fix(miner): validate cumulative special transaction state per package - #7570
fix(miner): validate cumulative special transaction state per package#7570PastaPastaPasta wants to merge 2 commits into
Conversation
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Repository UI Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Plus Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (7)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (1)
WalkthroughBlock template creation now validates Asset Lock/Unlock transactions at package scope. Credit-pool state rolls back when any transaction in a package fails. EHF signal duplicates are checked before package acceptance. BlockAssembler dependencies were updated. Unit and functional tests cover rollback, valid ancestor packages, and packages rejected for exceeding withdrawal limits. Estimated code review effort: 3 (Moderate) | ~20 minutes Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant BlockAssembler
participant TransactionPackage
participant CCreditPoolDiff
participant BlockTemplate
BlockAssembler->>TransactionPackage: sort ancestor package
BlockAssembler->>CCreditPoolDiff: validate Asset Lock/Unlock transactions
CCreditPoolDiff-->>BlockAssembler: accept or reject package atomically
BlockAssembler->>BlockTemplate: include valid package
Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers: 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4 | ❌ 1❌ Failed checks (1 warning)
✅ Passed checks (4 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Comment |
Potential PR merge conflictsThis is advisory only. It does not block CI, but it marks PRs that will likely need a rebase depending on merge order. If this PR merges firstThese open PRs will likely need a rebase:
|
|
✅ Final review complete — no blockers (commit 929b5a4) |
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 076c8c6efd
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
|
|
||
| bool CCreditPoolDiff::ProcessLockUnlockTransactions(const std::vector<CTransactionRef>& txs, TxValidationState& state) | ||
| { | ||
| auto initialIndexes = newIndexes; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
When a template contains many independent Asset Unlock transactions, this copies every index accumulated from all previously accepted packages before processing each subsequent package. Because newIndexes grows by one per unlock, assembling an unlock-heavy block now performs O(n²) node allocations and hash insertions, which can substantially delay repeated getblocktemplate calls for blocks containing thousands of withdrawals. Track only the indexes inserted by the current package and erase those on rollback, rather than cloning the entire set.
AGENTS.md reference: AGENTS.md:L172-L172
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
thepastaclaw
left a comment
thepastaclaw
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Final validation — Codex/Sol only (Phase 2 disabled)
The package-level credit-pool and EHF accounting is logically sound, and the new tests cover the intended rollback behavior. One in-scope performance issue remains: cloning the cumulative unlock-index set for every package makes unlock-heavy block-template construction quadratic while holding both cs_main and the mempool lock.
Source: reviewer backends: gpt-5.6-sol (Codex general) and gpt-5.6-sol (Codex dash-core-commit-history); final verifier backend: gpt-5.6-sol (Codex). openclaw-agent/cliproxy/gpt-5.6-sol was orchestration-only and is not reviewer evidence.
Validated zero-blocker Codex/Sol precheck evidence was promoted to final because Phase 2 (Sonnet/Opus) is temporarily disabled. This is Codex/Sol-only final validation, not Codex + Sonnet/Opus coverage.
Review provenance
- Codex reviewers:
gpt-5.6-sol— general (completed),gpt-5.6-sol— dash-core-commit-history (completed) - Verifier:
gpt-5.6-sol— verifier - Sonnet/Opus: not run (Phase 2 disabled — temporary Codex/Sol-only final)
- Secondary pass: disabled (
temporary_phase2_sonnet_disable)
🟡 1 suggestion(s)
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
These findings are from an automated code review. Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
In `src/evo/creditpool.cpp`:
- [SUGGESTION] src/evo/creditpool.cpp:325-340: Avoid copying all accepted unlock indexes for every package
`newIndexes` contains the indexes from every Asset Unlock already accepted into the candidate block, so copying the entire set before each package causes O(n²) hash-node allocations across independent unlock packages. A 2 MB template can contain thousands of small Asset Unlock transactions because the withdrawal limit constrains their total amount rather than their count. Once the amount limit is exhausted, each additional unlock package still copies all previously accepted indexes before immediately failing. This work occurs inside `CreateNewBlock()` while both `cs_main` and the mempool lock are held. Record only the indexes inserted by this invocation and erase those during rollback; the amount fields can continue using scalar snapshots.
| bool CCreditPoolDiff::ProcessLockUnlockTransactions(const std::vector<CTransactionRef>& txs, TxValidationState& state) | ||
| { | ||
| auto initialIndexes = newIndexes; | ||
| const auto initialLocked = sessionLocked; | ||
| const auto initialUnlocked = sessionUnlocked; | ||
|
|
||
| for (const auto& tx : txs) { | ||
| if (ProcessLockUnlockTransaction(*tx, state)) continue; | ||
|
|
||
| newIndexes = std::move(initialIndexes); | ||
| sessionLocked = initialLocked; | ||
| sessionUnlocked = initialUnlocked; | ||
| return false; | ||
| } | ||
| return true; | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🟡 Suggestion: Avoid copying all accepted unlock indexes for every package
newIndexes contains the indexes from every Asset Unlock already accepted into the candidate block, so copying the entire set before each package causes O(n²) hash-node allocations across independent unlock packages. A 2 MB template can contain thousands of small Asset Unlock transactions because the withdrawal limit constrains their total amount rather than their count. Once the amount limit is exhausted, each additional unlock package still copies all previously accepted indexes before immediately failing. This work occurs inside CreateNewBlock() while both cs_main and the mempool lock are held. Record only the indexes inserted by this invocation and erase those during rollback; the amount fields can continue using scalar snapshots.
| bool CCreditPoolDiff::ProcessLockUnlockTransactions(const std::vector<CTransactionRef>& txs, TxValidationState& state) | |
| { | |
| auto initialIndexes = newIndexes; | |
| const auto initialLocked = sessionLocked; | |
| const auto initialUnlocked = sessionUnlocked; | |
| for (const auto& tx : txs) { | |
| if (ProcessLockUnlockTransaction(*tx, state)) continue; | |
| newIndexes = std::move(initialIndexes); | |
| sessionLocked = initialLocked; | |
| sessionUnlocked = initialUnlocked; | |
| return false; | |
| } | |
| return true; | |
| } | |
| bool CCreditPoolDiff::ProcessLockUnlockTransactions(const std::vector<CTransactionRef>& txs, TxValidationState& state) | |
| { | |
| const auto initialLocked = sessionLocked; | |
| const auto initialUnlocked = sessionUnlocked; | |
| std::vector<uint64_t> packageIndexes; | |
| packageIndexes.reserve(txs.size()); | |
| for (const auto& tx : txs) { | |
| const bool isUnlock = tx->IsSpecialTxVersion() && tx->nType == TRANSACTION_ASSET_UNLOCK; | |
| if (ProcessLockUnlockTransaction(*tx, state)) { | |
| if (isUnlock) { | |
| const auto payload = GetTxPayload<CAssetUnlockPayload>(*tx); | |
| assert(payload); | |
| packageIndexes.emplace_back(payload->getIndex()); | |
| } | |
| continue; | |
| } | |
| for (const uint64_t index : packageIndexes) { | |
| newIndexes.erase(index); | |
| } | |
| sessionLocked = initialLocked; | |
| sessionUnlocked = initialUnlocked; | |
| return false; | |
| } | |
| return true; | |
| } |
source: ['codex']
2 participants
Issue being fixed or feature implemented
This pull request is based directly on develop and does not depend on another pull request.
What was done?
How Has This Been Tested?
Breaking Changes
None. Consensus validation and transaction serialization are unchanged; this changes block-template package selection so invalid packages are skipped instead of poisoning or aborting template construction.
Checklist:
This pull request was created by Codex.