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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

gossipd: don't "unmark" dying channels' updates if we receive them. #6426

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 25, 2023
Merged

gossipd: don't "unmark" dying channels' updates if we receive them. #6426

merged 1 commit into from
Jul 25, 2023

Commits on Jul 22, 2023

  1. gossipd: don't "unmark" dying channels' updates if we receive them. 

    This looked like a test flake, but was real:

```
        l1.daemon.wait_for_log("closing soon due to the funding outpoint being spent")
    
        # We won't gossip the dead channel any more (but we still propagate node_announcement).  But connectd is not explicitly synced, so wait for "a bit".
        time.sleep(1)
>       assert len(get_gossip(l1)) == 2
E       assert 4 == 2
```

We can see that two channel_updates come in *after* we mark it dying:

```
gossipd: channel 103x1x0 closing soon due to the funding outpoint being spent
gossipd: REPLY WIRE_GOSSIPD_NEW_BLOCKHEIGHT_REPLY with 0 fds
022d223620a359a47ff7f7ac447c85c46c923da53389221a0054c11c1e3ca31d59-gossipd: Received channel_update for channel 103x1x0/0 now DISABLED
022d223620a359a47ff7f7ac447c85c46c923da53389221a0054c11c1e3ca31d59-gossipd: Received channel_update for channel 103x1x0/1 now DISABLED
```

We should keep marking channel_updates the same way.

Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
    @rustyrussell
    rustyrussell committed Jul 22, 2023
    Configuration menu
    Copy the full SHA
    bbe8b36 View commit details
    Browse the repository at this point in the history