mirror of
https://github.com/lightningnetwork/lnd.git
synced 2025-08-29 15:11:09 +02:00
accessman: skip restriction for existing peers
When a peer already has a connection with us, there's no need to check for available slots as we will either close the old conn or refuse the new conn.
This commit is contained in:
committed by
Olaoluwa Osuntokun
parent
5dfc5f4b42
commit
b527f19de7
@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
|
||||
package lnd
|
||||
|
||||
import (
|
||||
"context"
|
||||
"testing"
|
||||
|
||||
"github.com/btcsuite/btcd/btcec/v2"
|
||||
@@ -250,9 +251,8 @@ func TestAssignPeerPerms(t *testing.T) {
|
||||
expectedErr: ErrGossiperBan,
|
||||
},
|
||||
// peer6 has no channel with us, and we expect it to have a
|
||||
// restricted status. We also expect the error
|
||||
// `ErrNoMoreRestrictedAccessSlots` to be returned given
|
||||
// we only allow 1 restricted peer in this test.
|
||||
// restricted status. Since this peer is seen, we don't expect
|
||||
// the error `ErrNoMoreRestrictedAccessSlots` to be returned.
|
||||
{
|
||||
name: "peer with no channels and restricted",
|
||||
peerPub: genPeerPub(),
|
||||
@@ -264,7 +264,7 @@ func TestAssignPeerPerms(t *testing.T) {
|
||||
numRestricted: 1,
|
||||
|
||||
expectedStatus: peerStatusRestricted,
|
||||
expectedErr: ErrNoMoreRestrictedAccessSlots,
|
||||
expectedErr: nil,
|
||||
},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -394,3 +394,135 @@ func TestAssignPeerPermsBypassRestriction(t *testing.T) {
|
||||
})
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// TestAssignPeerPermsBypassExisting asserts that when the peer is a
|
||||
// pre-existing peer, it won't be restricted.
|
||||
func TestAssignPeerPermsBypassExisting(t *testing.T) {
|
||||
t.Parallel()
|
||||
|
||||
// genPeerPub is a helper closure that generates a random public key.
|
||||
genPeerPub := func() *btcec.PublicKey {
|
||||
peerPriv, err := btcec.NewPrivateKey()
|
||||
require.NoError(t, err)
|
||||
|
||||
return peerPriv.PubKey()
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// peer1 exists in `peerCounts` map.
|
||||
peer1 := genPeerPub()
|
||||
peer1Str := string(peer1.SerializeCompressed())
|
||||
|
||||
// peer2 exists in `peerScores` map.
|
||||
peer2 := genPeerPub()
|
||||
peer2Str := string(peer2.SerializeCompressed())
|
||||
|
||||
// peer3 is a new peer.
|
||||
peer3 := genPeerPub()
|
||||
|
||||
// Create params to init the accessman.
|
||||
initPerms := func() (map[string]channeldb.ChanCount, error) {
|
||||
return map[string]channeldb.ChanCount{
|
||||
peer1Str: {},
|
||||
}, nil
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
disconnect := func(*btcec.PublicKey) (bool, error) {
|
||||
return false, nil
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
cfg := &accessManConfig{
|
||||
initAccessPerms: initPerms,
|
||||
shouldDisconnect: disconnect,
|
||||
maxRestrictedSlots: 0,
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
a, err := newAccessMan(cfg)
|
||||
require.NoError(t, err)
|
||||
|
||||
// Add peer2 to the `peerScores`.
|
||||
a.peerScores[peer2Str] = peerSlotStatus{
|
||||
state: peerStatusTemporary,
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// Assigning to peer1 should not return an error.
|
||||
status, err := a.assignPeerPerms(peer1)
|
||||
require.NoError(t, err)
|
||||
require.Equal(t, peerStatusRestricted, status)
|
||||
|
||||
// Assigning to peer2 should not return an error.
|
||||
status, err = a.assignPeerPerms(peer2)
|
||||
require.NoError(t, err)
|
||||
require.Equal(t, peerStatusTemporary, status)
|
||||
|
||||
// Assigning to peer3 should return an error.
|
||||
status, err = a.assignPeerPerms(peer3)
|
||||
require.ErrorIs(t, err, ErrNoMoreRestrictedAccessSlots)
|
||||
require.Equal(t, peerStatusRestricted, status)
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// TestHasPeer asserts `hasPeer` returns the correct results.
|
||||
func TestHasPeer(t *testing.T) {
|
||||
t.Parallel()
|
||||
|
||||
ctx := context.Background()
|
||||
|
||||
// Create a testing accessMan.
|
||||
a := &accessMan{
|
||||
peerCounts: make(map[string]channeldb.ChanCount),
|
||||
peerScores: make(map[string]peerSlotStatus),
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// peer1 exists with an open channel.
|
||||
peer1 := "peer1"
|
||||
a.peerCounts[peer1] = channeldb.ChanCount{
|
||||
HasOpenOrClosedChan: true,
|
||||
}
|
||||
peer1Access := peerStatusProtected
|
||||
|
||||
// peer2 exists with a pending channel.
|
||||
peer2 := "peer2"
|
||||
a.peerCounts[peer2] = channeldb.ChanCount{
|
||||
PendingOpenCount: 1,
|
||||
}
|
||||
peer2Access := peerStatusTemporary
|
||||
|
||||
// peer3 exists without any channels.
|
||||
peer3 := "peer3"
|
||||
a.peerCounts[peer3] = channeldb.ChanCount{}
|
||||
peer3Access := peerStatusRestricted
|
||||
|
||||
// peer4 exists with a score.
|
||||
peer4 := "peer4"
|
||||
peer4Access := peerStatusTemporary
|
||||
a.peerScores[peer4] = peerSlotStatus{state: peer4Access}
|
||||
|
||||
// peer5 doesn't exist.
|
||||
peer5 := "peer5"
|
||||
|
||||
// We now assert `hasPeer` returns the correct results.
|
||||
//
|
||||
// peer1 should be found with peerStatusProtected.
|
||||
access, found := a.hasPeer(ctx, peer1)
|
||||
require.True(t, found)
|
||||
require.Equal(t, peer1Access, access)
|
||||
|
||||
// peer2 should be found with peerStatusTemporary.
|
||||
access, found = a.hasPeer(ctx, peer2)
|
||||
require.True(t, found)
|
||||
require.Equal(t, peer2Access, access)
|
||||
|
||||
// peer3 should be found with peerStatusRestricted.
|
||||
access, found = a.hasPeer(ctx, peer3)
|
||||
require.True(t, found)
|
||||
require.Equal(t, peer3Access, access)
|
||||
|
||||
// peer4 should be found with peerStatusTemporary.
|
||||
access, found = a.hasPeer(ctx, peer4)
|
||||
require.True(t, found)
|
||||
require.Equal(t, peer4Access, access)
|
||||
|
||||
// peer5 should NOT be found.
|
||||
access, found = a.hasPeer(ctx, peer5)
|
||||
require.False(t, found)
|
||||
require.Equal(t, peerStatusRestricted, access)
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
Reference in New Issue
Block a user