🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "test, refactor: Magic bytes array followup"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28857)

✅ fanquake closed an issue: "Manpage for `-par` bolds lower bound"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28850)

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "doc: rewrite explanation for `-par=`"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28858)

📝 fanquake opened a pull request: "[26.x] rc3 or finalize"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28872)
It's not clear if an rc3 will happen, and there is currently nothing further marked for backport to 26.x. If an rc3 does happen, any additional backports can be pushed here, if it doesn't, we can pull in the release notes/make the final version changes before release.

Currently backports:
* https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28858 (doesn't require an rc3)

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "wallet: Fix migration of wallets with txs that have both spendable and watchonly outputs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28868#issuecomment-1810500867)
Is (some part of) this meant for backport to 26.x?

💬 fanquake commented on issue "build: Configuring with `-mno-sse4.1` does not fail the sse4.1 instrinsics check":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/28864#issuecomment-1810503305)
Note that this ultimately results in compile failure, but because we try and compile the `sha256_x86_shani.cpp` code, but fail because it `"needs isa option -msse4.1"`:
```bash
In file included from /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/13/include/immintrin.h:39,
from crypto/sha256_x86_shani.cpp:12:
In function 'void {anonymous}::Shuffle(__m128i&, __m128i&)',
inlined from 'void sha256_x86_shani::Transform(uint32_t*, const unsigned char*, size_t)' at crypto/sha256_x86_shani.cpp:
...

👋 fanquake's pull request is ready for review: "test: migrate to some per-symbol ubsan suppressions"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28865)

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "test: migrate to some per-symbol ubsan suppressions":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28865#issuecomment-1810521898)
Pushed up a few more changes.

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "test: migrate to some per-symbol ubsan suppressions":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28865#issuecomment-1810538701)
lgtm ACK fd30e9688e15fe6e0f8b64202a6e9c7d96333394

💬 0xB10C commented on pull request "p2p: Increase inbound capacity for block-relay only connections":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28463#issuecomment-1810590275)
A few stats:

I've been running this for about a week now. I currently have 161 inbound connections: 113 (maximum) full-relay connections and 48 block-relay-only connections.


💬 0xB10C commented on pull request "p2p: Increase inbound capacity for block-relay only connections":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28463#issuecomment-1810591988)
In https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28463#issuecomment-1716393675 you mention that:

> [we] don't want to **significantly** change the number of tx-relaying inbound peers, because we don’t want to radically change the memory and traffic requirements that come with running a full node with the default configuration.

On multiple full-inbound `master` nodes I'm getting roughly an 80%/20% full-relay/block-relay-only inbound split. This makes sense as we currently open 8 full-relay outbo
...

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "guix: update time-machine":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28580#issuecomment-1810592496)
The LLVM 17 that was merged into Guix is currently 17.0.3. That is fine for our usage, but I've also sent a patch upstream to try get it bumped to 17.0.5: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-patches/2023-11/msg00964.html.

📝 maflcko opened a pull request: " fuzz: AutoFile with XOR "
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28873)
This should help to get fuzz coverage for https://maflcko.github.io/b-c-cov/fuzz.coverage/src/streams.cpp.gcov.html

Also, remove unused code and fix a timeout bug.

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "depends: remove `PYTHONPATH` from config.site":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28845#issuecomment-1810625090)
I think we can drop everything. Pushed that up.

👍 dergoegge approved a pull request: "test: migrate to some per-symbol ubsan suppressions"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28865#pullrequestreview-1730221446)
utACK fd30e9688e15fe6e0f8b64202a6e9c7d96333394 (if CI is green)

Good stuff

💬 ismaelsadeeq commented on pull request "wallet: propagete `checkChainLimits` error message to wallet":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28863#discussion_r1392912274)
Thanks Fixed

📝 fanquake opened a pull request: "Redundant upnp ifdef"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28874)
This is a very belated followup to #26896 (which removed the configure options for setting the upnp and natpmp runtime default) and corrects the `-help` docs for `-upnp` and `-natpmp`.

💬 jonatack commented on pull request "net: improves addnode / m_added_nodes logic":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28155#discussion_r1392921326)
True. I'm touching that code for #28248, if you have a naming suggestion.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: Fix migration of wallets with txs that have both spendable and watchonly outputs":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28868#issuecomment-1810687500)
> Is (some part of) this meant for backport to 26.x?

With the current test failure that is hard to debug, no.

📝 hebasto opened a pull request: "build: Pass sanitize flags to instrument `libsecp256k1` code"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28875)
This PR is a revived https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27991 with an addressed [comment](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27991#discussion_r1252148488).

Fixes https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27990.

Might be tested as follows:
```
$ ./autogen.sh && ./configure --enable-fuzz --with-sanitizers=fuzzer CC=clang-13 CXX=clang++-13
$ make clean > /dev/null && make
$ objdump --disassemble=secp256k1_xonly_pubkey_serialize src/test/fuzz/fuzz | grep __sanitizer_cov
1953bd0
...