💬 andrewtoth commented on pull request "validation: fetch block inputs on parallel threads >10% faster IBD":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31132#discussion_r2402470769)
Done.

💬 andrewtoth commented on pull request "validation: fetch block inputs on parallel threads >10% faster IBD":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31132#discussion_r2402472467)
Added some explanation in the commit message. Please let me know if it makes it more clear.

👋 frankomosh's pull request is ready for review: "doc: add coverage instrumentation hint to libFuzzer quickstart"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33536)

📝 fanquake converted_to_draft a pull request: "Update libmultiprocess subtree in 30.x branch"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33519)
Includes:

- https://github.com/bitcoin-core/libmultiprocess/pull/207
- https://github.com/bitcoin-core/libmultiprocess/pull/208
- https://github.com/bitcoin-core/libmultiprocess/pull/211
- https://github.com/bitcoin-core/libmultiprocess/pull/201
- https://github.com/bitcoin-core/libmultiprocess/pull/213
- https://github.com/bitcoin-core/libmultiprocess/pull/214
- https://github.com/bitcoin-core/libmultiprocess/pull/221
- https://github.com/bitcoin-core/libmultiprocess/pull/220

Corre
...

📝 fanquake converted_to_draft a pull request: "Update libmultiprocess subtree to support reduced logging"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33518)
Includes:

- https://github.com/bitcoin-core/libmultiprocess/pull/213
- https://github.com/bitcoin-core/libmultiprocess/pull/214
- https://github.com/bitcoin-core/libmultiprocess/pull/221
- https://github.com/bitcoin-core/libmultiprocess/pull/220

The last change is needed to support #33517 and fix poor performance in some cases caused by slow logging.

The changes can be verified by running `test/lint/git-subtree-check.sh src/ipc/libmultiprocess` as described in [developer notes](https
...

🤔 glozow reviewed a pull request: "[29.x] Finalise 29.2rc2"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33534#pullrequestreview-3299962725)
lgtm 513cef75ee06bc5d310a22d366a5f3c815aa1499. Got the same manpages, no changes to examples/bitcoin.conf or bips.md.

I think the release notes need to be updated

💬 glozow commented on pull request "[29.x] Finalise 29.2rc2":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33534#discussion_r2402655206)
Need to update release notes for #33482, no?

💬 glozow commented on pull request "[29.x] Finalise 29.2rc2":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33534#discussion_r2402669380)
I also don't see #32989

💬 glozow commented on pull request "wallet: don't consider unconfirmed TRUC coins with ancestors":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33528#issuecomment-3366489897)
> Is this going to be backported to 30.x?

I think that'd be best so that the behavior is consistent from v30 onwards.

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "[29.x] Finalise 29.2rc2":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33534#discussion_r2402679207)
Added a commit.

🤔 glozow reviewed a pull request: "[29.x] Finalise 29.2rc2"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33534#pullrequestreview-3300018391)
ACK d82fc69829cd8cabbaf2c3a969597b40c32edc86

💬 davidgumberg commented on pull request "[29.x] Finalise 29.2rc2":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33534#issuecomment-3366521126)
reACK d82fc69

👍 darosior approved a pull request: "[29.x] Finalise 29.2rc2"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33534#pullrequestreview-3300035989)
utACK 513cef75ee06bc5d310a22d366a5f3c815aa1499. Changes look good to me, but i have not been through the process of regenerating the doc myself.

👍 darosior approved a pull request: "[28.x] More backports"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33535#pullrequestreview-3300089164)
utACK 06fe49dc88638e2ad21f1b7d0dd87661de384517.

💬 andrewtoth commented on pull request "validation: fetch block inputs on parallel threads >10% faster IBD":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31132#issuecomment-3366595565)
Removed `m_batch_size`. Each thread now increments the atomic counter by 1.

🤔 danielabrozzoni reviewed a pull request: "test: addrman: check isTerrible when time is more than 10min in the future"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33533#pullrequestreview-3300148395)
tACK 8e47ed6906d5e381498681e2cab9f2e318597705

I verified that mutating the isTerrible condition did not cause any tests to fail on master, while this PR correctly triggers a test failure.

👍 theStack approved a pull request: "Bump SCRIPT_VERIFY flags to 64 bit"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32998#pullrequestreview-3299741455)
Code-review ACK 652424ad162b63d73ecb6bd65bd26946e90c617f :flags:

💬 theStack commented on pull request "Bump SCRIPT_VERIFY flags to 64 bit":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32998#discussion_r2402803342)
nit: `operator<` would be sufficient (currently only needed in the transaction tests, where a [`std::set` of script flag combinations](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/86eaa4d6cd5c428f6635a8d44fa6b5a9545ea909/src/test/transaction_tests.cpp#L183) is used), I doubt that the other ones would ever have a use-case
```diff
diff --git a/src/script/verify_flags.h b/src/script/verify_flags.h
index 95a55d2c79..e14a329ace 100644
--- a/src/script/verify_flags.h
+++ b/src/script/verify_flags.h
@
...

💬 theStack commented on pull request "Bump SCRIPT_VERIFY flags to 64 bit":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32998#discussion_r2402485646)
nit: while touching, could switch to the more modern `.contains`
```suggestion
if (!mapFlagNames.contains(word)) {
```

🤔 marcofleon reviewed a pull request: "test: addrman: check isTerrible when time is more than 10min in the future"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33533#pullrequestreview-3300206362)
Nice, code review ACK 8e47ed6906d5e381498681e2cab9f2e318597705