backport: bitcoin#20773, #21169, #21798, #21810, #21892, #21922, #21931, #22004 #6159

knst · 2024-07-26T16:02:50Z

Issue being fixed or feature implemented

Regular backports from bitcoin v22

What was done?

see commits

How Has This Been Tested?

Run unit/functional tests

Breaking Changes

N/A

Checklist:

I have performed a self-review of my own code
I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests
I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
I have assigned this pull request to a milestone

UdjinM6

light ACK dfa854c

(wallets seems to be loading correctly)

UdjinM6 · 2024-07-30T10:05:52Z

src/test/fuzz/tx_pool.cpp

+    WITH_LOCK(::cs_main, tx_pool.check(chainstate));
+    {
+        BlockAssembler::Options options;
+        options.nBlockMaxSize= fuzzed_data_provider.ConsumeIntegralInRange(0U, MaxBlockSize(true));


21798: nit:

Suggested change

options.nBlockMaxSize= fuzzed_data_provider.ConsumeIntegralInRange(0U, MaxBlockSize(true));

options.nBlockMaxSize = fuzzed_data_provider.ConsumeIntegralInRange(0U, MaxBlockSize(true));

PastaPastaPasta · 2024-08-01T03:34:26Z

contrib/seeds/generate-seeds.py

@@ -16,6 +16,7 @@
    <ip>:<port>
    [<ipv6>]:<port>
    <onion>.onion:<port>
+    <i2p>.b32.i2p:<port>


I'd prefer to have 21825 in it's own PR and we actually test it; basically not clear how this would affect release process, and we should spin up at least 1 i2p node that we run :)

PastaPastaPasta

lgtm dfa854c except the i2p I'd like to be in another PR and tested :)

UdjinM6

utACK 034dbc9

UdjinM6 · 2024-08-02T20:42:28Z

rebased via GH GUI to fix "Check Merge Fast-Forward Only"

PastaPastaPasta

utACK bd5bd72

…g coverage from 65% to 70%. 545404e fuzz: Add RPC interface fuzzing. Increase fuzzing coverage from 65% to 70%. (practicalswift) Pull request description: Add RPC interface fuzzing. This PR increases overall fuzzing line coverage from [~65%](https://marcofalke.github.io/btc_cov/fuzz.coverage/) to ~70% 🎉 To test this PR: ``` $ make distclean $ ./autogen.sh $ CC=clang CXX=clang++ ./configure --enable-fuzz --with-sanitizers=address,fuzzer,undefined $ make -C src/ test/fuzz/fuzz $ FUZZ=rpc src/test/fuzz/fuzz ``` See [`doc/fuzzing.md`](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/fuzzing.md) for more information on how to fuzz Bitcoin Core. Don't forget to contribute any coverage increasing inputs you find to the [Bitcoin Core fuzzing corpus repo](https://github.com/bitcoin-core/qa-assets). Happy fuzzing :) ACKs for top commit: MarcoFalke: Concept ACK 545404e Tree-SHA512: 35fc1b508af42bf480ee3762326b09ff2eecdb7960a1917ad16345fadd5c0c21d666dafe736176e5a848ff6492483c782e4ea914cd9000faf50190df051950fd

fa03d0a fuzz: Create a block template in tx_pool targets (MarcoFalke) fa61ce5 fuzz: Limit mocktime to MTP in tx_pool targets (MarcoFalke) fab646b fuzz: Use correct variant of ConsumeRandomLengthString instead of hardcoding a maximum size (MarcoFalke) fae2c8b fuzz: Allow to pass min/max to ConsumeTime (MarcoFalke) Pull request description: Relatively simple check to ensure a block can always be created from the mempool ACKs for top commit: practicalswift: Tested ACK fa03d0a Tree-SHA512: e613376ccc88591cbe594db14ea21ebc9b2b191f6325b3aa4ee0cd379695352ad3b480e286134ef6ee30f043d486cf9792a1bc7e44445c41045ac8c3b931c7ff

…_pool 99993f0 fuzz: Avoid excessively large min fee rate in tx_pool (MarcoFalke) Pull request description: Any fee rate above 1 BTC / kvB is clearly nonsense, so no need to fuzz this. Hopefully fixes https://bugs.chromium.org/p/oss-fuzz/issues/detail?id=34078 ACKs for top commit: practicalswift: cr ACK 99993f0: patch looks correct despite no `fa` prefix in commit hash Tree-SHA512: bd3651d354b13d889ad1708d2b385ad0479de036de74a237346eefad5dbfb1df76ec02b55ec00487ec598657ef6102f992302b14c4e47f913a9962f81f4157e6

faa0d94 fuzz: Avoid timeout in EncodeBase58 (MarcoFalke) Pull request description: The complexity is O(N^2), so limit the size. Hopefully fixes https://bugs.chromium.org/p/oss-fuzz/issues/detail?id=34126 Oss-Fuzz testcase for `rpc` fuzzer: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/files/6461382/clusterfuzz-testcase-minimized-rpc-4831734974775296.log ACKs for top commit: practicalswift: cr ACK faa0d94: patch looks correct sipa: utACK faa0d94 Tree-SHA512: 57ad9de8d811b828982d09a586782fc8a62fa3685590301d58120e2249caa30a9dccd3abe0b47e00ea8482de705fe0edbed298ab8761ea0d29496b50ed2db5d7

fa397a6 ci: Bump cirrus fuzz CPUs to avoid timeout (MarcoFalke) Pull request description: ACKs for top commit: hebasto: ACK fa397a6, let's try it. Tree-SHA512: 7e06dda66c71d76e5fd144f6b5bb10f0bcac72feb15bd0f400ef08ba4dcb92558319401ef5f9d3822376affceb2192df1903b3a79c0ab2d7283ca21454054dea

5252f86 fuzz: Reduce maintenance requirements by allowing RPC annotations also for conditionally available RPC commands (such as wallet commands) without the fragility of #ifdef forests (practicalswift) 54549dd fuzz: RPC fuzzer post-merge follow-ups. Remove unused includes. Update list of fuzzed RPC commands. (practicalswift) Pull request description: Various RPC fuzzer follow-ups: * Remove unused includes. * Update list of fuzzed RPC commands. * Reduce maintenance requirements by allowing RPC annotations also for conditionally available RPC commands (such as wallet commands) without the fragility of `#ifdef` forests. Context: bitcoin#21169 (review) ACKs for top commit: MarcoFalke: Concept ACK 5252f86 Tree-SHA512: 286d70798131706ffb157758e1c73f7f00ed96ce120c7d9dc849e672b283f1362df47b206cfec9da44d5debb5869225e721761dcd5c38a7d5d1019dc6c912ab2

bbbb518 fuzz: Speed up transaction fuzz target (MarcoFalke) Pull request description: `hashBlock` and `include_addresses` are orthogonal, so no need to do an exhaustive "search". Might fix https://bugs.chromium.org/p/oss-fuzz/issues/detail?id=34491 ACKs for top commit: practicalswift: cr ACK bbbb518: patch looks correct, and `TxToUniv` surprisingly wide in the `transaction_fuzz_target` flame graph! Putting it on a diet makes sense. Tree-SHA512: 1e7c30c7fecf96364a9a1597c0a22139389fdeb67db59f3c2c6fc088196e3332877b2865991a957980d542f99a2f48cc066dd7cc16c695a5113190fe06205089

489ebb7 wallet: make chain optional for CWallet::Create (Ivan Metlushko) d73ae93 CWallet::Create move chain init message up into calling code (Ivan Metlushko) 44c430f refactor: Add CWallet:::AttachChain method (Russell Yanofsky) e2a47ce refactor: move first run detection to client code (Ivan Metlushko) Pull request description: This is a followup for bitcoin#20365 (comment) First part of a refactoring with overall goal to simplify `CWallet` and de-duplicate code with `wallettool` **Rationale**: split `CWallet::Create` and create `CWallet::AttachChain`. `CWallet::AttachChain` takes chain as first parameter on purpose. In future I suggest we can remove `chain` from `CWallet` constructor. The second commit is based on be164f9 from bitcoin#15719 (thanks ryanofsky) cc ryanofsky achow101 ACKs for top commit: ryanofsky: Code review ACK 489ebb7. Only changes since last review were adding a const variable declaration, and implementing suggestion not to move feerate option checks to AttachChain. Thanks for updates and fast responses! Tree-SHA512: 00235abfe1b00874c56c449adcab8a36582424abb9ba27440bf750af8f3f217b68c11ca74eb30f78a2109ad1d9009315480effc78345e16a3074a1b5d8128721

knst added this to the 21.1 milestone Jul 26, 2024

knst force-pushed the bp-v22-p15 branch 2 times, most recently from abbc48d to dfa854c Compare July 29, 2024 06:34

knst marked this pull request as ready for review July 29, 2024 13:48

knst requested review from UdjinM6 and PastaPastaPasta July 29, 2024 13:48

UdjinM6 previously approved these changes Jul 30, 2024

View reviewed changes

PastaPastaPasta reviewed Aug 1, 2024

View reviewed changes

knst dismissed UdjinM6’s stale review via 388c5dd August 1, 2024 18:27

knst force-pushed the bp-v22-p15 branch from dfa854c to 388c5dd Compare August 1, 2024 18:27

knst changed the title ~~backport: bitcoin#20773, #21169, #21798, #21810, #21825, #21892, #21922, #21931, #22004~~ backport: bitcoin#20773, #21169, #21798, #21810, #21892, #21922, #21931, #22004 Aug 1, 2024

knst requested review from PastaPastaPasta and UdjinM6 August 1, 2024 18:28

knst force-pushed the bp-v22-p15 branch from 388c5dd to 034dbc9 Compare August 1, 2024 18:30

UdjinM6 approved these changes Aug 2, 2024

View reviewed changes

UdjinM6 force-pushed the bp-v22-p15 branch from 034dbc9 to cc0188c Compare August 2, 2024 20:41

knst force-pushed the bp-v22-p15 branch from cc0188c to bd5bd72 Compare August 5, 2024 10:26

UdjinM6 modified the milestones: 21.1, 21.2 Aug 8, 2024

PastaPastaPasta approved these changes Aug 12, 2024

View reviewed changes

knst force-pushed the bp-v22-p15 branch from bd5bd72 to e608bc3 Compare August 12, 2024 09:29

MarcoFalke and others added 7 commits August 12, 2024 20:38

laanwj and others added 3 commits August 12, 2024 20:38

fix: follow-up bitcoin#20773 - for collateral lock/unlock coins

4125485

fix: follow-up bitcoin#20773 - coinjoin loader can be nullptr too

9ad26f1

PastaPastaPasta force-pushed the bp-v22-p15 branch from e608bc3 to 9ad26f1 Compare August 12, 2024 13:38

PastaPastaPasta merged commit 60403ef into dashpay:develop Aug 13, 2024
7 of 15 checks passed

knst deleted the bp-v22-p15 branch August 13, 2024 06:21

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

backport: bitcoin#20773, #21169, #21798, #21810, #21892, #21922, #21931, #22004 #6159

backport: bitcoin#20773, #21169, #21798, #21810, #21892, #21922, #21931, #22004 #6159

knst commented Jul 26, 2024 •

edited

Loading

UdjinM6 left a comment

UdjinM6 Jul 30, 2024

PastaPastaPasta Aug 1, 2024 •

edited

Loading

PastaPastaPasta left a comment

UdjinM6 left a comment

UdjinM6 commented Aug 2, 2024

PastaPastaPasta left a comment

	options.nBlockMaxSize= fuzzed_data_provider.ConsumeIntegralInRange(0U, MaxBlockSize(true));
	options.nBlockMaxSize = fuzzed_data_provider.ConsumeIntegralInRange(0U, MaxBlockSize(true));

backport: bitcoin#20773, #21169, #21798, #21810, #21892, #21922, #21931, #22004 #6159

backport: bitcoin#20773, #21169, #21798, #21810, #21892, #21922, #21931, #22004 #6159

Conversation

knst commented Jul 26, 2024 • edited Loading

Issue being fixed or feature implemented

What was done?

How Has This Been Tested?

Breaking Changes

Checklist:

UdjinM6 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

UdjinM6 Jul 30, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

PastaPastaPasta Aug 1, 2024 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

PastaPastaPasta left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

UdjinM6 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

UdjinM6 commented Aug 2, 2024

PastaPastaPasta left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

knst commented Jul 26, 2024 •

edited

Loading

PastaPastaPasta Aug 1, 2024 •

edited

Loading