📝 brunoerg opened a pull request: "test: check proper OP_2ROT behavior"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33047)
According to corecheck, the following mutant is not caught by any test (https://corecheck.dev/mutation/src/script/interpreter.cpp).

```diff
diff --git a/src/script/interpreter.cpp b/src/script/interpreter.cpp
index 61ea7f4503..4f6fa34836 100644
--- a/src/script/interpreter.cpp
+++ b/src/script/interpreter.cpp
@@ -746,7 +746,6 @@ bool EvalScript(std::vector<std::vector<unsigned char> >& stack, const CScript&
return set_error(serror, SCRIPT_ERR_INVALID_STACK_OPERA
...

💬 murchandamus commented on pull request "Reduce minrelaytxfee to 100 sats/kvB":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32959#issuecomment-3109422588)
As hinted by @glozow above, `mempool_opts.min_relay_feerate` is set automatically to the minimum of `incrementalrelayfee` and `minrelaytxfee`, so to lower the minimum feerate for what is accepted into a node’s mempool, which means that either `DEFAULT_INCREMENTAL_RELAY_FEE` also has to be lowered or the two need to be decoupled. I would still maintain that relaying things that aren’t mined by default would be odd, and so it sounds to me that lowering the `DEFAULT_MIN_RELAY_TX_FEE` would entail a
...

💬 darosior commented on pull request "Introduce per-txin sighash midstate cache for legacy/p2sh/segwitv0 scripts":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32473#issuecomment-3109476511)
Here is a fuzz test which asserts the cached and not cached versions of the sighash function always return the same result: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/3c056d766d6311e4120d43705b53059e3b1b0bb1. Running it for a while here did not reveal anything.

> I ran IBD on mainnet and signet with caching for blocks enabled and it did not result in any historical block being rejected on either of these networks. I'll do testnet3 and testnet4 next.

Done that and it didn't cause any issue e
...

💬 RobinLinus commented on pull request "Reduce minrelaytxfee to 100 sats/kvB":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32959#issuecomment-3109580155)
Since similar arguments keep coming up: The sole purpose of the minimum relay fee should be DoS protection. Trying to fix the security budget by imposing administered prices on block space seems misguided—market forces will likely circumvent such price controls and make things worse in the process.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet, rpc: add anti-fee-sniping to `send` and `sendall`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28944#issuecomment-3109583652)
ACK aac0b6dd79b0db1e9d42a6f466709a61cfd1f69f

🤔 furszy reviewed a pull request: "index: initial sync speedup, parallelize process"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26966#pullrequestreview-3048467543)
> What is the step to reproduce your result?

1. Sync your node without any index.
2. Restart the node with block filter or txindex enabled and let it run (you could also set `-connect=0` to sync only the index, without running the net/validation threads. Since threads won't be competing for `cs_main`, this will give you a more accurate result).

You’ll see a "[index name] is enabled at height [height]" log entry once it finishes. Then it’s just a matter of subtracting the index startup tim
...

💬 pinheadmz commented on issue "getbestblockhash is sometimes taking a very long time":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32733#issuecomment-3109585516)
I am running Bitcoin Core v28.0.0 with `txindex=1` on an RPi 4 with 8 GB RAM and 1 TB USB-SSD and I have no performance issues at all. I also run LND and some other bitcoin monitoring software that makes RPCs every 1 second.

Just for a sanity check, can you ensure that your bitcoin data directory is being written to external SSD and not the MicroSD card?

💬 furszy commented on pull request "index: initial sync speedup, parallelize process":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26966#discussion_r2226285266)
Absolutely

💬 glozow commented on pull request "p2p: TxOrphanage revamp cleanups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32941#discussion_r2226282529)
done

💬 glozow commented on pull request "p2p: TxOrphanage revamp cleanups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32941#discussion_r2226282789)
done

💬 glozow commented on pull request "p2p: TxOrphanage revamp cleanups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32941#discussion_r2226282376)
Fixed the typos. I didn't mention the `getorphantxs` fields since we haven't mentioned them in release notes before

💬 glozow commented on pull request "p2p: TxOrphanage revamp cleanups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32941#discussion_r2226286848)
Added the option again, a warning, and a more explicit recommendation in the release notes.

💬 glozow commented on pull request "p2p: TxOrphanage revamp cleanups":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32941#discussion_r2226284019)
Thanks, removed that commit and leaving as is

💬 furszy commented on pull request "index: initial sync speedup, parallelize process":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26966#discussion_r2226304853)
> In " init: provide thread pool to indexes " [82fa9d2](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/82fa9d29653b445118fc2d03e2ced520a5d4c7dc)
>
> Define the max and then use it here and in checking the bounds

Since the maximum number of threads for indexes should depend on how many threads Core has at runtime and the number of available processors, I don't think hardcoding it here is the best approach. I agree with adding it on the error side: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26966#di
...

💬 furszy commented on pull request "index: initial sync speedup, parallelize process":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26966#discussion_r2226307172)
> In "util: introduce general purpose thread pool" [7d984c3](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/7d984c3b2dca085ef7f49d21568b06c7b89c7807)
>
> Also verify that no work queue size is 0.

sure. Done.

💬 pinheadmz commented on pull request "fees: rpc: `estimatesmartfee` now returns a fee rate estimate during low network activity":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32395#issuecomment-3109644770)
concept ACK -- I think like https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32528 a little fudge factor against what is "most correct" is worth the tradeoff for a more predictable user experience, especially on test networks

💬 furszy commented on pull request "index: initial sync speedup, parallelize process":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26966#discussion_r2226319906)
Done

🤔 glozow reviewed a pull request: "package validation: relax the package-not-child-with-unconfirmed-parents rule"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31385#pullrequestreview-3048518467)
Thanks @ishaanam! Took all suggestions

💬 glozow commented on pull request "package validation: relax the package-not-child-with-unconfirmed-parents rule":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31385#discussion_r2226318223)
changed them to `parent_relative, child_relative`

💬 glozow commented on pull request "package validation: relax the package-not-child-with-unconfirmed-parents rule":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31385#discussion_r2226317096)
Good point, added a definition