693414d27181cf967f787a2ca72344e52c58c7f0 node/ifaces: ChainImpl: Use an accessor for ChainMan (Carl Dong) 98c4e252f0d09bebb2e4ad3289407459c2cda5d5 node/ifaces: NodeImpl: Use an accessor for ChainMan (Carl Dong) 7e8b5ee814b0b8c34acb20637ed4fc988ccba555 validation: Make BlockManager::LookupBlockIndex const (Carl Dong) 88aead263c61d86e5f836028f517cfbf2a575498 node: Avoid potential UB by asserting assumptions (Carl Dong) 1dd8ed7a8491e51b76eeb236b15b794d9254f674 net_processing: Move comments to declarations (Carl Dong) 07156eb387ea580be5e2ce4a1744992ce7575903 node/coinstats: Replace #include with fwd-declaration (Carl Dong) 7b8e976cd5ac78a22f1be2b2fed8562c693af5d9 miner: Add chainstate member to BlockAssembler (Carl Dong) e62067e7bcad5a559899afff2e4a8e8b7e9f4301 Revert "miner: Pass in chainstate to BlockAssembler::CreateNewBlock" (Carl Dong) eede0647b06b6009080c4e536a2705e911d6ee19 Revert "scripted-diff: Invoke CreateNewBlock with chainstate" (Carl Dong) 0c1b2bc549aec77b247f0103652d883227841ac5 Revert "miner: Remove old CreateNewBlock w/o chainstate param" (Carl Dong) Pull request description: Chronological history of this changeset: 1. Bundle 4 (#21270) got merged 2. Posthumous reviews were posted 3. These changes were prepended in bundle 5 4. More reviews were added in bundle 5 5. Someone suggested that we split the prepended changes up to another PR 6. This is that PR In the future, I will just do posthumous review changes in another PR instead. I apologize for the confusion. Addresses posthumous reviews on bundle 4: - From jnewbery: - https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21270#issuecomment-796738048 - I didn't fix this one, but I added a `TODO` comment so that we don't lost track of it - https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21270#discussion_r592291225 - https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21270#discussion_r592296942 - https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21270#discussion_r592299738 - https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21270#discussion_r592301704 - From MarcoFalke: - https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21270#discussion_r593096212 - https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21270#discussion_r593097032 - https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21270#discussion_r593097867 - https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21270#discussion_r593100570 Addresses reviews on bundle 5: - Checking chainman existence before locking cs_main - MarcoFalke - https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21391#discussion_r596601776 - https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21391#discussion_r596601876 - Appropriate locking, usage of chainman, and control flow in `src/node/interfaces.cpp` - MarcoFalke - https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21391#discussion_r596601383 - jnewbery - https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21391#discussion_r597029360 - https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21391#discussion_r597029921 - ryanofsky - https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21391#discussion_r597163828 - Style/comment formatting changes - jnewbery - https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21391#discussion_r597026552 - https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21391#discussion_r597027186 - Making LookupBlockIndex const - jnewbery - https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21391#discussion_r597035062 ACKs for top commit: MarcoFalke: review ACK 693414d27181cf967f787a2ca72344e52c58c7f0 🛐 ryanofsky: Code review ACK 693414d27181cf967f787a2ca72344e52c58c7f0. I reviewed this previously as part of #21391. I am a fan of the increasingly complicated bundle numbering, and kind of hope there in the next round there is some way we can get bundles 5.333333 and 5.666667! jamesob: ACK 693414d27181cf967f787a2ca72344e52c58c7f0 ([`jamesob/ackr/21525.1.dongcarl.bundle_4_5_n_followup_f`](https://github.com/jamesob/bitcoin/tree/ackr/21525.1.dongcarl.bundle_4_5_n_followup_f)) Tree-SHA512: 9bdc199f70400d01764e1bd03c25bdb6cff26dcef60e4ca3b649baf8d017a2dfc1f058099067962b4b6ccd32d078002b1389d733039f4c337558cb70324c0ee3
Unit tests
The sources in this directory are unit test cases. Boost includes a unit testing framework, and since Bitcoin Core already uses Boost, it makes sense to simply use this framework rather than require developers to configure some other framework (we want as few impediments to creating unit tests as possible).
The build system is set up to compile an executable called test_bitcoin
that runs all of the unit tests. The main source file for the test library is found in
util/setup_common.cpp.
Compiling/running unit tests
Unit tests will be automatically compiled if dependencies were met in ./configure
and tests weren't explicitly disabled.
After configuring, they can be run with make check.
To run the unit tests manually, launch src/test/test_bitcoin. To recompile
after a test file was modified, run make and then run the test again. If you
modify a non-test file, use make -C src/test to recompile only what's needed
to run the unit tests.
To add more unit tests, add BOOST_AUTO_TEST_CASE functions to the existing
.cpp files in the test/ directory or add new .cpp files that
implement new BOOST_AUTO_TEST_SUITE sections.
To run the GUI unit tests manually, launch src/qt/test/test_bitcoin-qt
To add more GUI unit tests, add them to the src/qt/test/ directory and
the src/qt/test/test_main.cpp file.
Running individual tests
test_bitcoin has some built-in command-line arguments; for
example, to run just the getarg_tests verbosely:
test_bitcoin --log_level=all --run_test=getarg_tests -- DEBUG_LOG_OUT
log_level controls the verbosity of the test framework, which logs when a
test case is entered, for example. The DEBUG_LOG_OUT after the two dashes
redirects the debug log, which would normally go to a file in the test datadir
(BasicTestingSetup::m_path_root), to the standard terminal output.
... or to run just the doubledash test:
test_bitcoin --run_test=getarg_tests/doubledash
Run test_bitcoin --help for the full list.
Adding test cases
To add a new unit test file to our test suite you need
to add the file to src/Makefile.test.include. The pattern is to create
one test file for each class or source file for which you want to create
unit tests. The file naming convention is <source_filename>_tests.cpp
and such files should wrap their tests in a test suite
called <source_filename>_tests. For an example of this pattern,
see uint256_tests.cpp.
Logging and debugging in unit tests
make check will write to a log file foo_tests.cpp.log and display this file
on failure. For running individual tests verbosely, refer to the section
above.
To write to logs from unit tests you need to use specific message methods
provided by Boost. The simplest is BOOST_TEST_MESSAGE.
For debugging you can launch the test_bitcoin executable with gdbor lldb and
start debugging, just like you would with any other program:
gdb src/test/test_bitcoin