Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

backport: bitcoin#15545,18418, 20681,20829,21042,21394,21398,21567,21736,21759 #5530

Merged
merged 10 commits into from
Aug 28, 2023

Conversation

vijaydasmp
Copy link

No description provided.

@vijaydasmp vijaydasmp changed the title Bp22 14 backport: bitcoin#15545,18418 Aug 6, 2023
@vijaydasmp vijaydasmp force-pushed the bp22_14 branch 2 times, most recently from 91535fd to f0079dc Compare August 8, 2023 18:02
@vijaydasmp vijaydasmp changed the title backport: bitcoin#15545,18418 backport: bitcoin#15545,18418, 19771 Aug 8, 2023
@vijaydasmp vijaydasmp force-pushed the bp22_14 branch 2 times, most recently from 6728914 to fd51891 Compare August 9, 2023 09:49
@vijaydasmp vijaydasmp changed the title backport: bitcoin#15545,18418, 19771 backport: bitcoin#15545,18418, 20832 Aug 9, 2023
@vijaydasmp vijaydasmp force-pushed the bp22_14 branch 3 times, most recently from 95ceb8f to 9e5d733 Compare August 9, 2023 12:44
@vijaydasmp vijaydasmp changed the title backport: bitcoin#15545,18418, 20832 backport: bitcoin#15545,18418, 20681,20829,21042 Aug 9, 2023
@vijaydasmp vijaydasmp changed the title backport: bitcoin#15545,18418, 20681,20829,21042 backport: bitcoin#15545,18418, 20681,20829,21042,21394,21398,21567,21736,21759 Aug 11, 2023
@vijaydasmp vijaydasmp force-pushed the bp22_14 branch 2 times, most recently from fba8ffd to 8da9fbb Compare August 12, 2023 07:09
@vijaydasmp vijaydasmp marked this pull request as ready for review August 12, 2023 12:24
Copy link
Collaborator

@knst knst left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

see comments

test/functional/test-shell.md Show resolved Hide resolved
doc/fuzzing.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Collaborator

@knst knst left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

utACK

@UdjinM6 UdjinM6 added this to the 20 milestone Aug 25, 2023
Copy link

@UdjinM6 UdjinM6 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

utACK

Copy link
Member

@PastaPastaPasta PastaPastaPasta left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

utACK for merging via merge commit

MarcoFalke and others added 6 commits August 28, 2023 11:31
…AcceptBlock

3d552b0 [doc] explain why CheckBlock() is called before AcceptBlock() (Sjors Provoost)

Pull request description:

  Based on https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2019-February/016697.html and its PDF attachment.

ACKs for top commit:
  MarcoFalke:
    cr ACK 3d552b0

Tree-SHA512: d1ef39855317853e0e7e051ec6015054d0d227fcdf20281c2c1921056537f1f79044aa1bdd35f46475edd17596fbcae79aeb338c4865b1269a01b158f6cb2ac4
e6fe1c3 rpc: Improve avoidpartialspends and avoid_reuse documentation (Fabian Jahr)
8f07307 wallet: Increase OUTPUT_GROUP_MAX_ENTRIES to 100 (Fabian Jahr)

Pull request description:

  Follow-up to bitcoin#17824.

  This increases OUTPUT_GROUP_MAX_ENTRIES to 100 which means that OutputGroups will now be up to 100 outputs large, up from previously 10. The main motivation for this change is that during the PR review club on bitcoin#17824 [several participants signaled](https://bitcoincore.reviews/17824.html#l-339) that 100 might be a better value here.

  I think fees should be manageable for users but more importantly, users should know what they can expect when using the wallet with this configuration, so I also tried to clarify the documentation on `-avoidpartialspends` and `avoid_reuse` a bit. If there are other additional ways how or docs where users can be made aware of the potential consequences of using these parameters, please let me know. Another small upside is that [there seem to be a high number of batching transactions with 100 and 200 inputs](https://miro.medium.com/max/3628/1*sZ5eaBSbsJsHx-J9iztq2g.png)([source](https://medium.com/@hasufly/an-analysis-of-batching-in-bitcoin-9bdf81a394e0)) giving these transactions a bit of a larger anonymity set, although that is probably a very weak argument.

ACKs for top commit:
  jnewbery:
    ACK e6fe1c3
  Xekyo:
    retACK e6fe1c3
  rajarshimaitra:
    tACK `e6fe1c3`
  achow101:
    ACK e6fe1c3
  glozow:
    code review ACK bitcoin@e6fe1c3

Tree-SHA512: 79685c58bafa64ed8303b0ecd616fce50fc9a2b758aa79833e4ad9f15760e09ab60c007bc16ab4cbc4222e644cfd154f1fa494b0f3a5d86faede7af33a6f2826
…arkdown

7b6887e doc: Convert depends options list from html to markdown (Wladimir J. van der Laan)

Pull request description:

  This makes it easier to read in `less`, which is important for install instructions.

  Rendered: [before](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/tree/7ef6b1c51d4a00511a74f6d08abb942a7e433f0b/depends#dependency-options) - [after](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/d97042406f9123a295e79893839b03b24d228c95/depends/README.md#dependency-options)

ACKs for top commit:
  jonatack:
    Code review re-ACK 7b6887e per `git diff d970424 7b6887e`
  hebasto:
    re-ACK 7b6887e

Tree-SHA512: 02970b2bb97d2e8fb2d66470f6d70662653fda176bf6f4861742823b361fdc7ab6a2b44143480ac1a525b8d7808b6a068e8b3677dbba16cd783b4cab90470af5
6f2c4fd netinfo: add user help documentation (Jon Atack)

Pull request description:

  This is the help doc commit of bitcoin#20764 without the rest of the PR or anything new since the 0.21.0 branch-off in order to target giving users a -netinfo help doc for 0.21.

  - to test the new help
  ```
  $ ./src/bitcoin-cli -netinfo help
  ```
  - to see the updated short help
  ```
  $ ./src/bitcoin-cli -help | grep -A4 netinfo
  ```

  <details><summary><code>-netinfo</code> help doc</summary><p>

  ```
  $ ./src/bitcoin-cli -netinfo help
  -netinfo level "help"

  Returns a network peer connections dashboard with information from the remote server.
  Under the hood, -netinfo fetches the data by calling getpeerinfo and getnetworkinfo.
  An optional integer argument from 0 to 4 can be passed for different peers listings.
  Pass "help" to see this detailed help documentation.
  If more than one argument is passed, only the first one is read and parsed.
  Suggestion: use with the Linux watch(1) command for a live dashboard; see example below.

  Arguments:
  1. level (integer 0-4, optional)  Specify the info level of the peers dashboard (default 0):
                                    0 - Connection counts and local addresses
                                    1 - Like 0 but with a peers listing (without address or version columns)
                                    2 - Like 1 but with an address column
                                    3 - Like 1 but with a version column
                                    4 - Like 1 but with both address and version columns
  2. help (string "help", optional) Print this help documentation instead of the dashboard.

  Result:

  * The peers listing in levels 1-4 displays all of the peers sorted by direction and minimum ping time:

    Column   Description
    ------   -----------
    <->      Direction
             "in"  - inbound connections are those initiated by the peer
             "out" - outbound connections are those initiated by us
    type     Type of peer connection
             "full"   - full relay, the default
             "block"  - block relay; like full relay but does not relay transactions or addresses
    net      Network the peer connected through ("ipv4", "ipv6", "onion", "i2p", or "cjdns")
    mping    Minimum observed ping time, in milliseconds (ms)
    ping     Last observed ping time, in milliseconds (ms)
    send     Time since last message sent to the peer, in seconds
    recv     Time since last message received from the peer, in seconds
    txn      Time since last novel transaction received from the peer and accepted into our mempool, in minutes
    blk      Time since last novel block passing initial validity checks received from the peer, in minutes
    age      Duration of connection to the peer, in minutes
    asmap    Mapped AS (Autonomous System) number in the BGP route to the peer, used for diversifying
             peer selection (only displayed if the -asmap config option is set)
    id       Peer index, in increasing order of peer connections since node startup
    address  IP address and port of the peer
    version  Peer version and subversion concatenated, e.g. "70016/Satoshi:21.0.0/"

  * The connection counts table displays the number of peers by direction, network, and the totals
    for each, as well as a column for block relay peers.

  * The local addresses table lists each local address broadcast by the node, the port, and the score.

  Examples:

  Connection counts and local addresses only
  > bitcoin-cli -netinfo

  Compact peers listing
  > bitcoin-cli -netinfo 1

  Full dashboard
  > bitcoin-cli -netinfo 4

  Full live dashboard, adjust --interval or --no-title as needed (Linux)
  > watch --interval 1 --no-title ./src/bitcoin-cli -netinfo 4

  See this help
  > bitcoin-cli -netinfo help

  ```
  </p></details>

ACKs for top commit:
  laanwj:
    ACK 6f2c4fd

Tree-SHA512: dd49b1ce65546dacfb8ba9f9d57de0eae55560fd05533cf26c0b5d6ec65bf1de789c3287e90a0e2f47707532fab2fe62919a4192a7ffd58ac8eec18293e9aaeb
590bda7 scripted-diff: Remove setup_clean_chain if default is not changed (Fabian Jahr)
98892f3 doc: Improve setup_clean_chain documentation (Fabian Jahr)

Pull request description:

  The first commit improves documentation on setup_clean_chain which is misunderstood quite frequently. Most importantly it fixes the TestShell docs which are simply incorrect.

  The second commit removes the instances of `setup_clean_clain` in functional tests where it is not changing the default.

  This used to be part of bitcoin#19168 which also sought to rename`setup_clean_chain`.

ACKs for top commit:
  jonatack:
    ACK 590bda7

Tree-SHA512: a7881186e65d31160b8f84107fb185973b37c6e50f190a85c6e2906a13a7472bb4efa9440bd37fe0a9ac5cd2d1e8559870a7e4380632d9a249eca8980b945f3e
ebde946 [doc] Improve comment about protected peers (Amiti Uttarwar)

Pull request description:

  The comment currently suggests a long-standing node would infrequently protect peers under normal circumstances. Clarify that we also protect peers that are synced to the same work as our chain tip. [Relevant check here](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/ee0dc02c6f93de2a366bbff490eb4d37bca6a24f/src/net_processing.cpp#L1997).

ACKs for top commit:
  Empact:
    ACK bitcoin@ebde946
  jnewbery:
    ACK ebde946

Tree-SHA512: 3692f4098e95f935d801e0ee6bbd3a7c9480e66ca070a7c68ba79c4fc2e62377f5d37080c7b6a7d15ab617aaf4d3df9b26abc4f1b090d572ba46fdd092a6a64a
MarcoFalke and others added 4 commits August 28, 2023 11:31
fab633d doc: Update fuzzing docs for afl-clang-lto (MarcoFalke)

Pull request description:

  Update the docs to default to `afl-clang-lto`. The afl-gcc (and other afl legacy fuzz engines) are still supported, though discouraged.

ACKs for top commit:
  fanquake:
    ACK fab633d - seems to work for me. Compiled and ran some fuzzers using Clang 11 on Bionic. Set `llvm-config` so that `clang-11` would be used over `clang` (10).
  jarolrod:
    ACK fab633d, tested on Ubuntu Focal

Tree-SHA512: 3d1969c167bea45a9d691f3b757f51213d550c9c1b895bed1fcf3c2f7345791787cfb13c376291b94eb3181caf4ae3126f4d01c7cebda7b2bb1c40a1294e9a68
4eca20d [doc] correct comment about ATMPW (glozow)
8fa74ae [doc] correct comment in chainparams (glozow)
2f8272c [doc] GetBestBlock() doesn't do nothing (gzhao408)

Pull request description:

  Came across a few misleading comments, wanted to fix them

ACKs for top commit:
  jnewbery:
    ACK 4eca20d
  MarcoFalke:
    ACK 4eca20d
  laanwj:
    Code review ACK 4eca20d

Tree-SHA512: 5bef1f1e7703f304128cf0eb8945e139e031580c99062bbbe15bf4db8443c2ba5a8c65844833132e6646c8980c678fc1d2ab0c63e17105585d583570ee350fd0
…n descriptor.cpp

e5faec6 doc: Fix doxygen comment silent merge conflict in descriptor.cpp (W. J. van der Laan)

Pull request description:

  It looks like bitcoin#21238 introduced a silent merge conflict in the documentation, which fails with `-Wdocumentation` in the CI.

  (please merge only if CI passes)

ACKs for top commit:
  ajtowns:
    ACK e5faec6 -- fixed it for me
  meshcollider:
    ACK e5faec6 modulo CI

Tree-SHA512: b07d50fd12aa7c239a92aad8ef29f4e88583c3ce701ebedba7c426aac4981c79113adc4670b7d055ab9535a28bdc3f9a30e6ca1b1ed0d7b9a333a3d9c4b40d8a
…" warning

0000a0c Remove confusing and almost useless "unexpected version" warning (MarcoFalke)

Pull request description:

  It is useless because it isn't displayed for most users:

  * It isn't displayed in normal operation (because the validation debug category is disabled by default)
  * It isn't displayed for users that sync up their nodes intermittently, e.g. once a day or once a week (because it is disabled for IBD)
  * It is only displayed in the debug log (as opposed to the versionbits warning, which is displayed more prominently)

  It is confusing because it doesn't have a use case:

  Despite the above, if a user *did* see the warning, it would most likely be a false positive (like it has been in the past). Even if it wasn't, there is nothing they can do about it. The only thing they could do is to check for updates and hope that a fixed version is available. But why would the user be so scrupulously precise in enabling the warning and reading the log, but then fail to regularly check update channels for updated software?

ACKs for top commit:
  practicalswift:
    ACK 0000a0c
  decryp2kanon:
    ACK 0000a0c
  LarryRuane:
    ACK 0000a0c

Tree-SHA512: 16e069c84be6ab6034baeefdc515d0e5cdf560b2005d2faec5f989d45494bd16cfcb4ffca6a17211d9556ae44f9737a60a476c08b5c2bb5e1bd29724ecd6d5c1
@PastaPastaPasta PastaPastaPasta merged commit 27be6e6 into dashpay:develop Aug 28, 2023
5 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants