Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#26103: refactor: mempool: use CTxMemPool::Limits

33b12e5df6 docs: improve docs where MemPoolLimits is used (stickies-v)
6945853c0b test: use NoLimits() in MempoolIndexingTest (stickies-v)
3a86f24a4c refactor: mempool: use CTxMempool::Limits (stickies-v)
b85af25f87 refactor: mempool: add MemPoolLimits::NoLimits() (stickies-v)

Pull request description:

  Mempool currently considers 4 limits regarding ancestor and descendant count and size, which get passed around between functions quite a bit. This PR uses `CTxMemPool::Limits` introduced in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25290 to simplify those signatures and callsites.

  The purpose of this PR is to improve readability and maintenance, without behaviour change.

  As noted in the first commit "refactor: mempool: change MemPoolLimits members to uint", we currently have an underflow issue where a user could pass a negative `-limitancestorsize`, which is eventually cast to an unsigned integer. This behaviour already exists. Because it's orthogonal and to minimize scope, I think this should be fixed in a separate PR.

ACKs for top commit:
  hebasto:
    ACK 33b12e5df6, I have reviewed the code and it looks OK, I agree it can be merged.
  glozow:
    reACK 33b12e5df6

Tree-SHA512: 591c6dcee1894f1c3ca28b34a680eeadcf0d40cda92451b4a422c03087b27d682b5e30ba4367abd75a99b5ccb115b7884b0026958d3c7dddab030549db5a4056

src/node/miner.cpp

@@ -392,9 +392,8 @@ void BlockAssembler::addPackageTxs(const CTxMemPool& mempool, int& nPackagesSele
         }
 
         CTxMemPool::setEntries ancestors;
-        uint64_t nNoLimit = std::numeric_limits<uint64_t>::max();
         std::string dummy;
-        mempool.CalculateMemPoolAncestors(*iter, ancestors, nNoLimit, nNoLimit, nNoLimit, nNoLimit, dummy, false);
+        mempool.CalculateMemPoolAncestors(*iter, ancestors, CTxMemPool::Limits::NoLimits(), dummy, false);
 
         onlyUnconfirmed(ancestors);
         ancestors.insert(iter);