💬 hebasto commented on pull request "build: Fix regression in "ARMv8 CRC32 intrinsics" test":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28919#issuecomment-1823187990)
Is it worth backporting to 26.x?

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "build: Fix regression in "ARMv8 CRC32 intrinsics" test":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28919#issuecomment-1823188307)
Backported in #28872.

👍 hebasto approved a pull request: "[26.x] Changes for rc3"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28872#pullrequestreview-1744989681)
re-ACK 2f86d3053314c382dfce5cf314e98811ed433859, only https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28919 backported since my [recent](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28872#pullrequestreview-1744950215) review.

🤔 pablomartin4btc reviewed a pull request: "Use Txid in COutpoint"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28922#pullrequestreview-1744990371)
Concept ACK

Light CR.

💬 pablomartin4btc commented on pull request "Use Txid in COutpoint":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28922#discussion_r1402451595)
Are you keeping this and removing it in a follow-up?

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/9e58c5bcd96e7ff2062274868814ccae0626589e/src/util/transaction_identifier.h#L53-L60

Same for the comparisons above those lines (#L18 `// TODO`).

📝 brunoerg opened a pull request: "test: add coverage for bech32m in `wallet_keypool_topup`"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28928)
0dcac51049cdd924a50d62629757effc8d542046 added coverage for all keypool addresses types in `wallet_keypool_topup` (4y agp). Now we have bech23m, so this PR adds it.

👍 TheCharlatan approved a pull request: "[26.x] Changes for rc3"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28872#pullrequestreview-1745009742)
ACK 2f86d3053314c382dfce5cf314e98811ed433859

💬 pinheadmz commented on pull request "test: fix `AddNode` unit test failure on OpenBSD":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28891#issuecomment-1823254133)
> cc @pinheadmz who is apparently also running an OpenBSD server, as far as I remember :-)

Hi, post merge code review ACK.

I have a FreeBSD container on google cloud I just fire up when needed.

The bug you're fixing here is apparently not an issue on my OS:
`FreeBSD freebsd-13-1 13.2-RELEASE-p4 FreeBSD 13.2-RELEASE-p4 GENERIC amd64`

The bitcoin unit test passes without this patch and `ping 127.1` also works fine.

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "[26.x] Changes for rc3"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28872)

✅ fanquake closed a pull request: "Create master"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28593)

📝 fanquake locked a pull request: "Create master"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28593)
<!--
*** Please remove the following help text before submitting: ***

Pull requests without a rationale and clear improvement may be closed
immediately.

GUI-related pull requests should be opened against
https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui
first. See CONTRIBUTING.md
-->

<!--
Please provide clear motivation for your patch and explain how it improves
Bitcoin Core user experience or Bitcoin Core developer experience
significantly:

* Any test improvements or new tests that improv
...

🤔 furszy reviewed a pull request: "test: add coverage for bech32m in `wallet_keypool_topup`"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28928#pullrequestreview-1745180193)
we should probably rewrite this test using only one node, and multiple wallets, instead of five different nodes.

✅ fanquake closed a pull request: "@kaaid"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28496)

📝 fanquake locked a pull request: "@kaaid"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28496)
<!--
*** Please remove the following help text before submitting: ***

Pull requests without a rationale and clear improvement may be closed
immediately.

GUI-related pull requests should be opened against
https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui
first. See CONTRIBUTING.md
-->

<!--
Please provide clear motivation for your patch and explain how it improves
Bitcoin Core user experience or Bitcoin Core developer experience
significantly:

* Any test improvements or new tests that improv
...

👍 TheCharlatan approved a pull request: "Improve peformance of CTransaction::HasWitness (28107 follow-up)"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28766#pullrequestreview-1745321741)
ACK af1d2ff88344e1545ac8d9ad09f8e37e264da712

Nit: Maybe add a `HasWitness` check somewhere in the `transaction_tests`?

💬 stickies-v commented on pull request "Use Txid in COutpoint":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28922#discussion_r1402468881)
nit
```suggestion
g_available_coins.emplace_back(Txid{}, i);
```

💬 stickies-v commented on pull request "Use Txid in COutpoint":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28922#discussion_r1402689558)
Doesn't it make more sense to keep this as `std::vector<uint256> chain_txids;` for now?

👍 stickies-v approved a pull request: "Use Txid in COutpoint"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28922#pullrequestreview-1745013646)
ACK 9e58c5bcd96e7ff2062274868814ccae0626589e. A sizeable diff, but very straightforward changes. Didn't see anything controversial. Left a few nits, but nothing blocking, only if you have to retouch.

💬 stickies-v commented on pull request "Use Txid in COutpoint":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28922#discussion_r1402468172)
nit
```suggestion
const auto hash{Txid::FromUint256(ParseHashV(request.params[0], "txid"))};
```

💬 stickies-v commented on pull request "Use Txid in COutpoint":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28922#discussion_r1402690528)
nit: Would simplify this to

```cpp
for (const auto& [txid, wtx] : wallet.mapWallet)
```

<details>
<summary>git diff on 9e58c5bcd9</summary>

```diff
diff --git a/src/wallet/spend.cpp b/src/wallet/spend.cpp
index 35583642a5..0e72efe0ba 100644
--- a/src/wallet/spend.cpp
+++ b/src/wallet/spend.cpp
@@ -319,11 +319,8 @@ CoinsResult AvailableCoins(const CWallet& wallet,
std::vector<COutPoint> outpoints;

std::set<uint256> trusted_parents;
- for (const auto& entry : wa
...

💬 stickies-v commented on pull request "Use Txid in COutpoint":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28922#discussion_r1402684591)
nit
```suggestion
txids.emplace_back(Txid::FromUint256(ConsumeUInt256(fuzzed_data_provider)));
```