💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "[IBD] multi-byte block obfuscation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31144#discussion_r2054469498)
I've changed it to an assert - if that's what you meant.

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "[IBD] multi-byte block obfuscation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31144#discussion_r2054469693)
Changed anyway

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "[IBD] multi-byte block obfuscation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31144#discussion_r2054469803)
renamed to `m_rotations`

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "[IBD] multi-byte block obfuscation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31144#discussion_r2054469920)
Did something similar (except for cstdint)

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "[IBD] multi-byte block obfuscation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31144#discussion_r2054470025)
Want to avoid this, but I don't actually mind either way - done

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "[IBD] multi-byte block obfuscation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31144#discussion_r2054470143)
Done

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "[IBD] multi-byte block obfuscation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31144#discussion_r2054470225)
Done

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "[IBD] multi-byte block obfuscation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31144#discussion_r2054470316)
Did something similar

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "[IBD] multi-byte block obfuscation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31144#discussion_r2054473019)
None are very readable, but I still find the stringy one simpler to read - the performance doesn't matter here at all

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "[IBD] multi-byte block obfuscation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31144#discussion_r2054474183)
Hah, removed a constructor during refactoring and left these - moved them to braced scopes, this way the names can be the same

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "[IBD] multi-byte block obfuscation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31144#discussion_r2054475071)
I'm not yet sure about the array (tried it, CI or local IBD didn't work for the reason you've also mentioned) - will take a look at that later

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "[IBD] multi-byte block obfuscation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31144#discussion_r2054475842)
Done

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "[IBD] multi-byte block obfuscation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31144#discussion_r2054477284)
Was meant as a simplification for the final commit - but didn't actually use these - thanks, fixed

💬 l0rinc commented on pull request "[IBD] multi-byte block obfuscation":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31144#discussion_r2054477414)
Fixed

👍 hebasto approved a pull request: "bench: close wallets after migration"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32309#pullrequestreview-2784709452)
ACK cad39f86fb5a81f0e3b5116e8e989bab8af89718, tested on Ubuntu 25.04.

🚀 hebasto merged a pull request: "bench: close wallets after migration"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32309)

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "test: Run all benchmarks in the sanity check":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32310#issuecomment-2821907878)
> > Why is the CI failing?
>
> Thx, excluded msvc for now, with the same approach as the temporary win-cross exclusion.

This can now be reverted after rebase.

🤔 jonatack reviewed a pull request: "[IBD] flush UTXO set in batches proportional to `dbcache` size"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31645#pullrequestreview-2784731899)
ACK 8fd522b223fc1405e70ca93c7e2d5a39f3f826fb

A few nits, feel free to pick/choose/ignore.

💬 jonatack commented on pull request "[IBD] flush UTXO set in batches proportional to `dbcache` size":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31645#discussion_r2054494446)
This seems to be the most frequently seen order:

```diff
#include <coins.h>
+#include <node/coins_view_args.h>
#include <streams.h>
@@ -20,7 +21,6 @@
#include <vector>

#include <boost/test/unit_test.hpp>
-#include <node/coins_view_args.h>

using namespace util::hex_literals;
```

💬 jonatack commented on pull request "[IBD] flush UTXO set in batches proportional to `dbcache` size":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31645#discussion_r2054492337)
Might be good to add a comment for this magic value, i.e. (from the PR description):

`Capped at 256 MiB, as gains are barely measurable for bigger batches (see PR 31645)`

also, clang-format

```diff
- /*hi=*/256_MiB
- );
+ /*hi=*/256_MiB);
```

and unneeded braces line 18

```diff
- (dbcache_bytes / DEFAULT_KERNEL_CACHE) * DEFAULT_DB_CACHE_BATCH,
+ dbcache_bytes / DEFAULT_KERNEL_CACHE * DEFAULT_DB_CACHE_BATCH,
```