💬 Sjors commented on pull request "net: Replace libnatpmp with built-in PCP+NATPMP implementation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30043#discussion_r1611882820)
> Also they're variable-length
That makes sense. Whereas `rt_msghdr` is fixed length I guess, so you're able to use `rt + 1` above.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30043#discussion_r1611882820)
> Also they're variable-length
That makes sense. Whereas `rt_msghdr` is fixed length I guess, so you're able to use `rt + 1` above.
💬 Sjors commented on pull request "net: Replace libnatpmp with built-in PCP+NATPMP implementation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30043#discussion_r1611884887)
I'm not sure, but there reason I wrote this comment is because initially I thought: yikes, what if this is out of bound?
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30043#discussion_r1611884887)
I'm not sure, but there reason I wrote this comment is because initially I thought: yikes, what if this is out of bound?
💬 sipa commented on pull request "Low-level cluster linearization code":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30126#discussion_r1611885584)
Remnant of a long-lost pre-C++20 past. Gone.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30126#discussion_r1611885584)
Remnant of a long-lost pre-C++20 past. Gone.
💬 Sjors commented on pull request "net: Replace libnatpmp with built-in PCP+NATPMP implementation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30043#discussion_r1611888217)
Mmm, I thought perhaps it would return a single error entry to indicate failure.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30043#discussion_r1611888217)
Mmm, I thought perhaps it would return a single error entry to indicate failure.
💬 sipa commented on pull request "Low-level cluster linearization code":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30126#issuecomment-2127404990)
I've dropped the dependency on #29625; there is a measurable slowdown from using the (ChaCha20-based) FastRandomContext over the (xoroshiro128++-based) InsecureRandomContext introduced there, but it's no more than 1-2%. I can switch back to that approach if 29625 were to make it in.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30126#issuecomment-2127404990)
I've dropped the dependency on #29625; there is a measurable slowdown from using the (ChaCha20-based) FastRandomContext over the (xoroshiro128++-based) InsecureRandomContext introduced there, but it's no more than 1-2%. I can switch back to that approach if 29625 were to make it in.
💬 murchandamus commented on pull request "policy: bump TX_MAX_STANDARD_VERSION to 3":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29496#discussion_r1611889254)
There is either too many or too few words here:
```suggestion
// This module enforces rules for BIP 431 TRUC transactions (with nVersion=3) which help make
```
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29496#discussion_r1611889254)
There is either too many or too few words here:
```suggestion
// This module enforces rules for BIP 431 TRUC transactions (with nVersion=3) which help make
```
💬 murchandamus commented on pull request "policy: bump TX_MAX_STANDARD_VERSION to 3":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29496#discussion_r1611894367)
Good idea to add this!
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29496#discussion_r1611894367)
Good idea to add this!
🤔 murchandamus reviewed a pull request: "policy: bump TX_MAX_STANDARD_VERSION to 3"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29496#pullrequestreview-2074297269)
Still looks good to me
crACK e41dae322d435cd8b32daf73883b466f30349584
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29496#pullrequestreview-2074297269)
Still looks good to me
crACK e41dae322d435cd8b32daf73883b466f30349584
💬 Sjors commented on pull request "net: Replace libnatpmp with built-in PCP+NATPMP implementation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30043#discussion_r1611896435)
`oldlenp=` does because it's key to the trick of how we get the length first. I find these variable name hints useful to e.g. search for them.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30043#discussion_r1611896435)
`oldlenp=` does because it's key to the trick of how we get the length first. I find these variable name hints useful to e.g. search for them.
👍 GeorgeTsagk approved a pull request: "policy: restrict all TRUC (v3) transactions to 10kvB"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29873#pullrequestreview-2074316856)
ack https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29873/commits/154b2b2296edccb5ed24e829798dacb6195edc11
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29873#pullrequestreview-2074316856)
ack https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29873/commits/154b2b2296edccb5ed24e829798dacb6195edc11
💬 luke-jr commented on pull request "Showing Local Addresses in Node Window":
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/626#issuecomment-2127412227)
>did that. cleaner and atomic. thanks.
Hmm, it's not that way in your new push tho
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/626#issuecomment-2127412227)
>did that. cleaner and atomic. thanks.
Hmm, it's not that way in your new push tho
⚠️ apulsifer opened an issue: "LevelDB read failure: Corruption: block checksum mismatch"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30159)
### Is there an existing issue for this?
- [X] I have searched the existing issues
### Current behaviour
When running in prune=550 mode, I consistently get the following error about once every 10 days per machine:
LevelDB read failure: Corruption: block checksum mismatch
There is no recovery from this error (reindex doesn't work in prune mode), so the only solution is to nuke the datadir and do a full resync or restore the datadir from a backup.
Searching the webs, the conventional w
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30159)
### Is there an existing issue for this?
- [X] I have searched the existing issues
### Current behaviour
When running in prune=550 mode, I consistently get the following error about once every 10 days per machine:
LevelDB read failure: Corruption: block checksum mismatch
There is no recovery from this error (reindex doesn't work in prune mode), so the only solution is to nuke the datadir and do a full resync or restore the datadir from a backup.
Searching the webs, the conventional w
...
💬 kcalvinalvin commented on pull request "Testnet4 including PoW difficulty adjustment fix":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29775#issuecomment-2127414985)
Maybe I'm getting a wrong vibe for the whole PR but what happened to actually having a written out specifications. The best thing out there now is just the mailing list and this PR, which I don't even know which parts of the mailing list this PR is supporting without reading into the code.
Testnet is where devs actually test things and this is ridiculous that it's being pushed out like this. Yes for mainnet people mostly run Core but for testnet people are more open to alt-implementations and s
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29775#issuecomment-2127414985)
Maybe I'm getting a wrong vibe for the whole PR but what happened to actually having a written out specifications. The best thing out there now is just the mailing list and this PR, which I don't even know which parts of the mailing list this PR is supporting without reading into the code.
Testnet is where devs actually test things and this is ridiculous that it's being pushed out like this. Yes for mainnet people mostly run Core but for testnet people are more open to alt-implementations and s
...
💬 Sjors commented on pull request "net: Replace libnatpmp with built-in PCP+NATPMP implementation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30043#discussion_r1611906833)
Can you add "to gateway x.x.x.x" here? I'm getting this error on your latest commit, three times, but I can't tell if it's IPv4, IPv6 or both.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30043#discussion_r1611906833)
Can you add "to gateway x.x.x.x" here? I'm getting this error on your latest commit, three times, but I can't tell if it's IPv4, IPv6 or both.
💬 Sjors commented on pull request "net: Replace libnatpmp with built-in PCP+NATPMP implementation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30043#discussion_r1611917789)
Update: this happens when I'm connected with a physical LAN cable _and_ wifi. So the warning was safe to ignore, but I'm still curious about it.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30043#discussion_r1611917789)
Update: this happens when I'm connected with a physical LAN cable _and_ wifi. So the warning was safe to ignore, but I'm still curious about it.
💬 maflcko commented on issue "LevelDB read failure: Corruption: block checksum mismatch":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30159#issuecomment-2127439462)
> I suspect a bug in the code is causing some thread to write to an incorrect memory location, possibly a memory use-after-free/reallocation/reorganization bug.
Would it be possible for you to compile and run with asan, or a similar sanitizer?
Also, what filesystem are you using on the drives? Something like `df --print-type --human-readable /bdata` should print it.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30159#issuecomment-2127439462)
> I suspect a bug in the code is causing some thread to write to an incorrect memory location, possibly a memory use-after-free/reallocation/reorganization bug.
Would it be possible for you to compile and run with asan, or a similar sanitizer?
Also, what filesystem are you using on the drives? Something like `df --print-type --human-readable /bdata` should print it.
💬 apulsifer commented on issue "LevelDB read failure: Corruption: block checksum mismatch":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30159#issuecomment-2127451533)
xfs on the root and data drive
sudo mkswap /dev/nvme[4 GB disk]
sudo swapon /dev/nvme[4 GB disk]
sudo mkdir /bdata
sudo mkfs -t xfs /dev/nvme[40 GB disk]
lsblk -o name,size,type,uuid
sudo nano /etc/fstab
add to fstab:
UUID=[4 GB disk uuid] swap swap defaults 0 0
UUID=[40 GB disk uuid] /bdata xfs defaults,nofail 0 2
sudo mount -a
Filesystem Type Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
devtmpfs devtmpfs 4.0M 0 4.0M 0% /dev
tmpfs tmpfs 210M
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30159#issuecomment-2127451533)
xfs on the root and data drive
sudo mkswap /dev/nvme[4 GB disk]
sudo swapon /dev/nvme[4 GB disk]
sudo mkdir /bdata
sudo mkfs -t xfs /dev/nvme[40 GB disk]
lsblk -o name,size,type,uuid
sudo nano /etc/fstab
add to fstab:
UUID=[4 GB disk uuid] swap swap defaults 0 0
UUID=[40 GB disk uuid] /bdata xfs defaults,nofail 0 2
sudo mount -a
Filesystem Type Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
devtmpfs devtmpfs 4.0M 0 4.0M 0% /dev
tmpfs tmpfs 210M
...
📝 sipa opened a pull request: "util: add BitSet"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30160)
Extracted from #30126.
This introduces the `BitSet` data structure, inspired by `std::bitset`, but with a few features that cannot be implemented on top without efficiency loss:
* Finding the first set bit.
* Finding the last set bit.
* Iterating over all set bits.
And a few other operators that help readability for #30126:
* `operator/` for set subtraction
* `operator&&` for testing whether intersection is non-empty
* `Fill` to construct a set with all numbers from 0 to n-1, inclusi
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30160)
Extracted from #30126.
This introduces the `BitSet` data structure, inspired by `std::bitset`, but with a few features that cannot be implemented on top without efficiency loss:
* Finding the first set bit.
* Finding the last set bit.
* Iterating over all set bits.
And a few other operators that help readability for #30126:
* `operator/` for set subtraction
* `operator&&` for testing whether intersection is non-empty
* `Fill` to construct a set with all numbers from 0 to n-1, inclusi
...
💬 luke-jr commented on pull request "rpc: introduce getversion RPC":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30112#issuecomment-2127454770)
Concept NACK, consumers should just check if features are available
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30112#issuecomment-2127454770)
Concept NACK, consumers should just check if features are available
💬 apulsifer commented on issue "LevelDB read failure: Corruption: block checksum mismatch":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30159#issuecomment-2127461229)
> Would it be possible for you to compile and run with asan, or a similar sanitizer?
I don't see where I would get a chunk of time to do that right now.... But as I mentioned, I copied the corrupted files, and that might give some clues to someone familiar with their format (especially if the corruption is ascii in the middle of binary, or vice versa)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30159#issuecomment-2127461229)
> Would it be possible for you to compile and run with asan, or a similar sanitizer?
I don't see where I would get a chunk of time to do that right now.... But as I mentioned, I copied the corrupted files, and that might give some clues to someone familiar with their format (especially if the corruption is ascii in the middle of binary, or vice versa)