💬 fanquake commented on pull request "depends: add *FLAGS to gen_id":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31125#discussion_r1810818502)
Broken.

💬 fanquake commented on pull request "depends: add *FLAGS to gen_id":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31125#discussion_r1810818914)
Added.

⚠️ edilmedeiros opened an issue: "[TestFramework] TestShell.reset() will always fail"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31131)
[TestShell documentation](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/28ce159bc327e6dfec34077ff2e379b23a95db65/test/functional/test-shell.md?plain=1#L167) mentions a `TestShell.reset()` method.

When experimenting with it, it will always fail with:

```
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/Users/jose.edil/2-development/bitcoin/vinteum/foss-program/infra-signet-server/signet-server.py", line 169, in <module>
TestShell().reset()
File "/Users/jose.edil/2-development/bitcoin/bitcoin
...

📝 andrewtoth opened a pull request: "validation: fetch block inputs parallel threads ~17% faster IBD"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31132)
When fetching inputs in ConnectBlock, each input is fetched from the cache in series. A cache miss means a round trip to the disk db to fetch the outpoint and insert it into the cache. Since the db is locked from being written during ConnectTip, we can fetch all block inputs missing from the cache on parallel threads before entering ConnectBlock. Using this strategy resulted in a ~17% faster IBD (or master was ~21% slower).

Doing IBD from a local peer with default settings, stopping at height
...

🤔 hebasto reviewed a pull request: "Add Signet and testnet4 launch shortcuts for Windows"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26334#pullrequestreview-2385433421)
Post-merge ACK cfd03de965a081facbd72316c76603dd7aa511bd.

👍 fanquake approved a pull request: "ci: Approximate MAKEJOBS in image build phase"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30935#pullrequestreview-2385444373)
ACK fa71bedf8609f06618aa85342ea6f5c4d2c5fea0

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "ci: Approximate MAKEJOBS in image build phase"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30935)

🚀 fanquake merged a pull request: "[27.x] Prep for 27.2"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31101)

💬 murchandamus commented on issue "Testnet4 consensus failure due to timewarp related "softfork"":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/30786#issuecomment-2429522291)
I have the impression that the person that was selling testnet3 coins may be the one that has monopolized mining testnet4 now

⚠️ laanwj opened an issue: "net: Tor service target port collides when running multiple nodes, making bitcoind error out"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31133)
Various people have reported this on IRC after the 28.0 release, but have not created a GH issue, so i'm creating one.

To be able to distinguish incoming localhost connections from connections on the Tor hidden (onion) service, we automatically create a separate "Tor service target" P2P port. This port is always opened, even if `-listenonion=0`, because the user might manually configure a Tor hidden service and wants the same behavior.

[DefaultOnionServiceTarget()](https://github.com/bitco
...

⚠️ mzumsande opened an issue: "net: multiple-node local setups with different `-port` don't work anymore"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31134)
With v28.0, (PR #22729), we now abort init on failed binds, as documented in the release notes. This also affects the default onion bind to port `8334`, which is always done unless the user specifies the desired binds using the `-bind` command.

As a result, setups with two local nodes that each use a different `-port` are not possible anymore - both of these nodes would attempt to create an onion bind to port `8334`, and one of them would fail. In earlier versions, we would silently ignore th
...

💬 fanquake commented on issue "net: Tor service target port collides when running multiple nodes, making bitcoind error out":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31133#issuecomment-2429530060)
cc @stevenroose

💬 mzumsande commented on issue "net: multiple-node local setups with different `-port` don't work anymore":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31134#issuecomment-2429533052)
closed, #31133 was opened at the same time, let's discuss there.

✅ mzumsande closed an issue: "net: multiple-node local setups with different `-port` don't work anymore"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31134)

💬 Christewart commented on pull request "Improve parallel script validation error debug logging":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31112#discussion_r1810921124)
Is there perf reasons to put the `auto result2 = check();` into the `if` expression? Seems more readable to do

```c++
auto result2 = check2();
if (!result2.has_value()) {
...
}
```

IIUC I see why this is done on [`L2187`](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31112/files#diff-97c3a52bc5fad452d82670a7fd291800bae20c7bc35bb82686c2c0a4ea7b5b98R2187) - to avoid doing the computation unnecessarily.

📝 fanquake converted_to_draft a pull request: "[28.x] Some backports"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31104)
Backports:
* #31007
* #31016
* #31035

💬 andrewtoth commented on pull request "Don't wipe coins cache when full and instead evict LRU clean entries":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31102#issuecomment-2429557412)
Not sure this approach is worth it anymore. For a full IBD I got about 2% faster. It seems that keeping non-dirty entries in the cache to be read from if spent is not that much benefit, since the likelihood of one of those entries being spent before evicted is not high enough.

I think #31132 is a better approach, because cache misses are fetched in parallel much faster so the misses are not as important.

I still think #28939 should be revived though. It is important to also track the memor
...

✅ andrewtoth closed a pull request: "Don't wipe coins cache when full and instead evict LRU clean entries"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31102)

📝 jonatack opened a pull request: "rpc, cli: return "verificationprogress" of 1 when up to date"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31135)
in getblockchaininfo/-getinfo and getchainstates, as requested in issues https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31127 and https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/26433. Verification progress estimates in the debug logging remain unchanged.

💬 jonatack commented on issue "getblockchaininfo `verificationprogress` never reaches 1.0":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31127#issuecomment-2429580257)
> Maybe for UX purposes `verificationprogress` in RPCs getblockchaininfo and getchainstates (and CLI -getinfo) could return 1 instead of the estimate, when `blocks` equals `headers` or `validated` is true.

Proposed in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31135.