fa4cb13b52 test: [doc] Manually unify stale headers (MarcoFalke)
fa5f297748 scripted-diff: [doc] Unify stale copyright headers (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
Historically, the upper year range in file headers was bumped manually
or with a script.
This has many issues:
* The script is causing churn. See for example commit 306ccd4, or
drive-by first-time contributions bumping them one-by-one. (A few from
this year: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32008,
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31642,
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32963, ...)
* Some, or likely most, upper year values were wrong. Reasons for
incorrect dates could be code moves, cherry-picks, or simply bugs in
the script.
* The upper range is not needed for anything.
* Anyone who wants to find the initial file creation date, or file
history, can use `git log` or `git blame` to get more accurate
results.
* Many places are already using the `-present` suffix, with the meaning
that the upper range is omitted.
To fix all issues, this bumps the upper range of the copyright headers
to `-present`.
Further notes:
* Obviously, the yearly 4-line bump commit for the build system (c.f.
b537a2c02a) is fine and will remain.
* For new code, the date range can be fully omitted, as it is done
already by some developers. Obviously, developers are free to pick
whatever style they want. One can list the commits for each style.
* For example, to list all commits that use `-present`:
`git log --format='%an (%ae) [%h: %s]' -S 'present The Bitcoin'`.
* Alternatively, to list all commits that use no range at all:
`git log --format='%an (%ae) [%h: %s]' -S '(c) The Bitcoin'`.
<!--
* The lower range can be wrong as well, so it could be omitted as well,
but this is left for a follow-up. A previous attempt was in
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26817.
ACKs for top commit:
l0rinc:
ACK fa4cb13b52
rkrux:
re-ACK fa4cb13b52
janb84:
ACK fa4cb13b52
Tree-SHA512: e5132781bdc4417d1e2922809b27ef4cf0abb37ffb68c65aab8a5391d3c917b61a18928ec2ec2c75ef5184cb79a5b8c8290d63e949220dbeab3bd2c0dfbdc4c5
The changes made here were:
| From | To |
|-------------------|------------------|
| `m.count(k)` | `m.contains(k)` |
| `!m.count(k)` | `!m.contains(k)` |
| `m.count(k) == 0` | `!m.contains(k)` |
| `m.count(k) != 0` | `m.contains(k)` |
| `m.count(k) > 0` | `m.contains(k)` |
The commit contains the trivial, mechanical refactors where it doesn't matter if the container can have multiple elements or not
Co-authored-by: Jan B <608446+janb84@users.noreply.github.com>
The term "force" is ambiguous and not used in BIP9 where the ! rule
prefix is introduced.
Additionally, #29039 renamed gbt_vb_name to gbt_force_name which
might increase the confusion.
-BEGIN VERIFY SCRIPT-
sed -i s/gbt_force_name/gbt_rule_value/g ./src/rpc/mining.cpp
sed -i s/gbt_force/gbt_optional_rule/g $(git grep -l gbt_force)
-END VERIFY SCRIPT-
Replaces State() (which returned ACTIVE/STARTED/etc) with IsActiveAfter()
which just returns a bool, as this was all State was actually used
for. Drops Mask(), which was only used in tests and can be replaced with
`1<<bit`, and also drops StateSinceHeight() and Statistics(), which are
now only used internally for Info().
Rather than having the RPC code have knowledge about how BIP9 is
implemented, create a reporting function in the versionbits code, and
limit the RPC code to coverting the result of that into the appropriate
output for getblocktemplate.
Rather than having the RPC code have knowledge about how BIP9 is
implemented, create a reporting function in the versionbits code, and
limit the RPC code to coverting the result of that into Univalue/JSON.
Rather than having the rule change period/threshold be constant for all
potential deployments on a chain, have it be specific to the deployment
itself. This both matches history (BIP 9 specified a 2016 block period
and 1916 block threshold; BIP 91 specified a 336 block period and 269
block threshold; and BIP 341 specified a 2016 block period and 1815
block threshold), and allows the code to be simplified, as only the
BIP9Deployment structure is needed, not the full Consensus::Params
structure.
For an abstract class, specifying parameters in detail serves no point;
and for the concrete implementation, changing the consensus parameters
between invocations doesn't make sense. So simplify the class by removing
the consensus params from the method arguments, and just make it a member
variable in the concrete object where needed. This also allows dropping
dummy parameters from the unit/fuzz tests.
Add sanity asserts for return value of `CBlockIndex::GetAncestor()` where appropriate.
In validation.cpp `CheckSequenceLocks`, check the return value of `tip->GetAncestor(maxInputHeight)` stored into `lp->maxInputBlock`. If it ever returns `nullptr` because the ancestor isn't found, it's going to be a bad bug to keep going, since a `LockPoints` object with the `maxInputBlock` member set to `nullptr` signifies no relative lock time.
In the other places, the added asserts would prevent accidental dereferencing of a null pointer which is undefined behavior.
Co-Authored-By: Aurèle Oulès <aurele@oules.com>
Co-Authored-By: danra <danra@users.noreply.github.com>
a380922891 Release notes for getdeploymentinfo rpc (Anthony Towns)
240cad09ba rpc: getdeploymentinfo: include signalling info (Anthony Towns)
376c0c6dae rpc: getdeploymentinfo: include block hash/height (Anthony Towns)
a7469bcd35 rpc: getdeploymentinfo: change stats to always refer to current period (Anthony Towns)
7f15c1841b rpc: getdeploymentinfo: allow specifying a blockhash other than tip (Anthony Towns)
fd826130a0 rpc: move softfork info from getblockchaininfo to getdeploymentinfo (Anthony Towns)
Pull request description:
The aim of this PR is to improve the ability to monitor soft fork status. It first moves the softfork section from getblockchaininfo into a new RPC named getdeploymentinfo, which is then also able to query the status of forks at an arbitrary block rather than only at the tip. In addition, bip9 status is changed to indicate the status of the given block, rather than just for the next block, and an additional field is included to indicate whether each block in the signalling period signaled.
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
Code review and lightly tested ACK a380922891
Sjors:
tACK a380922891
fjahr:
tACK a380922891
Tree-SHA512: 7417d733b47629f229c5128586569909250481a3e94356c52fe67a03fd42cd81745246e384b98c4115fb61587714c879e4bc3e5f5c74407d9f8f6773472a33cb
On a period boundary, getdeploymentinfo (and previously getblockchaininfo)
would report the status and statistics for the next block rather than
the current block. Change this to always report the status/statistics
of the current block, but add status-next to report the status for the
next block.
This removes the DEFINED->FAILED transition and changes the
STARTED->FAILED transition to only occur if signalling didn't pass the
threshold. This ensures that it is always possible for activation to
occur, no matter what settings are chosen, or the speed at which blocks
are found.
Previously we used deployments that would timeout prior to Bitcoin's
invention, which allowed the deployment to still be activated in unit
tests. This switches those deployments to be truly never active.
5a9b508 [trivial] Add end of namespace comments (practicalswift)
Tree-SHA512: 92b0fcae4d1d3f4da9e97569ae84ef2d6e09625a5815cd0e5f0eb6dd2ecba9852fa85c184c5ae9de5117050330ce995e9867b451fa8cd5512169025990541a2b
Segwit's version bit will be signalled for all invocations of CreateNewBlock,
and not specifying segwit only will cause CreateNewBlock to skip transactions
with witness from being selected.
