A BitcoinTestFramework child class which can be imported by an external user or
project. TestShell.setup() initiates an underlying BitcoinTestFramework object
with bitcoind subprocesses, rpc interfaces and test logging.
TestShell.shutdown() safely tears down the BitcoinTestFramework object.
This ensures TestFramework default parameters are set before setup is called. A
child class will therefore have access to defaults when overriding setup.
In order for BitcoinTestFramework to correctly restart after shutdown, the
previous logging handlers need to be removed, or else logging will continue in
the previous temp directory. "Flush" ensures buffers are emptied, and "close"
ensures file handler close logging file.
Setup and shutdown code now moved into dedicated methods. Test "success" is
added as a BitcoinTestFramework member, which can be accessed outside of main.
Argument parsing also moved into separate method and called from main.
The asyncio.new_event_loop() instance is now removed from the NetworkThread
class during shutdown. This enables a NetworkThread instance to be restarted
after being closed. The current NetworkThread class guards against an existing
new_event_loop during initialization.
The function implementing segwit v0 signature hash was originally named
SegwitVersion1SignatureHash() (presumably before segwit v0 was named
segwit v0). Rename it to SegwitV0SignatureHash().
Also rename SignatureHash() to LegacySignatureHash() for disambiguation.
Addresses #17043, affects RBF and BIP68 functional tests.
The "tx-size-small" policy rule rejects transactions with a non-witness size of
smaller than 82 bytes (see src/validation.cpp:MemPoolAccept::PreChecks(...)),
which corresponds to a transaction with 1 segwit input and 1 P2WPKH output.
Through the default address change, the created test transactions have segwit
inputs now and sending to short scriptPubKeys might violate this rule. By
bumping the dummy scriptPubKey size to 22 bytes (= the size of a P2WPKH
scriptPubKey), on all occurences the problem is solved.
The dummy scriptPubKey has the format:
21 <21-byte-long string of 'a' or 1s>
former commit messages, now squashed:
test: rbf, bip68: use constant DUMMY_P2WPKH_SCRIPT for bumped scriptPubKey
test: rbf, bip68: use constant DUMMY_P2WPKH_SCRIPT for dummy scriptPubKeys (b'a' * 35)
test: rbf, bip68: comment DUMMY_P2WPKH_SCRIPT constant, put into common (new) module
fa25f43ac5 p2p: Remove BIP61 reject messages (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Reject messages (BIP 61) appear in the following settings:
* Parsing of reject messages (in case `-debug=net` is set, off by default). This has only been used for a single `LogPrint` call for several releases now. Such logging is completely meaningless to us and should thus be removed.
* The sending of reject messages (in case `-enablebip61` is set, off by default). This can be used to debug a node that is under our control. Instead of hacking this debugging into the p2p protocol, it could be more easily achieved by parsing the debug log. (Use `-printtoconsole` to have it as stream, or read from the `debug.log` file like our python function `assert_debug_log` in the test framework does)
Having to maintain all of this logic and code to accommodate debugging, which can be achieved by other means a lot easier, is a burden. It makes review on net processing changes a lot harder, since the reject message logic has to be carried around without introducing any errors or DOS vectors.
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
utACK fa25f43ac5
laanwj:
I'm still not 100% convinced that I like getting rid of BIP61 conceptually, but apparently everyone wants it, code review ACK fa25f43ac5.
ryanofsky:
Code review ACK fa25f43ac5
Tree-SHA512: daf55254202925e56be3d6cfb3c1c804e7a82cecb1dd1e5bd7b472bae989fd68ac4f21ec53fc46751353056fd645f7f877bebcb0b40920257991423a3d99e0be
ea4cc3a7b3 Truly decouple wallet from chainparams for -fallbackfee (Jorge Timón)
Pull request description:
Before it was 0 by default for main and 20000 for test and regtest.
Now it is 0 by default for all chains, thus there's no need to call Params().
Also now the default for main is properly documented.
Suggestion for release notes:
-fallbackfee was 0 (disabled) by default for the main chain, but 20000 by default for the test chains. Now it is 0 by default for all chains. Testnet and regtest users will have to add fallbackfee=20000 to their configuration if they weren't setting it and they want it to keep working like before.
Should I propose them to the wiki for the release notes or only after merge?
For more context, see https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16402#issuecomment-515701042
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
ACK ea4cc3a7b3
Tree-SHA512: fdfaba5d813da4221e405e0988bef44f3856d10f897a94f9614386d14b7716f4326ab8a6646e26d41ef3f4fa61b936191e216b1b605e9ab0520b0657fc162e6c
Before it was 0 by default for main and 20000 for test and regtest.
Now it is 0 by default for all chains, thus there's no need to call Params().
Also now the default for main is properly documented
fa69588537 test: Make PORT_MIN in test runner configurable (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
This is needed when some ports in the port range are used by other processes. Note that simply assigning the ports dynamically does not work:
* We spin up several nodes per test (each node gets its own port)
* We run several tests in parallel
So to avoid nodes from different tests colliding on ports, the port assignment must be deterministic (can not be dynamic).
Fixes: #10869
ACKs for top commit:
practicalswift:
ACK fa69588537 -- diff looks correct
promag:
ACK fa69588537.
Tree-SHA512: e79adb015e7de79064e2d14336c38bc9672bd779ad6c52917721897e73f617c39d32c068a369c26670002a6c4ab95a71ef3a6878ebdd9710e02f410e2f7bcd14
333317ce6b test: Test that low difficulty chain fork is rejected (MarcoFalke)
fa31dc1bf4 test: Pass down correct chain name in tests (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
To prevent OOM, Bitcoin Core will reject chain forks at low difficulty by default. This is the only use-case of checkpoints, so add a test for it to make sure the feature works as expected. If it didn't work, checkpoints would have no use-case and we might as well remove them
ACKs for top commit:
Sjors:
Thanks for adding the node 1 example. Code review ACK 333317c
Tree-SHA512: 90dffa540d0904f3cffb61d2382b1a26f84fe9560b7013e4461546383add31a8757b350616a6d43217c59ef7b8b2a1b62bb3bab582c679cbb2c660a782ce7be1
fa734603b7 wallet: Fix segmentation fault in CreateWalletFromFile (MarcoFalke)
fab3c34412 test: Print both messages on failure in assert_raises_message (MarcoFalke)
faa13539d5 wallet: Fix documentation around WalletParameterInteraction (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Comes with a test to aid review. The test should fail without the fix to bitcoind
The following `CreateWalletFromFile` issues are fixed:
* `walletFile` refers to freed memory and will thus corrupt the debug.log and/or crash the node if read
* `WalletParameterInteraction` was moved to `CreateWalletFromFile` and `WalletInit::ParameterInteraction` without updating the documentation
ACKs for top commit:
promag:
ACK fa734603b7.
darosior:
ACK fa734603b7
meshcollider:
LGTM, code-read ACK fa734603b7
Tree-SHA512: 2aceb63a3f25b90a840cfa08d37f5874aad4eb3df8c2ebf94e2ed18b55809b185e6920bdb345b988bff1fcea5e68a214fe06c361f7da2c01a3cc29e0cc421cb4
e4f4ea47eb lint: Catch use of [] or {} as default parameter values in Python functions (practicalswift)
25dd867150 Avoid using mutable default parameter values (practicalswift)
Pull request description:
Avoid common Python default parameter gotcha when mutable `dict`/`list`:s are used as default parameter values.
Examples of this gotcha caught during review:
* https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16673#discussion_r317415261
* https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14565#discussion_r241942304
Perhaps surprisingly this is how mutable list and dictionary default parameter values behave in Python:
```
>>> def f(i, j=[], k={}):
... j.append(i)
... k[i] = True
... return j, k
...
>>> f(1)
([1], {1: True})
>>> f(1)
([1, 1], {1: True})
>>> f(2)
([1, 1, 2], {1: True, 2: True})
```
In contrast to:
```
>>> def f(i, j=None, k=None):
... if j is None:
... j = []
... if k is None:
... k = {}
... j.append(i)
... k[i] = True
... return j, k
...
>>> f(1)
([1], {1: True})
>>> f(1)
([1], {1: True})
>>> f(2)
([2], {2: True})
```
The latter is typically the intended behaviour.
This PR fixes two instances of this and adds a check guarding against this gotcha going forward :-)
ACKs for top commit:
Sjors:
Oh Python... ACK e4f4ea47eb. Testing tip: swap the two commits.
Tree-SHA512: 56e14d24fc866211a20185c9fdb274ed046c3aed2dc0e07699e58b6f9fa3b79f6d0c880fb02d72b7fe5cc5eb7c0ff6da0ead33123344e1a872209370c2e49e3f
e78aaf41f4 [docs] Add release notes for burying bip 9 soft fork deployments (John Newbery)
8319e738f9 [tests] Add coverage for the content of getblockchaininfo.softforks (James O'Beirne)
0328dcdcfc [Consensus] Bury segwit deployment (John Newbery)
1c93b9b31c [Consensus] Bury CSV deployment height (John Newbery)
3862e473f0 [rpc] Tidy up reporting of buried and ongoing softforks (John Newbery)
Pull request description:
This hardcodes CSV and segwit activation heights, similar to the BIP 90 buried deployments for BIPs 34, 65 and 66.
CSV and segwit have been active for over 18 months. Hardcoding the activation height is a code simplification, makes it easier to understand segwit activation status, and reduces technical debt.
This was originally attempted by jl2012 in #11398 and again by me in #12360.
ACKs for top commit:
ajtowns:
ACK e78aaf41f4 ; checked diff to previous acked commit, checked tests still work
ariard:
ACK e78aaf4, check diff, run the tests again and successfully activated csv/segwit heights on mainnet as expected.
MarcoFalke:
ACK e78aaf41f4 (still didn't check if the mainnet block heights are correct, but the code looks good now)
Tree-SHA512: 7e951829106e21a81725f7d3e236eddbb59349189740907bb47e33f5dbf95c43753ac1231f47ae7bee85c8c81b2146afcdfdc11deb1503947f23093a9c399912
fa3c6575ca lint: Add false positive to python dead code linter (MarcoFalke)
fa25668e1c test: Test p2sh-witness and bech32 in wallet_import_rescan (MarcoFalke)
fa79af2989 test: Replace fragile "rng" with call to random() (MarcoFalke)
fac3dcf7d0 test: Generate one block for each send in wallet_import_rescan (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
This adds test coverage for segwit in the `wallet_import_rescan` test, among other cleanups.
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
ACK fa3c6575ca
Tree-SHA512: 877741763c62c1bf9d868864a1e3f0699857e8c028e9fcd65c7eeb73600c22cbe97b7b51093737743d9e87bcb991c1fe1086f673e18765aef0fcfe27951402f0
c5b404e8f1 Add functional tests for flexible whitebind/list (nicolas.dorier)
d541fa3918 Replace the use of fWhitelisted by permission checks (nicolas.dorier)
ecd5cf7ea4 Do not disconnect peer for asking mempool if it has NO_BAN permission (nicolas.dorier)
e5b26deaaa Make whitebind/whitelist permissions more flexible (nicolas.dorier)
Pull request description:
# Motivation
In 0.19, bloom filter will be disabled by default. I tried to make [a PR](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16176) to enable bloom filter for whitelisted peers regardless of `-peerbloomfilters`.
Bloom filter have non existent privacy and server can omit filter's matches. However, both problems are completely irrelevant when you connect to your own node. If you connect to your own node, bloom filters are the most bandwidth efficient way to synchronize your light client without the need of some middleware like Electrum.
It is also a superior alternative to BIP157 as it does not require to maintain an additional index and it would work well on pruned nodes.
When I attempted to allow bloom filters for whitelisted peer, my proposal has been NACKed in favor of [a more flexible approach](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16176#issuecomment-500762907) which should allow node operator to set fine grained permissions instead of a global `whitelisted` attribute.
Doing so will also make follow up idea very easy to implement in a backward compatible way.
# Implementation details
The PR propose a new format for `--white{list,bind}`. I added a way to specify permissions granted to inbound connection matching `white{list,bind}`.
The following permissions exists:
* ForceRelay
* Relay
* NoBan
* BloomFilter
* Mempool
Example:
* `-whitelist=bloomfilter@127.0.0.1/32`.
* `-whitebind=bloomfilter,relay,noban@127.0.0.1:10020`.
If no permissions are specified, `NoBan | Mempool` is assumed. (making this PR backward compatible)
When we receive an inbound connection, we calculate the effective permissions for this peer by fetching the permissions granted from `whitelist` and add to it the permissions granted from `whitebind`.
To keep backward compatibility, if no permissions are specified in `white{list,bind}` (e.g. `--whitelist=127.0.0.1`) then parameters `-whitelistforcerelay` and `-whiterelay` will add the permissions `ForceRelay` and `Relay` to the inbound node.
`-whitelistforcerelay` and `-whiterelay` are ignored if the permissions flags are explicitly set in `white{bind,list}`.
# Follow up idea
Based on this PR, other changes become quite easy to code in a trivially review-able, backward compatible way:
* Changing `connect` at rpc and config file level to understand the permissions flags.
* Changing the permissions of a peer at RPC level.
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
re-ACK c5b404e8f1
Tree-SHA512: adfefb373d09e68cae401247c8fc64034e305694cdef104bdcdacb9f1704277bd53b18f52a2427a5cffdbc77bda410d221aed252bc2ece698ffbb9cf1b830577
This combines reporting of buried (formally ISM) softfork deployments
and BIP9 versionbits softfork deployments into one JSON object in the
getblockchaininfo return object.
fa8489a155 test: Add test for BIP30 duplicate tx (MarcoFalke)
77770d95e2 test: Properly serialize BIP34 coinbase height (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
This adds a test for BIP30 to check that duplicate txs can exist in the blockchain given the first one was completely spent when the second one is added. (Requested by ajtowns in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16333#issuecomment-508604071)
We can not add a test that a later duplicate tx overwrites a previous one, because BIP30 is always enforced on regtest. If someone feels strongly about such a test, some Bitcoin Core code would have to be modified, which can be done in a follow up pull request.
Also, add a commit to fix the BIP34 test failures reported in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14633#issue-227712540
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
Code review ACK fa8489a155
Tree-SHA512: c707d0bdc93937263876b603425b53322a2a9f9ec3f50716ae2fa9de8ddc644beb22b26c1bfde7f4aab102633e096b354ef380db919176bd2cb44a2828f884aa
faf36838bd test: Avoid hardcoding the chain name in combine_logs (MarcoFalke)
fa8a1d7ba3 test: Adapt test framework for chains other than "regtest" (MarcoFalke)
68f546635d test: Fix “local variable 'e' is assigned to but never used” (Ben Woosley)
Pull request description:
This is required for various work in progress:
* testchains #8994
* signet #16411
* some of my locally written tests
While it will be unused in the master branch as of now, it will make all of those pull requests shorter. Thus review for non-regtest tests can focus on the actual changes and not some test framework changes.
ACKs for top commit:
jonatack:
ACK faf36838bd, ran tests and reviewed the code.
Tree-SHA512: 35add66c12cab68f2fac8f7c7d47c604d3f24eae9336ff78f83e2c92b3dc08a25e7f4217199bac5393dd3fb72f945bba9c001d6fbb8efd298c88858075fcb3d6
Jon Atack