Messy merge conflicts because this PR backported some ad-hoc stuff from
upstream while keeping a few things that upstream deleted. Hopefully
reviewing is easier than doing this in the first place, since ultimately
all I did was delete code from one side or another of the conflicts.
(Ok, I also changed some boost optional stuff to std::optional, and had
to patch up a test file for test framework changes.)
When reviewing the detailed crypto, bear in mind that taptweaks, like all
hashes are the kind of crypto that cannot be subtly wrong -- it will either
fail very hard or be correct. And we have independent implementations in
C++ and Python that cross-check each other, si it's unlikely to be the former.
This forward-ports the new Taproot sighash but does not fix a couple
22-blocked TODOs related to the MissingDataBehavior enum. Should be fixed
in a followup commit.
One nontrivial change I had to make was feeding the genesis hash to SignTransaction
(the "global" one in script/sign.cpp) so that it could correctly compute
the sighash at signing time.
Surprisingly easy to do. Almost all of the diff resolution was mechanically
* replacing boost::variant with std::variant
* replacing Optional with std::optional
* then replacing `nullopt` with `std::nullopt`
* updating the RPC functions for the new RPCArg::Default type
* update the tests/ directory to make new (since 22) tests use arrays for
createrawtransaction outputs
* other ad-hoc changes to function parameters etc (not too many of these)
I had to "really" change the code in PrecomputePSBTData, which was introduced
in 22.0 and affected by PSET, but this function was like 8 lines long so it
was easy.
Reviewing the diff may be a bit difficult because of the mix of mechanical
changes and ad-hoc things. Probably the most straightforward thing to do
is to redo the merge, `sed -i` to fix the boost::variant and Optional stuff,
then diff the remaining conflicts against this commit.
TODO: grep for `blindpsbt` and you will see that this RPC is still referenced
in documentation and help text even though it was deleted. Need to fix this
in 0.21 in a separate PR.
fab2e23b57 Use generate* from TestFramework (MarcoFalke)
faf7e92804 test: Add generate* calls to test framework (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
This is needed for #22567.
By making the calls to `generate*` member function of the test framework, it paves the way to make it easier to implicitly call the `sync_all` member function.
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
utACK fab2e23b57
Tree-SHA512: 7a7be6be71f0602119689df45d63a1adec309f323eac2330ee0f200676001afe825605859bd02c6a8a8dcf85d925dc1bc37370ef1ceb8ad1d85a66eec0dbfff9
fafe896a0b test: Set regtest.BIP66Height = 102 to speed up tests (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
No need to waste time by forcing creation of more than 1000 blocks to get the benefits of being able to test BIP 66. Also, reducing the height makes it more likely that (third-party) tests are conforming to BIP 66, which is enforced on mainnet for all new blocks.
ACKs for top commit:
GeneFerneau:
Concept + code review ACK [fafe896](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22632/commits/fafe896a0b870d85250927bd5374caf73d379468)
0xB10C:
crACK fafe896a0b
laanwj:
ACK fafe896a0b
Zero-1729:
tACK fafe896
kristapsk:
ACK fafe896a0b. Full functional test suite showed few second speed incrase on my laptop (although I didn't do proper benchmarking with multiple runs, just single `time ./test/functional/test_runner.py` on current master vs this PR).
theStack:
Tested ACK fafe896a0b
hg333:
tACK fafe896a0b
Tree-SHA512: 4bbee3c8587d612e74a59fde49b6439c1296f2fc27d3a7cf59a35e920f729fdd581c930290bd04def618f81412236676ddb99b4ceb4d80dfb9fd610b128a04b1
accf3d5868 [test] mempool package ancestor/descendant limits (glozow)
2b6b26e57c [test] parameterizable fee for make_chain and create_child_with_parents (glozow)
313c09f7b7 [test] helper function to increase transaction weight (glozow)
f8253d69d6 extract/rename helper functions from rpc_packages.py (glozow)
3cd663a5d3 [policy] ancestor/descendant limits for packages (glozow)
c6e016aa13 [mempool] check ancestor/descendant limits for packages (glozow)
f551841d3e [refactor] pass size/count instead of entry to CalculateAncestorsAndCheckLimits (glozow)
97dd1c729d MOVEONLY: add helper function for calculating ancestors and checking limits (glozow)
f95bbf58aa misc package validation doc improvements (glozow)
Pull request description:
This PR implements a function to calculate mempool ancestors for a package and enforces ancestor/descendant limits on them as a whole. It reuses a portion of `CalculateMemPoolAncestors()`; there's also a small refactor to move the reused code into a generic helper function. Instead of calculating ancestors and descendants on every single transaction in the package and their ancestors, we use a "worst case" heuristic, treating every transaction in the package as each other's ancestor and descendant. This may overestimate everyone's counts, but is still pretty accurate in the our main package use cases, in which at least one of the transactions in the package is directly related to all the others (e.g. 1 parent + 1 child, multiple parents with 1 child, or chains).
Note on Terminology: While "package" is often used to describe groups of related transactions _within_ the mempool, here, I only use package to mean the group of not-in-mempool transactions we are currently validating.
#### Motivation
It would be a potential DoS vector to allow submission of packages to mempool without a proper guard for mempool ancestors/descendants. In general, the purpose of mempool ancestor/descendant limits is to limit the computational complexity of dealing with families during removals and additions. We want to be able to validate multiple transactions on top of the mempool, but also avoid these scenarios:
- We underestimate the ancestors/descendants during package validation and end up with extremely complex families in our mempool (potentially a DoS vector).
- We expend an unreasonable amount of resources calculating everyone's ancestors and descendants during package validation.
ACKs for top commit:
JeremyRubin:
utACK accf3d5
ariard:
ACK accf3d5.
Tree-SHA512: 0d18ce4b77398fe872e0b7c2cc66d3aac2135e561b64029584339e1f4de2a6a16ebab3dd5784f376e119cbafc4d50168b28d3bd95d0b3d01158714ade2e3624d
5a1bef60a0 test: refactor: remove binascii from test_framework (Zero-1729)
Pull request description:
This PR continues the work started in PR #22593, regarding using the `bytes` built-in module. In this PR specifically, instances of `binascii`'s methods `hexlify`, `unhexlify`, and `a2b_hex` have been replaced with the build-in `bytes` module's `hex` and `fromhex` methods where appropriate to make bytes <-> hex-string conversions consistent across the functional test files and test_framework.
Additionally, certain changes made are based on the following assumption:
```
bytes.hex(data) == binascii.hexlify(data).decode()
bytes.hex(data).encode() == binascii.hexlify(data)
```
Ran the functional tests to ensure behaviour is still consistent and changes didn't break existing tests.
closes#22605
ACKs for top commit:
theStack:
Code-review ACK 5a1bef60a0🔢
Tree-SHA512: 8f28076cf0580a0d02a156f3e1e94c9badd3d41c3fbdfb2b87cd8a761dde2c94faa5f4c448d6747b1ccc9111c3ef1a1d7b42a11c806b241fa0410b7529e2445f
222290f543 test: Set BIP34Height = 2 for regtest (MarcoFalke)
fac90c55be test: Create all blocks with version 4 or higher (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
BIP34 is active on the current tip of mainnet, so all miners must obey it. It would be nice if it also was active in fresh regtest instances from the earliest time possible.
I changed the BIP34 height to `2`, so that the block at height=1 may be used to mine a duplicate coinbase. (Needed to test mainnet behaviour)
This pull is done in two commits:
* test: Create all blocks with version 4 or higher:
Now that BIP34 is activated earlier, we need to create blocks with a higher version number. Just bump it to 4 instead of 2 to avoid having to bump it again later.
* test: Set BIP34Height = 2 for regtest:
This fixes the BIP34 implementation in the tests (to match the one of the Core codebase) and updates the tests where needed
ACKs for top commit:
ajtowns:
ACK 222290f543
jonatack:
ACK 222290f543 tested and reviewed rebased to current master 5e213822f8
theStack:
Tested ACK 222290f543
Tree-SHA512: d69c637a62a64b8e87de8c7f0b305823d8f4d115c1852514b923625dbbcf9a4854b5bb3771ff41702ebf47c4c182a4442c6d7c0b9f282c95a34b83e56a73939b
3f7250b328 [test] Use the new endpoint to improve tests (Amiti Uttarwar)
3893da06db [RPC] Add field to getpeerinfo to indicate if addr relay is enabled (Amiti Uttarwar)
0980ca78cd [test] Test that we intentionally select addr relay peers. (Amiti Uttarwar)
c061599e40 [net_processing] Remove RelayAddrsWithPeer function (Amiti Uttarwar)
201e496481 [net_processing] Introduce new field to indicate if addr relay is enabled (Amiti Uttarwar)
1d1ef2db7e [net_processing] Defer initializing m_addr_known (Amiti Uttarwar)
6653fa3328 [test] Update p2p_addr_relay test to prepare (Amiti Uttarwar)
2fcaec7bbb [net_processing] Introduce SetupAddressRelay (Amiti Uttarwar)
Pull request description:
This PR builds on the test refactors extracted into #22306 (first 5 commits).
This PR aims to reduce addr blackholes. When we receive an `addr` message that contains 10 or less addresses, we forward them to 1-2 peers. This is the main technique we use for self advertisements, so sending to peers that wouldn't relay would effectively "blackhole" the trickle. Although we cannot prevent this in a malicious case, we can improve it for the normal, honest cases, and reduce the overall likelihood of occurrence. Two known cases where peers would not participate in addr relay are if they have connected to you as a block-relay-only connection, or if they are a light client.
This implementation defers initialization of `m_addr_known` until it is needed, then uses its presence to decide if the peer is participating in addr relay. For outbound (not block-relay-only) peers, we initialize the filter before sending the initial self announcement when processing their `version` message. For inbound peers, we initialize the filter if/when we get an addr related message (`ADDR`, `ADDRV2`, `GETADDR`). We do NOT initialize the filter based on a `SENDADDRV2` message.
To communicate about these changes beyond bitcoin core & to (try to) ensure that no other software would be disrupted, I have:
- Posted to the [mailing list](https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2021-April/018784.html)
- Researched other open source clients to confirm compatibility, opened issues in all the projects & documented in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21528#issuecomment-809906430. Many have confirmed that this change would not be problematic.
- Raised as topic during [bitcoin-core-dev meeting](https://www.erisian.com.au/bitcoin-core-dev/log-2021-03-25.html#l-954)
- Raised as topic during [bitcoin p2p meeting](https://www.erisian.com.au/bitcoin-core-dev/log-2021-04-20.html#l-439)
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
reACK 3f7250b328
glozow:
ACK 3f7250b328
ajtowns:
utACK 3f7250b328
Tree-SHA512: 29069282af684c1cd37d107c395fdd432dcccb11626f3c2dabfe92fdc4c85e74c7c4056fbdfa88017fec240506639b72ac6c311f8ce7c583112eb15f47e421af
607076d01b test: remove confusing `MAX_BLOCK_BASE_SIZE` (Sebastian Falbesoner)
4af97c74ed test: introduce `get_weight()` helper for CBlock (Sebastian Falbesoner)
a084ebe133 test: introduce `get_weight()` helper for CTransaction (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
This is a very late follow-up PR to #10618, which removed the constant `MAX_BLOCK_BASE_SIZE` from the core implementation about four years ago (see also #10608 in why it was considered confusing and superfluous).
Since there is also no point in still keeping it in the functional test framework, the PR switches to weight-based accounting on the relevant test code parts and use `MAX_BLOCK_WEIGHT` instead for the block limit checks. To prepare that, the first two commits introduce `get_weight()` helpers for the classes CTransaction and CBlock, respectively.
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
review ACK 607076d01b🚴
Tree-SHA512: d59aa0b6b3dfd0a849b8063e66de275d252f705f99e25cd3bf6daec028b47d946777ee5b42a060f5283cb18e917ac073119c2c0e11bbc21211f69ef0a6ed335a
