mirror of
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin.git
synced 2026-01-19 14:53:43 +01:00
Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#32638: blocks: force hash validations on disk read
9341b5333ablockstorage: make block read hash checks explicit (Lőrinc)2371b9f4eetest/bench: verify hash in `ComputeFilter` reads (Lőrinc)5d235d50d6net: assert block hash in `ProcessGetBlockData` and `ProcessMessage` (Lőrinc) Pull request description: A follow-up to https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32487#discussion_r2094072165, after which validating the hash of a read block from disk doesn't incur the cost of calculating its hash anymore. ### Summary This PR adds explicit checks that the read block header's hash matches the one we were expecting. ### Context After the previous PR, validating a block's hash during read operations became essentially free. This PR leverages that by requiring callers to provide a block's expected hash (or `std::nullopt`), preventing silent failures caused by corrupted or mismatched data. Most `ReadBlock` usages were updated with expected hashes and now fail on mismatch. ### Changes * added hash assertions in `ProcessGetBlockData` and `ProcessMessage` to validate that the block read from disk matches the expected hash; * updated tests and benchmark to pass the correct block hash to `ReadBlock()`, ensuring the hash validation is tested - or none if we already expect PoW failure; * removed the default value for `expected_hash`, requiring an explicit hash for all block reads. ### Why is the hash still optional (but no longer has a default value) * for header-error tests, where the goal is to trigger failures early in the parsing process; * for out-of-order orphan blocks, where the child hash isn't available before the initial disk read. ACKs for top commit: maflcko: review ACK9341b5333a🕙 achow101: ACK9341b5333ahodlinator: ACK9341b5333ajanb84: re ACK9341b5333aTree-SHA512: cf1d4fff4c15e3f8898ec284929cb83d7e747125d4ee759e77d369f1716728e843ef98030be32c8d608956a96ae2fbefa0e801200c333b9eefd6c086ec032e1f
This commit is contained in:
@@ -5204,14 +5204,14 @@ void ChainstateManager::LoadExternalBlockFile(
|
||||
while (range.first != range.second) {
|
||||
std::multimap<uint256, FlatFilePos>::iterator it = range.first;
|
||||
std::shared_ptr<CBlock> pblockrecursive = std::make_shared<CBlock>();
|
||||
if (m_blockman.ReadBlock(*pblockrecursive, it->second)) {
|
||||
LogDebug(BCLog::REINDEX, "%s: Processing out of order child %s of %s\n", __func__, pblockrecursive->GetHash().ToString(),
|
||||
head.ToString());
|
||||
if (m_blockman.ReadBlock(*pblockrecursive, it->second, {})) {
|
||||
const auto& block_hash{pblockrecursive->GetHash()};
|
||||
LogDebug(BCLog::REINDEX, "%s: Processing out of order child %s of %s", __func__, block_hash.ToString(), head.ToString());
|
||||
LOCK(cs_main);
|
||||
BlockValidationState dummy;
|
||||
if (AcceptBlock(pblockrecursive, dummy, nullptr, true, &it->second, nullptr, true)) {
|
||||
nLoaded++;
|
||||
queue.push_back(pblockrecursive->GetHash());
|
||||
queue.push_back(block_hash);
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
range.first++;
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user