builders can add their key in the next PR
they open adding attestations.
Since the original fix was set to be a "reasonable" transaction
to reduce allocations and the true motivation later revealed,
it makes sense to relax this check to something more principled.
There are more exotic transaction patterns that could take advantage
of a relaxed requirement, such as 1 input, 1 output OP_RETURN to burn
a utxo to fees for CPFP purposes when change isn't practical.
Two changes could be accomplished:
1) Anything not 64 bytes could be allowed
2) Anything above 64 bytes could be allowed
In the Great Consensus Cleanup, suggestion (2) was the route taken.
It would not allow an "empty" OP_RETURN
but would reduce the required padding from 22 bytes to 5.
The functional test is also modified to test the actual case
we care about: 64 bytes
ec63a4892e test: call `keypoolrefill` with private keys disabled should throw an error (brunoerg)
Pull request description:
This PR adds test coverage for the following error:
cb32328d1b/src/wallet/rpc/addresses.cpp (L332-L334)
ACKs for top commit:
aureleoules:
ACK ec63a4892e
Tree-SHA512: b5deda8981ff472f290e6e16c8723a58e02cbe099afd1f672c099f4add0a1d9b192b11a2c3f0e11b96794671f6b9efa75812b7a174248d7c58d7fd7d3310e7b9
1647a11f39 tests: Reorder longer running tests in test_runner (Andrew Chow)
ff6c9fe027 tests: Whitelist test p2p connection in rpc_packages (Andrew Chow)
8c20796aac tests: Use waitfornewblock for work queue test in interface_rpc (Andrew Chow)
6c872d5e65 tests: Initialize sigops draining script with bytes in feature_taproot (Andrew Chow)
544cbf776c tests: Use batched RPC in feature_fee_estimation (Andrew Chow)
4ad7272f8b tests: reduce number of generated blocks for wallet_import_rescan (Andrew Chow)
Pull request description:
When configured with `--enable-debug`, many tests become dramatically slower. These slow downs are particularly noticed in tests that generate a lot of blocks in separate calls, make a lot of RPC calls, or send a lot of data from the test framework's P2P connection. This PR aims to improve the runtime of some of the slower tests and improve the overall runtime of the test runner. This has improved the runtime of the test runner from ~400s to ~140s on my computer.
The slowest test by far was `wallet_import_rescan.py`. This was taking ~320s. Most of that time was spent waiting for blocks to be mined and then synced to the other nodes. It was generating a new block for every new transaction it was creating in a setup loop. However it is not necessary to have one tx per block. By mining a block only every 10 txs, the runtime is improved to ~61s.
The second slowest test was `feature_fee_estimation.py`. This test spends most of its time waiting for RPCs to respond. I was able to improve its runtime by batching RPC requests. This has improved the runtime from ~201s to ~140s.
In `feature_taproot.py`, the test was constructing a Python `CScript` using a very large list of `OP_CHECKSIG`s. The constructor for the Python implementation of `CScript` was iterating this list in order to create a `bytes` from it even though a `bytes` could be created from it without iterating. By making the `bytes` before passing it into the constructor, we are able to improve this test's runtime from ~131s to ~106s.
Although `interface_rpc.py` was not typically a slow test, I found that it would occasionally have a super long runtime. It typically takes ~7s, but I have observed it taking >400s to run on occasion. This longer runtime occurs more often when `--enable-debug`. This long runtime was caused by the "exceeding work queue" test which is really just trying to trigger a race condition. In this test, it would create a few threads and try an RPC in a loop in the hopes that eventually one of the RPCs would be added to the work queue while another was processing. It used `getrpcinfo` for this, but this function is fairly fast. I believe what was happening was that with `--enable-debug`, all of the code for receiving the RPC would often take longer to run than the RPC itself, so the majority of the requests would succeed, until we got lucky after 10's of thousands of requests. By changing this to use a slow RPC, the race condition can be triggered more reliably, and much sooner as well. I've used `waitfornewblock` with a 500ms timeout. This improves the runtime to ~3s consistently.
The last test I've changed was `rpc_packages.py`. This test was one of the higher runtime variability tests. The main source of this variation appears to be waiting for the test node to relay a transaction to the test framework's P2P connection. By whitelisting that peer, the variability is reduced to nearly 0.
Lastly, I've reordered the tests in `test_runner.py` to account for the slower runtimes when configured with `--enable-debug`. Some of the slow tests I've looked at were listed as being fast which was causing overall `test_runner.py` runtime to be extended. This change makes the test runner's runtime be bounded by the slowest test (currently `feature_fee_estimation.py` with my usual config (`-j 60`).
ACKs for top commit:
willcl-ark:
ACK 1647a11
Tree-SHA512: 529e0da4bc51f12c78a40d6d70b3a492b97723c96a3526148c46943d923c118737b32d2aec23d246392e50ab48013891ef19fe6205bf538b61b70d4f16a203eb
fanquake