highperfocused/bitcoin
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin.git synced 2026-01-20 07:09:15 +01:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#28251: validation: fix coins disappearing mid-package evaluation

Browse Source 
32c1dd1ad6 [test] mempool coins disappearing mid-package evaluation (glozow)
a67f460c3f [refactor] split setup in mempool_limit test (glozow)
d08696120e [test framework] add ability to spend only confirmed utxos (glozow)
3ea71feb11 [validation] don't LimitMempoolSize in any subpackage submissions (glozow)
d227b7234c [validation] return correct result when already-in-mempool tx gets evicted (glozow)
9698b81828 [refactor] back-fill results in AcceptPackage (glozow)
8ad7ad3392 [validation] make PackageMempoolAcceptResult members mutable (glozow)
03b87c11ca [validation] add AcceptSubPackage to delegate Accept* calls and clean up m_view (glozow)
3f01a3dab1 [CCoinsViewMemPool] track non-base coins and allow Reset (glozow)
7d7f7a1189 [policy] check for duplicate txids in package (glozow)

Pull request description:

  While we are evaluating a package, we split it into "subpackages" for evaluation (currently subpackages all have size 1 except the last one). If a subpackage has size 1, we may add a tx to mempool and call `LimitMempoolSize()`, which evicts transactions if the mempool gets full. We handle the case where the just-submitted transaction is evicted immediately, but we don't handle the case in which a transaction from a previous subpackage (either just submitted or already in mempool) is evicted. Mainly, since the coins created by the evicted transaction are cached in `m_view`, we don't realize the UTXO has disappeared until `CheckInputsFromMempoolAndCache` asserts that they exist. Also, the returned `PackageMempoolAcceptResult` reports that the transaction is in mempool even though it isn't anymore.

  Fix this by not calling `LimitMempoolSize()` until the very end, and editing the results map with "mempool full" if things fall out.

  Pointed out by instagibbs in faeed687e5 on top of the v3 PR.

ACKs for top commit:
  instagibbs:
    reACK 32c1dd1ad6

Tree-SHA512: 61e7f69db4712e5e5bfa27d037ab66bdd97f1bf60a8d9ffb96adb1f0609af012c810d681102ee5c7baec7b5fe8cb7c304a60c63ccc445d00d86a2b7f0e7ddb90
This commit is contained in:
fanquake
2023-09-13 17:50:21 +01:00
parent adc0921ea1 32c1dd1ad6
commit f1a9fd627b
9 changed files with 392 additions and 95 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

17
src/test/txpackage_tests.cpp
View File

@@ -65,6 +65,17 @@ BOOST_FIXTURE_TEST_CASE(package_sanitization_tests, TestChain100Setup)
BOOST_CHECK(!CheckPackage(package_too_large, state_too_large));
BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL(state_too_large.GetResult(), PackageValidationResult::PCKG_POLICY);
BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL(state_too_large.GetRejectReason(), "package-too-large");
// Packages can't contain transactions with the same txid.
Package package_duplicate_txids_empty;
for (auto i{0}; i < 3; ++i) {
CMutableTransaction empty_tx;
package_duplicate_txids_empty.emplace_back(MakeTransactionRef(empty_tx));
}
PackageValidationState state_duplicates;
BOOST_CHECK(!CheckPackage(package_duplicate_txids_empty, state_duplicates));
BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL(state_duplicates.GetResult(), PackageValidationResult::PCKG_POLICY);
BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL(state_duplicates.GetRejectReason(), "package-contains-duplicates");
}
BOOST_FIXTURE_TEST_CASE(package_validation_tests, TestChain100Setup)
@@ -809,18 +820,20 @@ BOOST_FIXTURE_TEST_CASE(package_cpfp_tests, TestChain100Setup)
expected_pool_size += 1;
BOOST_CHECK_MESSAGE(submit_rich_parent.m_state.IsInvalid(), "Package validation unexpectedly succeeded");
// The child would have been validated on its own and failed, then submitted as a "package" of 1.
// The child would have been validated on its own and failed.
BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL(submit_rich_parent.m_state.GetResult(), PackageValidationResult::PCKG_TX);
BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL(submit_rich_parent.m_state.GetRejectReason(), "transaction failed");
auto it_parent = submit_rich_parent.m_tx_results.find(tx_parent_rich->GetWitnessHash());
auto it_child = submit_rich_parent.m_tx_results.find(tx_child_poor->GetWitnessHash());
BOOST_CHECK(it_parent != submit_rich_parent.m_tx_results.end());
BOOST_CHECK(it_child != submit_rich_parent.m_tx_results.end());
BOOST_CHECK(it_parent->second.m_result_type == MempoolAcceptResult::ResultType::VALID);
BOOST_CHECK(it_child->second.m_result_type == MempoolAcceptResult::ResultType::INVALID);
BOOST_CHECK(it_parent->second.m_state.GetRejectReason() == "");
BOOST_CHECK_MESSAGE(it_parent->second.m_base_fees.value() == high_parent_fee,
strprintf("rich parent: expected fee %s, got %s", high_parent_fee, it_parent->second.m_base_fees.value()));
BOOST_CHECK(it_parent->second.m_effective_feerate == CFeeRate(high_parent_fee, GetVirtualTransactionSize(*tx_parent_rich)));
auto it_child = submit_rich_parent.m_tx_results.find(tx_child_poor->GetWitnessHash());
BOOST_CHECK(it_child != submit_rich_parent.m_tx_results.end());
BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL(it_child->second.m_result_type, MempoolAcceptResult::ResultType::INVALID);
BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL(it_child->second.m_state.GetResult(), TxValidationResult::TX_MEMPOOL_POLICY);