7bf6dfbb48 wallet: Remove path checking code from bitcoin-wallet tool (Russell Yanofsky)
77d5bb72b8 wallet: Remove path checking code from createwallet RPC (Russell Yanofsky)
a987438e9d wallet: Remove path checking code from loadwallet RPC (Russell Yanofsky)
8b5e7297c0 refactor: Pass wallet database into CWallet::Create (Russell Yanofsky)
3c815cfe54 wallet: Remove Verify and IsLoaded methods (Russell Yanofsky)
0d94e60625 refactor: Use DatabaseStatus and DatabaseOptions types (Russell Yanofsky)
b5b414151a wallet: Add MakeDatabase function (Russell Yanofsky)
288b4ffb6b Remove WalletLocation class (Russell Yanofsky)
Pull request description:
Get rid of file path handling in wallet application code and move it down to database layer.
There is no change in behavior except for some changed error messages.
Motivation for this change is to make code more understandable, but also to prepare for adding SQLite support in #19077 so SQLite implementation can be contained at the database layer and wallet loading code does not need to become more complicated.
ACKs for top commit:
achow101:
ACK 7bf6dfbb48
meshcollider:
Code re-review and functional test run ACK 7bf6dfbb48
Tree-SHA512: 23ad18324c9e8947f0cf88a3734c2e9fb25536b2cb4d552cf5d1a4ade320fbffb73bb2d1b3a99585c11630aa7092e0fcfc2dd4fe65b91e3a54161433a5cd13cb
581b343d5b Add in/out connections to cli -getinfo (Jon Atack)
d9cc13e88d UNIX_EPOCH_TIME fixup in rpc getnettotals (Jon Atack)
1ab49b81cf Add in/out connections to rpc getnetworkinfo (Jon Atack)
Pull request description:
This is basic info that is present in the GUI that I've been wishing to have exposed via the RPC and CLI without needing a bash workaround or script. For human users it would also be useful to have it in `-getinfo`.
`bitcoin-cli getnetworkinfo`
```
"connections": 15,
"connections_in": 6,
"connections_out": 9,
```
`bitcoin-cli -getinfo`
```
"connections": {
"in": 6,
"out": 9,
"total": 15
},
```
Update the tests, RPC help, and release notes for the changes. Also fixup the `getnettotals` timemillis help while touching `rpc/net.cpp`.
-----
Reviewers can manually test this PR by [building from source](https://jonatack.github.io/articles/how-to-compile-bitcoin-core-and-run-the-tests), launching bitcoind, and then running `bitcoin-cli -getinfo`, `bitcoin-cli getnetworkinfo`, `bitcoin-cli help getnetworkinfo`, and `bitcoin-cli help getnettotals` (for the UNIX epoch time change).
ACKs for top commit:
eriknylund:
> tACK [581b343](581b343d5b) on master at [a0a422c](a0a422c34c), ran unit & functional tests and and confirmed changes on an existing datadir ✌️
benthecarman:
tACK `581b343`
willcl-ark:
tACK for 581b343d5b, this time rebased onto master at 862fde88be.
shesek:
tACK `581b343`. This provides what I needed, thanks!
n-thumann:
tACK 581b343 on master at a0a422c, ran unit & functional tests and and confirmed changes on an existing datadir ✌️
Tree-SHA512: 08dd3ac8fefae401bd8253ff3ac027603c528eeccba53cedcb127771316173a7052fce44af8fa33ac98ebc4cf2a2b11cdefd949995d55e9b9a5942b876d00dc5
Checks are now consolidated in MakeBerkeleyDatabase function instead of
happening in higher level code.
This commit does not change behavior except for error messages which now
include more complete information.
6de9429087 qa: Changes v0.17.1 to v0.17.2 (nthumann)
Pull request description:
As of 0374e821bd v0.17.2 is downloaded instead of v0.17.1 for functional testing. This causes `test/functional/feature_backwards_compatibility.py` to fail, because it [requires](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/test/functional/feature_backwards_compatibility.py#L57) v0.17.1.
Steps to reproduce:
Run `test/get_previous_releases.py -b v0.19.1 v0.18.1 v0.17.1 v0.16.3 v0.15.2`. It cannot be downloaded at all because the sha256sum is missing [here](c1e0c2ad3b/test/get_previous_releases.py (L23)).
Or adjust the command and run `test/get_previous_releases.py -b v0.19.1 v0.18.1 v0.17.2 v0.16.3 v0.15.2`, then run `test/functional/test_runner.py feature_backwards_compatibility`. It´ll fail because the test is missing v0.17.1.
This PR changes v0.17.1 to v0.17.2 in this test and in a few comments.
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
ACK 6de9429087
fanquake:
ACK 6de9429087 - looks correct. Surprised this wasn't caught/part of #19813. In future you could add any explanations & extra info as part of your commit message as well (even though PR descriptions are included as part of the merge).
Tree-SHA512: bbe50c4fd5c1aedd6dc1cdc3d93ef9005db1c67adca3f263b6b0d869c40b495a3221e706c9389fedea4748e31911dbd591062f60ce9836e58099fbdd9515b4d9
fa1cd9e1dd test: Remove unused lock arg from BitcoinTestFramework.wait_until (MarcoFalke)
fad2794e93 test: Rename wait until helper to wait_until_helper (MarcoFalke)
facb41bf1d test: Remove unused p2p_lock in VersionBitsWarningTest (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
This avoids confusion with the `wait_until` member functions, which should be preferred because they take the appropriate locks and scale the timeout appropriately on their own.
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
Code review ACK fa1cd9e1dd
hebasto:
ACK fa1cd9e1dd, I have reviewed the code and it looks OK, I agree it can be merged.
Tree-SHA512: 319d400085606a4c738e314824037f72998e6657d8622b363726842aba968744f23c56d27275dfe506b8cbbb6e97fc39ca1d325db05d4d67df0e8b35f2244d5c
fb56d37612 p2p: ensure inv is GenMsgTx before ToGenTxid in inv processing (John Newbery)
aa3621385e test: use CInv::MSG_WITNESS_TX flag in p2p_segwit (Jon Atack)
24ee4f01ea p2p: make gtxid(.hash) and fAlreadyHave localvars const (Jon Atack)
b1c855453b p2p: use CInv block message helpers in net_processing.cpp (Jon Atack)
acd6642167 [net processing] Change AlreadyHaveTx() to take a GenTxid (John Newbery)
5fdfb80b86 [net processing] Change AlreadyHaveBlock() to take block_hash argument (John Newbery)
430e183b89 [net processing] Remove mempool argument from AlreadyHaveBlock() (John Newbery)
42ca5618ca [net processing] Split AlreadyHave() into separate block and tx functions (John Newbery)
39f1dc9445 p2p: remove nFetchFlags from NetMsgType TX and INV processing (Jon Atack)
471714e1f0 p2p: add CInv block message helper methods (Jon Atack)
Pull request description:
Building on #19590 and the recent `wtxid` and `GenTxid` changes, this is a refactoring and cleanup PR to simplify and improve some of the net processing code.
Some of the diffs are best reviewed with `-w` to ignore spacing.
Co-authored by John Newbery.
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
Code review ACK fb56d37612
jnewbery:
utACK fb56d37612
vasild:
ACK fb56d3761
Tree-SHA512: ba39b58e6aaf850880a842fe5f6295e9f1870906ef690206acfc17140aae2ac854981e1066dbcd4238062478762fbd040ef772fdc2c50eea6869997c583e6a6d
36ec9801a4 test: Add chacha20 test vectors in muhash (Fabian Jahr)
0e2b400fea test: Add basic Python/C++ Muhash implementation parity unit test (Fabian Jahr)
b85543cb73 test: Add Python MuHash3072 implementation to test framework (Pieter Wuille)
ab30cece0e test: Move modinv to util and add unit test (Fabian Jahr)
Pull request description:
This is the second in a [series of pull requests](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18000) to implement an Index for UTXO set statistics.
This pull request adds a Python implementation of Muhash3072, a homomorphic hashing algorithm to be used for hashing the UTXO set. The Python implementation can then be used to compare behavior with the C++ version.
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
utACK 36ec9801a
laanwj:
Code review ACK 36ec9801a4
Tree-SHA512: a3519c6e11031174f1ae71ecd8bcc7f3be42d7fc9c84c77f2fbea7cfc5ad54fcbe10b55116ad8d9a52ac5d675640eefed3bf260c58a02f2bf3bc0d8ec208baa6
3340dbadd3 Remove -zapwallettxes (Andrew Chow)
Pull request description:
It's not clear what use there is to keeping `-zapwallettxes` given that it's intended usage has been superseded by `abandontransaction`. So this removes it outright.
Alternative to #19700
ACKs for top commit:
meshcollider:
utACK 3340dbadd3
fanquake:
ACK 3340dbadd3 - remaining manpage references will get cleaned up pre-release.
Tree-SHA512: 3e58e1ef6f4f94894d012b93e88baba3fb9c2ad75b8349403f9ce95b80b50b0b4f443cb623cf76c355930db109f491b3442be3aa02972e841450ce52cf545fc8
7356292e1d Have zmq reorg test cover mempool txns (Gregory Sanders)
a0f4f9c983 Add zmq test for transaction pub during reorg (Gregory Sanders)
2399a0600c Add test case for mempool->block zmq notification (Gregory Sanders)
e70512a83c Make ordering of zmq consumption irrelevant to functional test (Gregory Sanders)
Pull request description:
Tests written to better define what messages are sent when. Also did a bit of refactoring to make sure the exact notification channel ordering doesn't matter.
Confusions below aside, I believe having these more descriptive tests helps describe what behavior we expect from ZMQ notificaitons.
Remaining confusion:
1) Notification patterns seem to vary wildly with the inclusion of mempool transactions being reorg'ed. See difference between "Add zmq test for transaction pub during reorg" and "Have zmq reorg test cover mempool txns" commits for specifics.
2) Why does a reorg'ed transaction get announced 3 times? From what I understand it can get announced once for disconnected block, once for mempool entry. What's the third? It occurs a 4th time when included in a block(not added in test)
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
code review ACK 7356292e1d
promag:
Code review ACK 7356292e1d.
Tree-SHA512: 573662429523fd6a1af23dd907117320bc68cb51a93fba9483c9a2160bdce51fb590fcd97bcd2b2751d543d5c1148efa4e22e1c3901144f882b990ed2b450038
-zapwallettxes is made a hidden option to inform users that it is
removed and they should be using abandontransaction to do the stuck
transaction thing.
fa3d9ce325 rpc: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (rpcdump) (MarcoFalke)
fa32c1d5ec rpc: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (zmq) (MarcoFalke)
faaa46dc20 rpc: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (mining) (MarcoFalke)
fa93bc14c7 rpc: Remove unused return type from appendCommand (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
This is split out from #18531 to just touch the RPC methods in misc. Description from the main pr:
### Motivation
RPCArg names in the rpc help are currently only used for documentation. However, in the future they could be used to teach the server the named arguments. Named arguments are currently registered by the `CRPCCommand`s and duplicate the RPCArg names from the documentation. This redundancy is fragile, and has lead to errors in the past (despite having linters to catch those kind of errors). See section "bugs found" for a list of bugs that have been found as a result of the changes here.
### Changes
The changes here add an assert in the `CRPCCommand` constructor that the RPCArg names are identical to the ones in the `CRPCCommand`.
### Future work
> Here or follow up, makes sense to also assert type of returned UniValue?
Sure, but let's not get ahead of ourselves. I am going to submit any further works as follow-ups, including:
* Removing the CRPCCommand arguments, now that they are asserted to be equal and thus redundant
* Removing all python regex linters on the args, now that RPCMan can be used to generate any output, including the cli.cpp table
* Auto-formatting and sanity checking the RPCExamples with RPCMan
* Checking passed-in json in self-check. Removing redundant checks
* Checking returned json against documentation to avoid regressions or false documentation
* Compile the RPC documentation at compile-time to ensure it doesn't change at runtime and is completely static
### Bugs found
* The assert identified issue #18607
* The changes itself fixed bug #19250
ACKs for top commit:
fjahr:
tested ACK fa3d9ce325
promag:
Code review ACK fa3d9ce325.
Tree-SHA512: 068ade4b55cc195868d53b7f9a27151d45b440857bb069e261a49d102a49a38fdba5d68868516a1d66a54a73ba34681362f934ded7349e894042bde873b75719
6d1f51343c [rpc] fundrawtransaction, walletcreatefundedpsbt lock manually selected coins (Sjors Provoost)
Pull request description:
When using `fundrawtransaction` and `walletcreatefundedpsbt` with `lockUnspents`, it would only lock automatically selected coins, not manually selected coins. That doesn't make much sense to me if the goal is to prevent accidentally double-spending yourself before you broadcast a transaction.
Note that when creating a transaction, manually selected coins are automatic "unlocked" (or more accurately: the lock is ignored). Earlier versions of this PR introduced an error when a locked coin is manually selected, but this idea was abandoned after some discussion. An application that uses this RPC should either rely on automatic coin selection (with `lockUnspents`) or handle lock concurrency itself with manual coin selection. In particular it needs to make sure to avoid/pause calls with automatic coin selection between calling `lockunspent` and the subsequent spending RPC.
See #7518 for historical background.
ACKs for top commit:
meshcollider:
Code review ACK 6d1f51343c
fjahr:
Code review ACK 6d1f51343c
Tree-SHA512: 8773c788d92f2656952e1beac147ba9956b8c5132d474e0880e4c89ff53642928b4cbfcd1cb3d17798b9284f02618a8830c93a9f7a4733e5bded96adff1d5d4d
d841301010 test: Add docstring to wait_until() in util.py to warn about its usage (Seleme Topuz)
1343c86c7c test: Update wait_until usage in tests not to use the one from utils (Seleme Topuz)
Pull request description:
Replace global (from [test_framework/util.py](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/test/functional/test_framework/util.py#L228)) `wait_until()` usages with the ones provided by `BitcoinTestFramework` and `P2PInterface` classes.
The motivation behind this change is that the `util.wait_until()` expects a timeout, timeout_factor and lock and it is not aware of the context of the test framework. `BitcoinTestFramework` offers a `wait_until()` which has an understandable amount of default `timeout` and a shared `timeout_factor`. Moreover, on top of these, `mininode.wait_until()` also has a shared lock.
closes#19080
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
ACK d841301010🦆
kallewoof:
utACK d841301010
Tree-SHA512: 81604f4cfa87fed98071a80e4afe940b3897fe65cf680a69619a93e97d45f25b313c12227de7040e19517fa9c003291b232f1b40b2567aba0148f22c23c47a88
fafc9d5af4 test: Fix intermittent issue in wallet_bumpfee (MarcoFalke)
fa347b2f25 test: Select at least the fee in wallet_bumpfee to avoid negative amounts (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
With a "dirty" mempool a transaction might fail to be accepted intermittently. For example,
* https://travis-ci.org/github/bitcoin-core/gui/jobs/719916499#L6773 Fails acceptance
* https://travis-ci.org/github/bitcoin-core/gui/jobs/719916499#L6954 Test fails
Fix the issue by clearing the mempool between subtests
ACKs for top commit:
promag:
Code review ACK fafc9d5af4.
Tree-SHA512: 23fb6decb6343d19eafddcbdb7da0551f6be11325d1c97c30e563944000aeb02bcc4b24904d204b132c093dc1acf28445fa1fd08bfe8d8b52ddd1de51c33eeb6
d5800da519 [test] Remove final references to mininode (John Newbery)
5e8df3312e test: resort imports (John Newbery)
85165d4332 scripted-diff: Rename mininode to p2p (John Newbery)
9e2897d020 scripted-diff: Rename mininode_lock to p2p_lock (John Newbery)
Pull request description:
New contributors are often confused by the terminology in the test framework, and what the difference between a _node_ and a _peer_ is. To summarize:
- a 'node' is a bitcoind instance. This is the thing whose behavior is being tested. Each bitcoind node is managed by a python `TestNode` object which is used to start/stop the node, manage the node's data directory, read state about the node (eg process status, log file), and interact with the node over different interfaces.
- one of the interfaces that we can use to interact with the node is the p2p interface. Each connection to a node using this interface is managed by a python `P2PInterface` or derived object (which is owned by the `TestNode` object). We can open zero, one or many p2p connections to each bitcoind node. The node sees these connections as 'peers'.
For historic reasons, the word 'mininode' has been used to refer to those p2p interface objects that we use to connect to the bitcoind node (the code was originally taken from the 'mini-node' branch of https://github.com/jgarzik/pynode/tree/mini-node). However that name has proved to be confusing for new contributors, so rename the remaining references.
ACKs for top commit:
amitiuttarwar:
ACK d5800da519
MarcoFalke:
ACK d5800da519🚞
Tree-SHA512: 2c46c2ac3c4278b6e3c647cfd8108428a41e80788fc4f0e386e5b0c47675bc687d94779496c09a3e5ea1319617295be10c422adeeff2d2bd68378e00e0eeb5de
5da96210fc doc: release note for getpeerinfo last_block/last_transaction (Jon Atack)
cfef5a2c98 test: rpc_net.py logging and test naming improvements (Jon Atack)
21c57bacda test: getpeerinfo last_block and last_transaction tests (Jon Atack)
8a560a7d57 rpc: expose nLastBlockTime/TXTime as getpeerinfo last_block/transaction (Jon Atack)
02fbe3ae0b net: add nLastBlockTime/TXTime to CNodeStats, CNode::copyStats (Jon Atack)
Pull request description:
This PR adds inbound peer eviction criteria `nLastBlockTime` and `nLastTXTime` to `CNodeStats` and `CNode::copyStats`, which then allows exposing them in the next commit as `last_transaction` and `last_block` Unix Epoch Time fields in RPC `getpeerinfo`.
This may be useful for writing missing eviction tests. I'd also like to add `lasttx` and `lastblk` columns to the `-netinfo` dashboard as described in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19643#issuecomment-671093420.
Relevant discussion at the p2p irc meeting http://www.erisian.com.au/bitcoin-core-dev/log-2020-08-11.html#l-549:
```text
<jonatack> i was specifically trying to observe and figure out how to test https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19500
<jonatack> which made me realise that i didn't know what was going on with my peer conns in enough detail
<jonatack> i'm running bitcoin locally with nLastBlockTime and nLastTXTime added to getpeerinfo for my peer connections dashboard
<jonatack> sipa: is there a good reason why that (eviction criteria) data is not exposed through getpeerinfo currently?
<sipa> jonatack: nope; i suspect just nobody ever added it
<jonatack> sipa: thanks. will propose.
```
The last commit is optional, but I think it would be good to have logging in `rpc_net.py`.
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
Code review ACK 5da96210fc
theStack:
Code Review ACK 5da96210fc
darosior:
ACK 5da96210fc
Tree-SHA512: 2db164bc979c014837a676e890869a128beb7cf40114853239e7280f57e768bcb43bff6c1ea76a61556212135281863b5290b50ff9d24fce16c5b89b55d4cd70
5067c5acc3 [test] Add test for getblockheader verboseness (Torhte Butler)
Pull request description:
Improve test coverage by adding a test for getblockheader with verbose argument set to false.
ACKs for top commit:
theStack:
ACK 5067c5acc3
Tree-SHA512: e55593f1026a89dc7b796fa985b4cbcdb596e91d80d42dfb0660bda1692aaa35749ec29f9cd7032803f6225afb323f085df1ef6a9982de87be8e098f7253cdd5
124e1ee134 doc: Add release notes for getindexinfo RPC (Fabian Jahr)
c447b09458 test: Add tests for getindexinfo RPC (Fabian Jahr)
667bc7a7f7 rpc: Add getindexinfo RPC (Fabian Jahr)
Pull request description:
As I was playing with indices a I was missing an RPC that gives information about the active indices in the node. I think this can be helpful for many users, especially since there are some new index candidates coming up (#14053, #18000) that can give a quick overview without the user having to parse the logs.
Feature summary:
- Adds new RPC `listindices` (placed in Util section)
- That RPC only lists the actively running indices
- For each index it gives the name, whether it is synced and up to which block height it is synced
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
Re-ACK 124e1ee134
jonatack:
Code review re-ACK 124e1ee per `git range-diff a57af89 47a5372 124e1ee` no change since my last re-ACK, rebase only
Tree-SHA512: 3b7174c87951e6457fef099f530337803906baf32fb64261410b8def2c0917853d6a1bf3059cd590b1cc1523608f8916dafb327a431d27ecbf8d7454406b5b35
It's also clearer to have `no_version_disconnect_node` send a message
other than version or verack in order to reach the peer discouragement
threshold.
7f13dfb587 test: test the implicit avoid partial spends functionality (Karl-Johan Alm)
b82067bf69 wallet: try -avoidpartialspends mode and use its result if fees are below threshold (Karl-Johan Alm)
Pull request description:
The `-avoidpartialspends` feature is normally disabled, as it may affect the optimal fee for payments. This PR introduces a new parameter `-maxapsfee` (max avoid partial spends fee) which acts on the following values:
* -1: disable partial spend avoidance completely (do not even try it)
* 0: only do partial spend avoidance if fees are the same or better as the regular coin selection
* 1..∞: use APS variant if the absolute fee difference is less than or equal to the max APS fee
For values other than -1, the code will now try partial spend avoidance once, and if that gives a value within the accepted range, it will use that.
Example: -maxapsfee=0.00001000 means the wallet will do regular coin select, APS coin select, and then pick AKS iff the absolute fee difference is <= 1000 satoshi.
Edit: updated this to reflect the fact we are now using a max fee.
ACKs for top commit:
fjahr:
tested ACK 7f13dfb587
achow101:
ACK 7f13dfb587
jonatack:
ACK 7f13dfb58, code review, debug build, verified the test fails with `AssertionError: not(2 == 1)` for the number of vouts when `-maxapsfee=0.0001` is changed to 0, and verified the new logging with an added assertion.
meshcollider:
Code review ACK 7f13dfb587
Tree-SHA512: 475929df57f6191bb4e36bfbcad5a280a64bb0ecd8767b76cb2e44e2301235d0eb294a3f2fac5bbf15d35d7ecfba47acb2285feadb883c9ce31c08377e3afb3c
Samuel Dobson