Previously in getblocktemplate only curtime took the timewarp rule into account.
Mining pool software could use either, though in general it should use curtime.
a4df12323c4e9230bca58562ba17ecee4233f8fe doc: add release notes (Sjors Provoost)
c75872ffdd98ce9f04fb8489515d1b63853f03b4 test: use DIFF_1_N_BITS in tool_signet_miner (tdb3)
4131f322ac0abe43639065362cd3c4ea36d2c5c3 test: check difficulty adjustment using alternate mainnet (Sjors Provoost)
c4f68c12e228818f655352d17d038dcc7ba1db3a Use OP_0 for BIP34 padding in signet and tests (Sjors Provoost)
cf0a62878be214cd4ec779aab214221b27b769b6 rpc: add next to getmininginfo (Sjors Provoost)
2d18a078a2d9eaa53b8b7acc7600141c69f0d742 rpc: add target and bits to getchainstates (Sjors Provoost)
f153f57acc9f9a6f84af161d5bed9aa9965abaa3 rpc: add target and bits to getblockchaininfo (Sjors Provoost)
baa504fdfaff4a9f61bc939035df5d5f2978cfd7 rpc: add target to getmininginfo result (Sjors Provoost)
2a7bfebd5e788e1d9e7e07a9f1b8e3625a0301cd Add target to getblock(header) in RPC and REST (Sjors Provoost)
341f93251677fee66c822f414b75499e8b3b31f6 rpc: add GetTarget helper (Sjors Provoost)
d20d96fa41ce706ccc480b4f3143438ce0720348 test: use REGTEST_N_BITS in feature_block (tdb3)
7ddbed4f9fc0c90bfed244a71194740a4a1fa1be rpc: add nBits to getmininginfo (Sjors Provoost)
ba7b9f3d7bf5a1ad395262b080e832f5c9958e4d build: move pow and chain to bitcoin_common (Sjors Provoost)
c4cc9e3e9df2733260942e0513dd8478d2a104da consensus: add DeriveTarget() to pow.h (Sjors Provoost)
Pull request description:
**tl&dr for consensus-code only reviewers**: the first commit splits `CheckProofOfWorkImpl()` in order to create a `DeriveTarget()` helper. The rest of this PR does not touch consensus code.
There are three ways to represent the proof-of-work in a block:
1. nBits
2. Difficulty
3. Target
The latter notation is useful when you want to compare share work against either the pool target (to get paid) or network difficulty (found an actual block). E.g. for difficulty 1 which corresponds to an nBits value of `0x00ffff`:
```
share hash: f6b973257df982284715b0c7a20640dad709d22b0b1a58f2f88d35886ea5ac45
target: 7fffff0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
```
It's immediately clear that the share is invalid because the hash is above the target.
This type of logging is mostly done by the pool software. It's a nice extra convenience, but not very important. It impacts the following RPC calls:
1. `getmininginfo` displays the `target` for the tip block
2. `getblock` and `getblockheader` display the `target` for a specific block (ditto for their REST equivalents)
The `getdifficulty` method is a bit useless in its current state, because what miners really want to know if the difficulty for the _next_ block. So I added a boolean argument `next` to `getdifficulty`. (These values are typically the same, except for the first block in a retarget period. On testnet3 / testnet4 they change when no block is found after 20 minutes).
Similarly I added a `next` object to `getmininginfo` which shows `bit`, `difficulty` and `target` for the next block.
In order to test the difficulty transition, an alternate mainnet chain with 2016 blocks was generated and used in `mining_mainnet.py`. The chain is deterministic except for its timestamp and nonce values, which are stored in `mainnet_alt.json`.
As described at the top, this PR introduces a helper method `DeriveTarget()` which is split out from `CheckProofOfWorkImpl`. The proposed `checkblock` RPC in #31564 needs this helper method internally to figure out the consensus target.
Finally, this PR moves `pow.cpp` and `chain.cpp` from `bitcoin_node` to `bitcoin_common`, in order to give `rpc/util.cpp` (which lives in `bitcoin_common`) access to `pow.h`.
ACKs for top commit:
ismaelsadeeq:
re-ACK a4df12323c4e9230bca58562ba17ecee4233f8fe
tdb3:
code review re ACK a4df12323c4e9230bca58562ba17ecee4233f8fe
ryanofsky:
Code review ACK a4df12323c4e9230bca58562ba17ecee4233f8fe. Only overall changes since last review were dropping new `gettarget` method and dropping changes to `getdifficulty`, but there were also various internal changes splitting and rearranging commits.
Tree-SHA512: edef5633590379c4be007ac96fd1deda8a5b9562ca6ff19fe377cb552b5166f3890d158554c249ab8345977a06da5df07866c9f42ac43ee83dfe3830c61cd169
223081ece651dc616ff63d9ac447eedc5c2a28fa scripted-diff: rename block and undo functions for consistency (Lőrinc)
baaa3b284671ba28dbbcbb43851ea46175fd2b13 refactor,blocks: remove costly asserts and modernize affected logs (Lőrinc)
fa39f27a0f8b8d14f6769d48f43999a3a1148e4f refactor,blocks: deduplicate block's serialized size calculations (Lőrinc)
dfb2f9d004860c95fc6f0d4a016a9c038d53a475 refactor,blocks: inline `WriteBlockToDisk` (Lőrinc)
42bc4914658d9834a653bd1763aa8f0d54355480 refactor,blocks: inline `UndoWriteToDisk` (Lőrinc)
86b85bb11f8999eb59e34bd026b0791dc866f2eb bench: add SaveBlockBench (Lőrinc)
34f9a0157aad7c10ac364b7e4602c5f74c1f9e20 refactor,bench: rename bench/readblock.cpp to bench/readwriteblock.cpp (Lőrinc)
Pull request description:
`UndoWriteToDisk` and `WriteBlockToDisk` were delegating a subset of their functionality to single-use methods that didn't optimally capture a meaningful chunk of the algorithm, resulting in calculating things twice (serialized size, header size).
This change inlines the awkward methods (asserting that all previous behavior was retained), and in separate commits makes the usages less confusing.
Besides making the methods slightly more intuitive, the refactorings reduce duplicate calculations as well.
The speed difference is insignificant for now (~0.5% for the new `SaveBlockToDiskBench`), but are a cleanup for follow-ups such as https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31539
ACKs for top commit:
ryanofsky:
Code review ACK 223081ece651dc616ff63d9ac447eedc5c2a28fa. Since last review, "Save" was renamed to "Write", uint32_t references were dropped, some log statements and comments were improved as suggested, and a lot of tweaks made to commits and commit messages which should make this easier to review.
hodlinator:
ACK 223081ece651dc616ff63d9ac447eedc5c2a28fa
TheCharlatan:
ACK 223081ece651dc616ff63d9ac447eedc5c2a28fa
andrewtoth:
ACK 223081ece651dc616ff63d9ac447eedc5c2a28fa
Tree-SHA512: 951bc8ad3504c510988afd95c561e3e259c6212bd14f6536fe56e8eb5bf5c35c32a368bbdb1d5aea1acc473d7e5bd9cdcde02008a148b05af1f955e413062d5c
86d7135e36efd39781cf4c969011df99f0cbb69d [p2p] only attempt 1p1c when both txns provided by the same peer (glozow)
f7658d9b1475ecaa5cb8e543e5c66a3a3a2dc1fb [cleanup] remove p2p_inv from AddTxAnnouncement (glozow)
063c1324c143d98e6d5108bb51b3ca59b45f9b85 [functional test] getorphantxs reflects multiple announcers (glozow)
0da693f7e129fccaecf9a2c177083d2e80d37781 [functional test] orphan handling with multiple announcers (glozow)
b6ea4a9afe2d8bbf49b6b6c42f0a3ce4390c4535 [p2p] try multiple peers for orphan resolution (glozow)
1d2e1d709ce3d95d409254c860347bc3fedf30e1 [refactor] move creation of unique_parents to helper function (glozow)
c6893b0f0b7b205c8da4b9d281a55c9eb843b582 [txdownload] remove unique_parents that we already have (glozow)
163aaf285af91b49c2d788463dc1e1654c88ade6 [fuzz] orphanage multiple announcer functions (glozow)
22b023b09da3e2fe00467c77b105a61c1961081f [unit test] multiple orphan announcers (glozow)
96c1a822a274689611f409246ef1573906b0083e [unit test] TxOrphanage EraseForBlock (glozow)
04448ce32a3bc4b6d12293f71e40333abe35c224 [txorphanage] add GetTx so that orphan vin can be read (glozow)
e810842acda6fe56e0536ebecfbb9d17d26e1513 [txorphanage] support multiple announcers (glozow)
62a9ff187076686b39dca64ad4f2f439da0875d1 [refactor] change type of unique_parents to Txid (glozow)
6951ddcefd9e05f31ee7634bbfbf1d19e04ec00e [txrequest] GetCandidatePeers (glozow)
Pull request description:
Part of #27463.
(Transaction) **orphan resolution** is a process that kicks off when we are missing UTXOs to validate an unconfirmed transaction. We currently request missing parents by txid; BIP 331 also defines a way to [explicitly request ancestors](https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0331.mediawiki#handle-orphans-better).
Currently, when we find that a transaction is an orphan, we only try to resolve it with the peer who provided the `tx`. If this doesn't work out (e.g. they send a `notfound` or don't respond), we do not try again. We actually can't, because we've already forgotten who else could resolve this orphan (i.e. all the other peers who announced the transaction).
What is wrong with this? It makes transaction download less reliable, particularly for 1p1c packages which must go through orphan resolution in order to be downloaded.
Can we fix this with BIP 331 / is this "duct tape" before the real solution?
BIP 331 (receiver-initiated ancestor package relay) is also based on the idea that there is an orphan that needs resolution, but it's just a new way of communicating information. It's not inherently more honest; you can request ancestor package information and get a `notfound`. So ancestor package relay still requires some kind of procedure for retrying when an orphan resolution attempt fails. See the #27742 implementation which builds on this orphan resolution tracker to keep track of what packages to download (it just isn't rebased on this exact branch). The difference when using BIP 331 is that we request `ancpkginfo` and then `pkgtxns` instead of the parent txids.
Zooming out, we'd like orphan handling to be:
- Bandwidth-efficient: don't have too many requests out at once. As already implemented today, transaction requests for orphan parents and regular download both go through the `TxRequestTracker` so that we don't have duplicate requests out.
- Not vulnerable to censorship: don't give up too easily, use all candidate peers. See e.g. https://bitcoincore.org/en/2024/07/03/disclose_already_asked_for/
- Load-balance between peers: don't overload peers; use all peers available. This is also useful for when we introduce per-peer orphan protection, since each peer will have limited slots.
The approach taken in this PR is to think of each peer who announces an orphan as a potential "orphan resolution candidate." These candidates include:
- the peer who sent us the orphan tx
- any peers who announced the orphan prior to us downloading it
- any peers who subsequently announce the orphan after we have started trying to resolve it
For each orphan resolution candidate, we treat them as having "announced" all of the missing parents to us at the time of receipt of this orphan transaction (or at the time they announced the tx if they do so after we've already started tracking it as an orphan). We add the missing parents as entries to `m_txrequest`, incorporating the logic of typical txrequest processing, which means we prefer outbounds, try not to have duplicate requests in flight, don't overload peers, etc.
ACKs for top commit:
marcofleon:
Code review ACK 86d7135e36efd39781cf4c969011df99f0cbb69d
instagibbs:
reACK 86d7135e36efd39781cf4c969011df99f0cbb69d
dergoegge:
Code review ACK 86d7135e36efd39781cf4c969011df99f0cbb69d
mzumsande:
ACK 86d7135e36efd39781cf4c969011df99f0cbb69d
Tree-SHA512: 618d523b86e60c3ea039e88326d50db4e55e8e18309c6a20e8f2b10ed9e076f1de0315c335fd3b8abdabcc8b53cbceb66fb59147d05470ea25b83a2b4bd9c877
3e0a992a3f0f2b15b7be5049dc4f3134b4b0bc40 doc: Clarify comments about endianness after #30526 (Ryan Ofsky)
Pull request description:
This is a documentation-only change following up on suggestions made in the #30526 review.
Motivation for this change is that I was recently reviewing #31583, which reminded me how confusing the arithmetic blob code was and made me want to write better comments.
ACKs for top commit:
achow101:
ACK 3e0a992a3f0f2b15b7be5049dc4f3134b4b0bc40
TheCharlatan:
ACK 3e0a992a3f0f2b15b7be5049dc4f3134b4b0bc40
Sjors:
ACK 3e0a992a3f0f2b15b7be5049dc4f3134b4b0bc40
BrandonOdiwuor:
LGTM ACK 3e0a992a3f0f2b15b7be5049dc4f3134b4b0bc40
Tree-SHA512: 90d5582a25a51fc406d83ca6b8c4e5e4d3aee828a0497f4b226b2024ff89e29b9b50d0ae8ddeac6abf2757fe78548d58cf3dd54df4b6d623f634a2106048091d
Add ability to add and track multiple announcers per orphan transaction,
erasing announcers but not the entire orphan.
The tx creation code in orphanage_tests needs to be updated so that each
tx is unique, because the CountOrphans() check assumes that calling
EraseForPeer necessarily means its orphans are deleted.
Unused for now.
This is a documentation-only change following up on suggestions made in the
#30526 review.
Motivation for this change is that I was recently reviewing #31583, which
reminded me how confusing the arithmetic blob code was and made me want to
write better comments.
b6f0593f43304f4ff31e8b68558ceeb1b588403c doc: add release note about testmempoolaccept debug-message (Matthew Zipkin)
f9cac635237142090271022164fa5d58e014493d test: cover testmempoolaccept debug-message in RBF test (Matthew Zipkin)
f9650e18ea6edb41c0136cc2ec3c7e0aba1bf83a rbf: remove unecessary newline at end of error string (Matthew Zipkin)
221c789e91696569fa34dbd162d26e98cf9cab64 rpc: include verbose reject-details field in testmempoolaccept response (Matthew Zipkin)
Pull request description:
Adds a new field `reject-details` in `testmempoolaccept` responses to include `m_debug_message` from `ValidationState`. This string is the complete error message thrown by the mempool in response to `sendrawtransaction`.
The extra verbosity is helpful to consumers of `testmempoolaccept`, which is sort of a debug tool anyway.
example:
>
> {
> "txid": "07d7a59a7bdad4c3a5070659ea04147c9b755ad9e173c52b6a38e017abf0f5b8",
> "wtxid": "5dc243b1b92ee2f5a43134eb3e23449be03d1abb3d7f3c03c836ed0f13c50185",
> "allowed": false,
> "reject-reason": "insufficient fee",
> "reject-details": "insufficient fee, rejecting replacement 07d7a59a7bdad4c3a5070659ea04147c9b755ad9e173c52b6a38e017abf0f5b8; new feerate 0.00300000 BTC/kvB <= old feerate 0.00300000 BTC/kvB"
> }
ACKs for top commit:
rkrux:
re-ACK b6f0593f43304f4ff31e8b68558ceeb1b588403c
glozow:
ACK b6f0593f43304f4ff31e8b68558ceeb1b588403c
Tree-SHA512: 340b8023d59cefa84598879c4efdb7c399a3f62da126e87c595523f302e53d33098fc69da9c5f8c92b7580dc75466c66cea372051f935b197265648fe15c43a3
fa63b8232f38e78d3c6413fa7d51809f376de75c test: generateblocks called by multiple threads (MarcoFalke)
fa62c8b1f04a5386ffa171aeff713d55bd874cbe rpc: Extend scope of validation mutex in generateblock (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
The mutex (required by TestBlockValidity) must be held after creating the block, until TestBlockValidity is called. Otherwise, it is possible that the chain advances in the meantime and leads to a crash in TestBlockValidity: `Assertion failed: pindexPrev && pindexPrev == chainstate.m_chain.Tip() (validation.cpp: TestBlockValidity: 4338)`
Fixes#31562
ACKs for top commit:
davidgumberg:
reACK fa63b8232f
achow101:
ACK fa63b8232f38e78d3c6413fa7d51809f376de75c
ismaelsadeeq:
re-ACK fa63b8232f38e78d3c6413fa7d51809f376de75c
mzumsande:
utACK fa63b8232f38e78d3c6413fa7d51809f376de75c
Tree-SHA512: 3dfda1192af52546ab11fbffe44af8713073763863f4a63fbcdbdf95b1c6cbeb003dc4b8b29e7ec67362238ad15e07d8f6855832a0c68dc5370254f8cbf9445c
ecaa786cc103cf7cc63ae899ec13d81a54e2fd1e rpc: add signet_challenge field to getblockchaininfo and getmininginfo (Ash Manning)
Pull request description:
Signet challenges are currently only available via `getblocktemplate` RPC.
`getblockchaininfo` and `getmininginfo` both provide inadequate information to distinguish signets. Since these are the RPCs used to determine the current network, they should also provide the signet challenge for signets.
Test coverage is included in `test/functional/feature_signet.py`.
ACKs for top commit:
sipa:
utACK ecaa786cc103cf7cc63ae899ec13d81a54e2fd1e
achow101:
ACK ecaa786cc103cf7cc63ae899ec13d81a54e2fd1e
i-am-yuvi:
Concept ACK ecaa786cc103cf7cc63ae899ec13d81a54e2fd1e
Sjors:
ACK ecaa786cc103cf7cc63ae899ec13d81a54e2fd1e
zaidmstrr:
Tested ACK [ecaa786](ecaa786cc1)
Tree-SHA512: 9ccf4ae634ee74353a2a895efb881fdc62ae703a134ccd219da2cd6080c7d38319e689054584722457a7cc79004bd6022292a3b0b90eaab9f7003564665e1ea4
The mutex (required by TestBlockValidity) must be held after creating
the block, until TestBlockValidity is called. Otherwise, it is possible
that the chain advances in the meantime and leads to a crash in
TestBlockValidity:
Assertion failed: pindexPrev && pindexPrev == chainstate.m_chain.Tip() (validation.cpp: TestBlockValidity: 4338)
The diff can be reviewed with the git options
--ignore-all-space --function-context
c991cea1a0c3ea99dc3e3919789ddf32a338a59d Remove processNewBlock() from mining interface (Sjors Provoost)
9a47852d88cf79a94ea2b7884f2dfa319bf37e4d Remove getTransactionsUpdated() from mining interface (Sjors Provoost)
bfc4e029d41ec3052d68f174565802016cb05d41 Remove testBlockValidity() from mining interface (Sjors Provoost)
Pull request description:
There are three methods in the mining interface that can be dropped. The Template Provider doesn't need them and other application should probably not use them either.
1. `processNewBlock()` was added in 7b4d3249ced93ec5986500e43b324005ed89502f, but became unnecessary with the introduction of interfaces::BlockTemplate::submitSolution in 7b4d3249ced93ec5986500e43b324005ed89502f.
Dropping it was suggested in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30200#issuecomment-2404460342
2. `getTransactionsUpdated()`: this is used in the implementation of #31003 `waitFeesChanged`. It's not very useful generically because the mempool updates very frequently.
3. `testBlockValidity()`: it might be useful for mining application to have a way to check the validity of a block template they modified, but the Stratum v2 Template Provider doesn't do that, and this method is a bit brittle (e.g. the block needs to build on the tip).
ACKs for top commit:
TheCharlatan:
Re-ACK c991cea1a0c3ea99dc3e3919789ddf32a338a59d
ryanofsky:
Code review ACK c991cea1a0c3ea99dc3e3919789ddf32a338a59d. Since last review, just rebased to avoid conflicts in surrounding code, and edited a commit message
tdb3:
code review ACK c991cea1a0c3ea99dc3e3919789ddf32a338a59d
Tree-SHA512: 2138e54f920b26e01c068b24498c6a210c5c4358138dce0702ab58185d9ae148a18f04c97ac9f043646d40f8031618d80a718a176b1ce4779c237de6fb9c4a67
facb4d010ca5c898756bedee46069509900ebea0 refactor: Move GuessVerificationProgress into ChainstateManager (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Currently the function is standalone, which means any passed-in data like `TxData` or the block pointer needs to be taken from the `ChainstateManager` and passed in. This is currently verbose and may become even more verbose if the function is reworked in the future. As the function can not be called without a `ChainstateManager` in production code anyway, make it a member function on the class.
ACKs for top commit:
ryanofsky:
Code review ACK facb4d010ca5c898756bedee46069509900ebea0. Nice cleanup, that should make this code less awkward to work with
TheCharlatan:
ACK facb4d010ca5c898756bedee46069509900ebea0
danielabrozzoni:
reACK facb4d010ca5c898756bedee46069509900ebea0
Tree-SHA512: b17977e12cd7c6e308c47e6a1aa920acecd4442696e46d1f30bd7c201e9898ca2d581ff0bf2cc9f7334e146c1b0c50925adb849c8c17f65dcdf6877be1c5f776
processNewBlock was added in 7b4d3249ced93ec5986500e43b324005ed89502f, but became unnecessary with the introduction of interfaces::BlockTemplate::submitSolution in 7b4d3249ced93ec5986500e43b324005ed89502f.
getTransactionsUpdated() is only needed by the implementation of waitFeesChanged() (not yet part of the interface).
It's very low level and not used by the proposed Template Provider.
This method was introduced in d8a3496b5ad27bea4c79ea0344f595cc1b95f0d3
and a74b0f93efa1d9eaf5abc2f6591c44a632aec6ed.
52fd1511a774d1ff9e747b2ce88aa1fcb778ced8 test: drop scriptPubKeyIn arg from CreateNewBlock (Sjors Provoost)
ff41b9e296aba0237e068fab181523c50bf8c9d0 Drop script_pub_key arg from createNewBlock (Sjors Provoost)
7ab733ede444aee61ab52670c228eec811268c6f rpc: rename coinbase_script to coinbase_output_script (Sjors Provoost)
Pull request description:
Providing a script for the coinbase transaction is only done in test code and for (unoptimized) CPU solo mining.
Production miners use the `getblocktemplate` RPC which omits the coinbase transaction entirely from its block template, leaving it to external (pool) software to construct it.
This commit removes the `script_pub_key argument` from `createNewBlock()` in the Mining interface.
A coinbase script can still be passed via `BlockCreateOptions` instead. Tests are modified to do so.
ACKs for top commit:
ryanofsky:
Code review ACK 52fd1511a774d1ff9e747b2ce88aa1fcb778ced8. No change since last review other than rebase
TheCharlatan:
Re-ACK 52fd1511a774d1ff9e747b2ce88aa1fcb778ced8
vasild:
ACK 52fd1511a774d1ff9e747b2ce88aa1fcb778ced8
Tree-SHA512: c4b3a53774d9a5dc90950e77f47a64dbb68f971baffbb9a0d8f59332ef8e52d0c039130c925bde73135b3d0e79e65d91d1df30dc4cff13f32d8a72e5c56669d8
95a0104f2e9869799db84add108ae8c57b56d360 test: Add tests for directories in place of config files (Hodlinator)
e85abe92c7cc5380489c028479f0d42f91827efd args: Catch directories in place of config files (Hodlinator)
e4b6b1822ce004365be11c54c8f5f02f95303fb0 test: Add tests for -noconf (Hodlinator)
483f0dacc413f4b1ba1b74c2429c4367b87e7f11 args: Properly support -noconf (Hodlinator)
312ec64cc0619f58c6e8abc5855fd2fa0e920c3f test refactor: feature_config_args.py - Stop nodes at the end of tests, not at the beginning (Hodlinator)
7402658bc2b9d835b240edb9c1dac308859687c3 test: -norpccookiefile (Hodlinator)
39cbd4f37c3d3a32cd993cbc78052d53f700989b args: Support -norpccookiefile for bitcoind and bitcoin-cli (Hodlinator)
e82ad88452bce4132e4583727e610d52dcf9ad9e logs: Use correct path and more appropriate macros in cookie-related code (Hodlinator)
6e28c76907ca0012b1a4556d9a982dfffb5abaf6 test: Harden testing of cookie file existence (Hodlinator)
75bacabb55f3d54ad9b2c660cafc82c167e4f644 test: combine_logs.py - Output debug.log paths on error (Hodlinator)
bffd92f00f5bfbb5a622d0bd20bfeed9f8b10928 args: Support -nopid (Hodlinator)
12f8d848fd91b11d5cffe21dfc3ba124102ee236 args: Disallow -nodatadir (Hodlinator)
6ff9662760099c405cf13153dd1de22900045f5e scripted-diff: Avoid printing version information for -noversion (Hodlinator)
e8a2054edc814b2c4661b96a3dce91da9be68fa4 doc args: Document narrow scope of -color (Hodlinator)
Pull request description:
- Document `-color` as only applying to `-getinfo`, to be less confusing for bitcoin-cli users.
- No longer print version information when getting passed `-noversion`.
- Disallow `-nodatadir` as we cannot run without one. It was previously interpreted as a mix of unset and as a relative path of "0".
- Support `-norpccookiefile`
- Support `-nopid`
- Properly support `-noconf` (instead of working by accident). Also detect when directories are specified instead of files.
Prompted by investigation in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16545#pullrequestreview-2316714013.
ACKs for top commit:
l0rinc:
utACK 95a0104f2e9869799db84add108ae8c57b56d360
achow101:
ACK 95a0104f2e9869799db84add108ae8c57b56d360
ryanofsky:
Code review ACK 95a0104f2e9869799db84add108ae8c57b56d360. Looks good! Thanks for all your work on this breaking the changes down and making them simple.
Tree-SHA512: 5174251e6b9196a9c6d135eddcb94130295c551bcfccc78e633d9e118ff91523b1be0d72828fb49603ceae312e6e1f8ee2651c6a2b9e0f195603a73a9a622785
Providing a script for the coinbase transaction is only done in test code
and for CPU solo mining.
Production miners use the getblocktemplate RPC which omits the coinbase
transaction entirely from its block template, leaving it to external (pool)
software to construct it.
A coinbase script can still be passed via BlockCreateOptions instead.
A temporary overload is added so that the test can be modified in the
next commit.
32fc59796f74a2941772b5ec2755b1319132cd9c rpc: Allow single transaction through submitpackage (glozow)
Pull request description:
There's no particular reason to restrict single transaction submissions with submitpackage. This change relaxes the RPC checks as enables the `AcceptPackage` flow to accept packages of a single transaction.
Resolves#31085
ACKs for top commit:
naumenkogs:
ACK 32fc59796f
achow101:
ACK 32fc59796f74a2941772b5ec2755b1319132cd9c
glozow:
ACK 32fc59796f74a2941772b5ec2755b1319132cd9c
Tree-SHA512: ffed353bfdca610ffcfd53b40b76da05ffc26df6bac4b0421492e067bede930380e03399d2e2d1d17f0e88fb91cd8eb376e3aabebbabcc724590bf068d09807c
73db95c65c1d372822166045ca8b9f173d5fd883 kernel: Make bitcoin-chainstate's block validation mirror submitblock's (TheCharlatan)
bb53ce9bdae2f02d7bd95cf5d8ca4ccf5136466a tests: Add functional test for submitting a previously pruned block (Greg Sanders)
1f7fc738255205a64374686aca9a4c53089360f1 rpc: Remove submitblock duplicate pre-check (TheCharlatan)
e62a8abd7df21795dcd173773f689b6d4c8feab6 rpc: Remove submitblock invalid-duplicate precheck (TheCharlatan)
36dbebafb9b54764005e6fffa7ad28d4cadfe5e4 rpc: Remove submitblock coinbase pre-check (TheCharlatan)
Pull request description:
With the introduction of a mining ipc interface and the potential future introduction of a kernel library API it becomes increasingly important to offer common behaviour between them. An example of this is ProcessNewBlock, which is used by ipc, rpc, net_processing and (potentially) the kernel library. Having divergent behaviour on suggested pre-checks and checks for these functions is confusing to both developers and users and is a maintenance burden.
The rpc interface for ProcessNewBlock (submitblock) currently pre-checks if the block has a coinbase transaction and whether it has been processed before. While the current example binary for how to use the kernel library, bitcoin-chainstate, imitates these checks, the other interfaces do not.
The coinbase check is repeated again early during ProcessNewBlock. Pre-checking it may also shadow more fundamental problems with a block. In most cases the block header is checked first, before validating the transactions. Checking the coinbase first therefore masks potential issues with the header. Fix this by removing the pre-check.
Similary the duplicate checks are repeated early in the contextual checks of ProcessNewBlock. If duplicate blocks are detected much of their validation is skipped. Depending on the constitution of the block, validating the merkle root of the block is part of the more intensive workload when validating a block. This could be an argument for moving the pre-checks into block processing. In net_processing this would have a smaller effect however, since the block mutation check, which also validates the merkle root, is done before.
Testing spamming a node with valid, but duplicate unrequested blocks seems to exhaust a CPU thread, but does not seem to significantly impact keeping up with the tip. The benefits of adding these checks to net_processing are questionable, especially since there are other ways to trigger the more CPU-intensive checks without submitting a duplicate block. Since these DOS concerns apply even less to the RPC interface, which does not have banning mechanics built in, remove them too.
Finally, also remove the pre-checks from `bitcoin-chainstate.cpp`.
---
This PR is part of the [libbitcoinkernel project](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27587).
ACKs for top commit:
Sjors:
re-utACK 73db95c65c1d372822166045ca8b9f173d5fd883
achow101:
ACK 73db95c65c1d372822166045ca8b9f173d5fd883
instagibbs:
ACK 73db95c65c1d372822166045ca8b9f173d5fd883
mzumsande:
ACK 73db95c65c1d372822166045ca8b9f173d5fd883
Tree-SHA512: 2d02e851cf402ecf6a1968c058df3576aac407e200cbf922a1a6391b7f97b4f42c6d9f6b0a78b9d1af0a6d40bdd529a7b11a1e6d88885bd7b8b090f6d1411861
37a5c5d83664c31d83fc649d3c8c858bd5f10f21 doc: update descriptors.md for getdescriptoractivity (James O'Beirne)
ee3ce6a4f4d35afe7fcab16eff419a6788b02170 test: rpc: add no address case for getdescriptoractivity (James O'Beirne)
811f76f3a511d20750046319b390e225a1151caa rpc: add getdescriptoractivity (James O'Beirne)
25fe087de59e967ce968d35ed77138325eb9a9fa rpc: move-only: move ScriptPubKeyDoc to utils (James O'Beirne)
Pull request description:
The RPC command `scanblocks` provides a useful way to get a set of blockhashes that have activity relevant to a set of descriptors (`relevant_blocks`). However actually extracting the activity from those blocks is left as an exercise to the end user.
This process involves not only generating the (potentially ranged) set of scripts for the descriptor set on the client side (maybe via `deriveaddresses`), but then the user must retrieve each block's contents one-by-one using `getblock <hash>`, which is transmitted over a network link. And that's all before they perform the actual search over block content. There's even more work required to incorporate unconfirmed transactions.
This PR introduces an RPC `getdescriptoractivity` that [dovetails](https://bitcoin-irc.chaincode.com/bitcoin-core-dev/2024-08-16#1046393;) with `scanblocks` output, handling the process described above. Users specify the blockhashes (perhaps from `relevant_blocks`) and a set of descriptors; they are then given all spend/receive activity in that set of blocks.
This is a very useful tool when implementing lightweight wallets that want neither to require a third-party indexer like electrs, nor the overhead of creating and managing watch-only wallets in Core. This allows Core to be more easily used in a "stateless" manner by wallets, with potentially many nodes interchangeably acting as backends.
### Example usage
```
% ./src/bitcoin-cli scanblocks start \
'["addr(bc1p0cp0vyag6snlta2l7c4am3rue7eef9f72l7uhx52m4v27vfydx9s8tfs7t)"]' \
857263
{
"from_height": 857263,
"to_height": 858263,
"relevant_blocks": [
"00000000000000000002bc5cc78f5b0913a5230a8f4b0d5060bc9a60900a5a88",
"00000000000000000001c5291ed6a40c06d3db5c8fb738567654b24a14b24ecb"
],
"completed": true
}
% ./src/bitcoin-cli getdescriptoractivity \
'["00000000000000000002bc5cc78f5b0913a5230a8f4b0d5060bc9a60900a5a88", "00000000000000000001c5291ed6a40c06d3db5c8fb738567654b24a14b24ecb"]' \
'["addr(bc1p0cp0vyag6snlta2l7c4am3rue7eef9f72l7uhx52m4v27vfydx9s8tfs7t)"]'
{
"activity": [
{
"type": "receive",
"amount": 0.00002900,
"blockhash": "00000000000000000002bc5cc78f5b0913a5230a8f4b0d5060bc9a60900a5a88",
"height": 857907,
"txid": "c9d34f202c1f66d80cae76f305350f5fdde910b97cf6ae6bf79f5bcf2a337d06",
"vout": 254,
"output_spk": {
"asm": "1 7e02f613a8d427f5f55ff62bddc47ccfb394953e57fdcb9a8add58af3124698b",
"desc": "rawtr(7e02f613a8d427f5f55ff62bddc47ccfb394953e57fdcb9a8add58af3124698b)#yewcd80j",
"hex": "51207e02f613a8d427f5f55ff62bddc47ccfb394953e57fdcb9a8add58af3124698b",
"address": "bc1p0cp0vyag6snlta2l7c4am3rue7eef9f72l7uhx52m4v27vfydx9s8tfs7t",
"type": "witness_v1_taproot"
}
},
{
"type": "spend",
"amount": 0.00002900,
"blockhash": "00000000000000000001c5291ed6a40c06d3db5c8fb738567654b24a14b24ecb",
"height": 858260,
"spend_txid": "7f61d1b248d4ee46376f9c6df272f63fbb0c17039381fb23ca5d90473b823c36",
"spend_vin": 0,
"prevout_txid": "c9d34f202c1f66d80cae76f305350f5fdde910b97cf6ae6bf79f5bcf2a337d06",
"prevout_vout": 254,
"prevout_spk": {
"asm": "1 7e02f613a8d427f5f55ff62bddc47ccfb394953e57fdcb9a8add58af3124698b",
"desc": "rawtr(7e02f613a8d427f5f55ff62bddc47ccfb394953e57fdcb9a8add58af3124698b)#yewcd80j",
"hex": "51207e02f613a8d427f5f55ff62bddc47ccfb394953e57fdcb9a8add58af3124698b",
"address": "bc1p0cp0vyag6snlta2l7c4am3rue7eef9f72l7uhx52m4v27vfydx9s8tfs7t",
"type": "witness_v1_taproot"
}
}
]
}
```
ACKs for top commit:
instagibbs:
reACK 37a5c5d83664c31d83fc649d3c8c858bd5f10f21
achow101:
ACK 37a5c5d83664c31d83fc649d3c8c858bd5f10f21
tdb3:
Code review and light retest ACK 37a5c5d83664c31d83fc649d3c8c858bd5f10f21
rkrux:
re-ACK 37a5c5d83664c31d83fc649d3c8c858bd5f10f21
Tree-SHA512: 04aa51e329c6c2ed72464b9886281d5ebd7511a8a8e184ea81249033a4dad535a12829b1010afc2da79b344ea8b5ab8ed47e426d0bf2eb78ab395d20b1da8dbb
11f3bc229ccd4b20191855fb1df882cfa6145264 refactor: Reserve vectors in fuzz tests (Lőrinc)
152fefe7a22b7da3cfe2815083634bece9c5654e refactor: Preallocate PrevectorFillVector(In)Direct without vector resize (Lőrinc)
a774c7a339c26b1409c9a9572d2b52810ee64062 refactor: Fix remaining clang-tidy performance-inefficient-vector errors (Lőrinc)
Pull request description:
PR inspired by https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29608#issuecomment-2437847307 (and https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29458, https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29606, https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29607, https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30093).
The `clang-tidy` check can be run via:
```bash
cmake -B build -DCMAKE_C_COMPILER=clang -DCMAKE_CXX_COMPILER=clang++ -DCMAKE_EXPORT_COMPILE_COMMANDS=ON -DBUILD_BENCH=ON -DBUILD_FUZZ_BINARY=ON -DBUILD_FOR_FUZZING=ON && cmake --build build -j$(nproc)
run-clang-tidy -quiet -p build -j $(nproc) -checks='-*,performance-inefficient-vector-operation' | grep -v 'clang-tidy'
```
which revealed 3 tests and 1 prod warning (+ fuzz and benching, found by hebasto).
Even though the tests aren't performance critical, getting rid of these warnings (for which the checks were already enabled via https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/.clang-tidy#L18, see below), the fix was quite simple.
<details>
<summary>clang-tidy -list-checks</summary>
```bash
cd src && clang-tidy -list-checks | grep 'vector'
performance-inefficient-vector-operation
```
</details>
<details>
<summary>Output before the change</summary>
```
src/test/rpc_tests.cpp:434:9: error: 'emplace_back' is called inside a loop; consider pre-allocating the container capacity before the loop [performance-inefficient-vector-operation,-warnings-as-errors]
433 | for (int64_t i = 0; i < 100; i++) {
434 | feerates.emplace_back(1 ,1);
| ^
src/test/checkqueue_tests.cpp:366:13: error: 'emplace_back' is called inside a loop; consider pre-allocating the container capacity before the loop [performance-inefficient-vector-operation,-warnings-as-errors]
365 | for (size_t i = 0; i < 3; ++i) {
366 | tg.emplace_back(
| ^
src/test/cuckoocache_tests.cpp:231:9: error: 'emplace_back' is called inside a loop; consider pre-allocating the container capacity before the loop [performance-inefficient-vector-operation,-warnings-as-errors]
228 | for (uint32_t x = 0; x < 3; ++x)
229 | /** Each thread is emplaced with x copy-by-value
230 | */
231 | threads.emplace_back([&, x] {
| ^
src/rpc/output_script.cpp:127:17: error: 'push_back' is called inside a loop; consider pre-allocating the container capacity before the loop [performance-inefficient-vector-operation,-warnings-as-errors]
126 | for (unsigned int i = 0; i < keys.size(); ++i) {
127 | pubkeys.push_back(HexToPubKey(keys[i].get_str()));
| ^
```
And the fuzz and benchmarks, noticed by hebasto: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31305#issuecomment-2483124499
</details>
ACKs for top commit:
maflcko:
review ACK 11f3bc229ccd4b20191855fb1df882cfa6145264 🎦
achow101:
ACK 11f3bc229ccd4b20191855fb1df882cfa6145264
theuni:
ACK 11f3bc229ccd4b20191855fb1df882cfa6145264
hebasto:
ACK 11f3bc229ccd4b20191855fb1df882cfa6145264, tested with clang 19.1.5 + clang-tidy.
Tree-SHA512: 41691c19f35c63b922a95407617a54f9bff1af3f95f99d15642064f321df038aeb1ae5f061f854ed913f69036807cc28fa6222b2ff4c24ef43b909027fa0f9b3
And under the hood suppoert single transactions
in AcceptPackage. This simplifies user experience
and paves the way for reducing number of codepaths
for transaction acceptance in the future.
Co-Authored-By: instagibbs <gsanders87@gmail.com>
The duplicate checks are repeated early in the contextual checks of
ProcessNewBlock. If duplicate blocks are detected much of their
validation is skipped. Depending on the constitution of the block,
validating the merkle root of the block is part of the more intensive
workload when validating a block. This could be an argument for moving
the pre-checks into block processing. In net_processing this would have
a smaller effect however, since the block mutation check, which also
validates the merkle root, is done before.
A side effect of this change is that a duplicate block is persisted
again on disk even when pruning is activated. This is similar to the
behaviour with getblockfrompeer. Add a release note for this change in
behaviour.
Testing spamming a node with valid, but duplicate unrequested blocks
seems to exhaust a CPU thread, but does not seem to significantly impact
keeping up with the tip. The benefits of adding these checks to
net_processing are questionable, especially since there are other ways
to trigger the more CPU-intensive checks without submitting a duplicate
block. Since these DOS concerns apply even less to the RPC interface,
which does not have banning mechanics built in, remove them too.
---
With the introduction of a mining ipc interface and the potential future
introduction of a kernel library API it becomes increasingly important
to offer common behaviour between them. An example of this is
ProcessNewBlock, which is used by ipc, rpc, net_processing and
(potentially) the kernel library. Having divergent behaviour on
suggested pre-checks and checks for these functions is confusing to both
developers and users and is a maintenance burden.
The rpc interface for ProcessNewBlock (submitblock) currently pre-checks
if the block has a coinbase transaction and whether it has been
processed before. While the current example binary for how to use the
kernel library, bitcoin-chainstate, imitates these checks, the other
interfaces do not.
ProcessNewBlock fails if an invalid duplicate block is passed in through
its call to AcceptBlock and AcceptBlockHeader. The failure in
AcceptBlockHeader makes AcceptBlock return early. This makes the
pre-check in submitblock redundant.
---
With the introduction of a mining ipc interface and the potential future
introduction of a kernel library API it becomes increasingly important
to offer common behaviour between them. An example of this is
ProcessNewBlock, which is used by ipc, rpc, net_processing and
(potentially) the kernel library. Having divergent behaviour on
suggested pre-checks and checks for these functions is confusing to both
developers and users and is a maintenance burden.
The rpc interface for ProcessNewBlock (submitblock) currently pre-checks
if the block has a coinbase transaction and whether it has been
processed before. While the current example binary for how to use the
kernel library, bitcoin-chainstate, imitates these checks, the other
interfaces do not.
The coinbase check is repeated again early during ProcessNewBlock.
Pre-checking it may also shadow more fundamental problems with a block.
In most cases the block header is checked first, before validating the
transactions. Checking the coinbase first therefore masks potential
issues with the header. Fix this by removing the pre-check.
The pre-check was likely introduced on top of
ada0caa165905b50db351a56ec124518c922085a to fix UB in
GetWitnessCommitmentIndex in case a block's transactions are empty. This
code path could only be reached because of the call to
UpdateUncommittedBlockStructures in submitblock, but cannot be reached
through net_processing.
Add some functional test cases to cover the previous conditions that
lead to a "Block does not start with a coinbase" json rpc error being
returned.
---
With the introduction of a mining ipc interface and the potential future
introduction of a kernel library API it becomes increasingly important
to offer common behaviour between them. An example of this is
ProcessNewBlock, which is used by ipc, rpc, net_processing and
(potentially) the kernel library. Having divergent behaviour on
suggested pre-checks and checks for these functions is confusing to both
developers and users and is a maintenance burden.
The rpc interface for ProcessNewBlock (submitblock) currently pre-checks
if the block has a coinbase transaction and whether it has been
processed before. While the current example binary for how to use the
kernel library, bitcoin-chainstate, imitates these checks, the other
interfaces do not.
