739f75c098
afb1bc120ecce2bf663093e15c93f5592c0d4a98 validation: Use dirty entry count in flush warnings and disk space checks (Pieter Wuille)
b413491a1cdd9a51f2aa10b775650f54f6785e3e coins: Keep track of number of dirty entries in `CCoinsViewCache` (Pieter Wuille)
7e52b1b945c4137e0fb05715090635ce82ed04b3 fuzz: call `EmplaceCoinInternalDANGER` as well in `SimulationTest` (Lőrinc)
Pull request description:
### Problem
Now that non-wiping flushes are possible (#28280, #28233), the cache may be mostly clean at flush time.
But the flush warning, disk-space check, and benchmark logging still used total cache size, so a node with a 10 GiB cache that only needs to write a small fraction of dirty entries could still trigger a scary warning via the disk-space checks.
The previous `DynamicMemoryUsage` metric was also fundamentally wrong for estimating disk writes, even before non-wiping flushes. In-memory coin size differs from on-disk write size due to LevelDB overhead, log doubling, and compaction.
The warning also only fired in `FlushStateToDisk`, so `AssumeUTXO` snapshot loads never warned at all.
### Fix
This PR tracks the actual number of dirty entries via `m_dirty_count` in `CCoinsViewCache`, maintained alongside the existing dirty-flag linked list, `SanityCheck` cross-validating both counts.
The warning and benchmark log move from `FlushStateToDisk` down to `CCoinsViewDB::BatchWrite`, where the actual I/O happens. This is the single place all flush paths converge (regular flushes, syncs, and snapshot loads), so the warning now fires correctly for `AssumeUTXO` too.
The threshold changes from 1 GiB of memory to 10 million dirty entries, which is roughly equivalent but avoids the in-memory vs on-disk size confusion.
The disk-space safety check now uses `GetDirtyCount()` with the existing conservative 48-byte-per-entry estimate, preventing unnecessary shutdowns when the cache is large but mostly clean.
---
Note: the first commit adds fuzz coverage for `EmplaceCoinInternalDANGER` in `SimulationTest` to exercise the accounting paths before modifying them.
Note: this is a revival of #31703 with all outstanding review feedback addressed.
ACKs for top commit:
Eunovo:
Concept ACK afb1bc120e
andrewtoth:
re-ACK afb1bc120ecce2bf663093e15c93f5592c0d4a98
sipa:
Code review ACK afb1bc120ecce2bf663093e15c93f5592c0d4a98
sedited:
ACK afb1bc120ecce2bf663093e15c93f5592c0d4a98
Tree-SHA512: 4133c6669fd20836ae2fb62ed804cdf6ebaa61076927b54fc412e42455a2f0d4cadfab0844064f9c32431eacb1f5e47b78de8e5cde1b26ba7239a7becf92f369
Bitcoin Core integration/staging tree
For an immediately usable, binary version of the Bitcoin Core software, see https://bitcoincore.org/en/download/.
What is Bitcoin Core?
Bitcoin Core connects to the Bitcoin peer-to-peer network to download and fully validate blocks and transactions. It also includes a wallet and graphical user interface, which can be optionally built.
Further information about Bitcoin Core is available in the doc folder.
License
Bitcoin Core is released under the terms of the MIT license. See COPYING for more information or see https://opensource.org/license/MIT.
Development Process
The master branch is regularly built (see doc/build-*.md for instructions) and tested, but it is not guaranteed to be
completely stable. Tags are created
regularly from release branches to indicate new official, stable release versions of Bitcoin Core.
The https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui repository is used exclusively for the development of the GUI. Its master branch is identical in all monotree repositories. Release branches and tags do not exist, so please do not fork that repository unless it is for development reasons.
The contribution workflow is described in CONTRIBUTING.md and useful hints for developers can be found in doc/developer-notes.md.
Testing
Testing and code review is the bottleneck for development; we get more pull requests than we can review and test on short notice. Please be patient and help out by testing other people's pull requests, and remember this is a security-critical project where any mistake might cost people lots of money.
Automated Testing
Developers are strongly encouraged to write unit tests for new code, and to
submit new unit tests for old code. Unit tests can be compiled and run
(assuming they weren't disabled during the generation of the build system) with: ctest. Further details on running
and extending unit tests can be found in /src/test/README.md.
There are also regression and integration tests, written
in Python.
These tests can be run (if the test dependencies are installed) with: build/test/functional/test_runner.py
(assuming build is your build directory).
The CI (Continuous Integration) systems make sure that every pull request is tested on Windows, Linux, and macOS. The CI must pass on all commits before merge to avoid unrelated CI failures on new pull requests.
Manual Quality Assurance (QA) Testing
Changes should be tested by somebody other than the developer who wrote the code. This is especially important for large or high-risk changes. It is useful to add a test plan to the pull request description if testing the changes is not straightforward.
Translations
Changes to translations as well as new translations can be submitted to Bitcoin Core's Transifex page.
Translations are periodically pulled from Transifex and merged into the git repository. See the translation process for details on how this works.
Important: We do not accept translation changes as GitHub pull requests because the next pull from Transifex would automatically overwrite them again.