⚠️ SharinganKazekage opened an issue: "Mine bitcoin using FPGA"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27650)
hey i have a project in university, is to create a fpga to mine bitcoin. Any idea where to start please?

💬 theochino commented on issue "Mine bitcoin using FPGA":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27650#issuecomment-1546539927)
https://youtu.be/y3dqhixzGVo

💬 MarcoFalke commented on issue "Mine bitcoin using FPGA":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27650#issuecomment-1546541424)
Usually the issue tracker is used to track technical issues related to the Bitcoin Core code base. General bitcoin questions and/or support requests are best directed to the [Bitcoin StackExchange](https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com) or the `#bitcoin` IRC channel on Libera Chat.

✅ MarcoFalke closed an issue: "Mine bitcoin using FPGA"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27650)

💬 MarcoFalke commented on pull request "fuzz: wallet, add target for `fees`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27647#discussion_r1192929497)
Any reason to create a fresh wallet for each iteration? Should give more iter/second if this was static.

Also, could run `clang-format` to avoid the leading whitespace bloat?

💬 MarcoFalke commented on issue "nested invalidate block doesn't work like I expect":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10439#issuecomment-1546543076)
Ok, closing for now due to lack of interest, progress and direction.

Pull requests with improvements are always welcome. Moreover, it is possible to re-open this issue or create a new issue referencing it, if there is fresh interest.

✅ MarcoFalke closed an issue: "nested invalidate block doesn't work like I expect"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10439)

💬 sipa commented on pull request "Introduce field element and group element classes to test_framework/key.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26222#issuecomment-1546544187)
@real-or-random Makes sense, that simplifies some things too. Done.

💬 MarcoFalke commented on pull request "test: avoid sporadic MINIMALDATA failure in feature_taproot.py (fixes #27595)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27631#issuecomment-1546544317)
> This passes your example, and doesn't seem to break any other test.

Seems fragile to change a data structure with one-off code for a single test case. If the one-off special case is needed, it can be put into the test case itself.

💬 martinus commented on pull request "util: implement `noexcept` move assignment & move ctor for `prevector`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27334#discussion_r1192934995)
I think it's enough to have `other._size = 0;` because then `other.is_direct()` will return false and no free happens

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "p2p: Increase tx relay rate":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27630#issuecomment-1546551585)
> randomly drop half of `m_recently_announced_invs` if it exceeds some maximum size

I just realized this would act as a shredder on clusters. Some peers would only get the parent (that's fine), but (for n > 2 clusters) most would get children for which they don't have the parent yet.

So any kind of load distribution between peers would have to be done per cluster. Perhaps by randomly dropping clusters until the queue is at an acceptable size. Or by coordinating the distribution globally f
...

💬 real-or-random commented on pull request "Introduce field element and group element classes to test_framework/key.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26222#discussion_r1192949775)
This one too. I suggest iterating over the all doc comments, also to make "group element" vs "point" consistent. (`__repr__` uses group element.)

💬 real-or-random commented on pull request "Introduce field element and group element classes to test_framework/key.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26222#discussion_r1192949389)
outdated comment

💬 joostjager commented on pull request "rpc: allow submitpackage to be called outside of regtest":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27609#issuecomment-1546603600)
>covers Lightning since AFAIK you won't make commitment transactions that spend each other

That's true. For anchor commitments I think it is the case that all outputs except the anchors (main balance outputs and htlcs) are timelocked CSV 1, so they aren't even available until after confirmation.

💬 joostjager commented on pull request "rpc: allow submitpackage to be called outside of regtest":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27609#issuecomment-1546604107)
>The worst case is the miner accepts transactions they actually should reject.

If I understood the various threads here and in other prs correctly, I think the consequence of this is that the mempool will be sub-optimal and lead to a block template that earns fewer fees for the miner exposing the endpoint?

If this would happen, I suppose the miner can always close the endpoint again and wait for the next release that is more strict on the "child-with-parents tree only" packages (while also
...

👋 MarcoFalke's pull request is ready for review: "ci: Run iwyu on all src files"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27571)

💬 brunoerg commented on pull request "fuzz: wallet, add target for `fees`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27647#discussion_r1192971964)
In fact, there is no need to create it for each iteration, gonna change it. Thanks.

💬 brunoerg commented on pull request "fuzz: wallet, add target for `fees`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27647#issuecomment-1546633637)
Force-pushed addressing @MarcoFalke's review.

- Changed `wallet` to be static
- Changed format according to `clang-format`

💬 sipa commented on pull request "Introduce field element and group element classes to test_framework/key.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26222#discussion_r1192972870)
Done.

💬 sipa commented on pull request "Introduce field element and group element classes to test_framework/key.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26222#discussion_r1192972961)
Done.