💬 Eunovo commented on pull request "validation: ensure assumevalid is always used during reindex":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31615#issuecomment-3095873057)
Rebased on master@ https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/5878f35446

👍 dergoegge approved a pull request: "fuzz: Make process_message(s) more deterministic"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32822#pullrequestreview-3037221638)
reACK fa1a14a13a15ecfb7587a94ee86b4ace7c819519

💬 Eunovo commented on pull request "Silent Payments: Receiving":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32966#discussion_r2218671774)
IIUC The silent payments wallet needs to scan entire blocks since it doesn't know ahead of time which `scriptPubKeys` to use in a GCS filter. Since we can't skip blocks, fast rescans shouldn't provide any advantages here.

💬 stickies-v commented on pull request "p2p: rename GetAddresses -> GetAddressesUncached":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32994#discussion_r2218745362)
> I'm wondering if it makes more sense to signal the lack of something ... instead of the additional functionality in the pair

I considered that too, but I don't think that's better. The "Unchached" one is unsafe, and for that it should stand out. My initial thought was to name it `GetAddressesUnsafe` or `GetAddressesInternal`, but those names carry less meaning, so I eventually landed on just describing what it does, which I think at least gives people somewhat familiar with the code a good
...

📝 maflcko opened a pull request: "NOMERGE DEBUG WIP ignore"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33028)

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "ci: Use APT_LLVM_V in msan task":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32999#issuecomment-3096172593)
Should probably adjust the timeout / comment:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/5878f35446ae260ccb0ab5051b795b4364f77951/.cirrus.yml#L160
but given it's being moved in #32989, left a note there.

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "Migrate CI to hosted Cirrus Runners":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32989#discussion_r2218810639)
Note to remember to drop the timeout post #32999.

🤔 ajtowns reviewed a pull request: "refactor: GenTxid type safety followups"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33005#pullrequestreview-3037443575)
Approach ACK

💬 ajtowns commented on pull request "refactor: GenTxid type safety followups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33005#discussion_r2218771665)
Maybe add a comment to call attention to the `const&`and the reason for it?

💬 ajtowns commented on pull request "refactor: GenTxid type safety followups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33005#discussion_r2218799503)
Passing in the `GenTxid` and keeping the `visit` inside the function (rather than an `if` outside it along with templatizing) seems nicer?

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "ci: Use APT_LLVM_V in msan task"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32999)

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "Migrate CI to hosted Cirrus Runners":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32989#discussion_r2218854573)
Unrelatedly, the `USE_CIRRUS_RUNNERS` can probably be removed:

* It is only there for forks, but the comment says it doesn't work for forks anyway in the expected way.
* If someone maintains a fork (presumably to add patches), it should be trivial for them to make the required patch to the CI as well.

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "test: fix `ReadTopologicalSet` unsigned integer overflow"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33007)

💬 ismaelsadeeq commented on pull request "Policy: Report reason inputs are non standard":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29060#issuecomment-3096237139)
Rebased after the merge of #32521 to pick up recent changes to `AreInputsStandard`.

A new verbose message will be returned when the BIP54 legacy sigops limit is violated:

* `bad-txns-non-witness-sigops-exceeds-bip54-limit`: This occurs when the total number of non-witness sigops across the entire transaction exceeds `MAX_TX_LEGACY_SIGOPS`. Additionally, a debug message is also returned with the actual number of sigops and the limit, for example: `sigops 2501 > limit 2500`.


[3cde7f1852
...

🤔 ismaelsadeeq reviewed a pull request: "mempool: Avoid needless vtx iteration during IBD"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32827#pullrequestreview-3037622642)
reACK 249889bee6b88eb9814eb969e6fb108f86a4bf98

💬 ismaelsadeeq commented on pull request "mempool: Avoid needless vtx iteration during IBD":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32827#discussion_r2218883957)
In "mempool: Avoid expensive loop in removeForBlock during IBD" 41ad2be4340d7b18a4669aa9becef8936597f000

nit: change commit title to "mempool: avoid looping `blk` `txs` when mempool is empty in `removeForBlock`"

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "[IBD] prevector: store `P2WSH`/`P2TR`/`P2PK` scripts inline":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32279#discussion_r2218901137)
nit in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/ecc6c07e583842a2afe1a8b5bb8ec0bb9f997fdb: Could add and use a small helper: `TxoutType GetTxoutType(const CScript& output_script)`? This makes the code shorter below and wraps this dummy.

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "[IBD] prevector: store `P2WSH`/`P2TR`/`P2PK` scripts inline":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32279#discussion_r2218546827)
nit in the first commit: could be using `using` for new code?

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "[IBD] prevector: store `P2WSH`/`P2TR`/`P2PK` scripts inline":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32279#discussion_r2218582070)


nit in the first commit: Should this be called `script_base_size` instead? There are other uses of prevector (`CompressedScript`, netaddr, ...), so defining this globally could be confusing.

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "[IBD] prevector: store `P2WSH`/`P2TR`/`P2PK` scripts inline":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32279#discussion_r2218877265)
nit in ecc6c07e583842a2afe1a8b5bb8ec0bb9f997fdb: Use snake_case for new code?