💬 stickies-v commented on pull request "kernel: Introduce initial C header API":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30595#discussion_r2336505385)
> How do you make sure that only binary operators can be used on flags when you bind them with ctypes/clang2py?
I haven't implemented that yet, but that seems like an orthogonal concern - and at first thought I don't see why that wouldn't be possible with ctypes?
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30595#discussion_r2336505385)
> How do you make sure that only binary operators can be used on flags when you bind them with ctypes/clang2py?
I haven't implemented that yet, but that seems like an orthogonal concern - and at first thought I don't see why that wouldn't be possible with ctypes?
💬 Sjors commented on pull request "multiprocess: Don't require bitcoin -m argument when IPC options are used":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33229#discussion_r2336519638)
This seems useful enough even outside the test suite. E.g. when a user files a bug report it's good to know whether we ran `bitcoind` or `bitcoin-node`, and instructing them to do `bitcoin -version` is a lot easier than to look at process names.
I would be fine with also adding it to `-help`, but there it's less relevant.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33229#discussion_r2336519638)
This seems useful enough even outside the test suite. E.g. when a user files a bug report it's good to know whether we ran `bitcoind` or `bitcoin-node`, and instructing them to do `bitcoin -version` is a lot easier than to look at process names.
I would be fine with also adding it to `-help`, but there it's less relevant.
💬 sipa commented on pull request "txgraph: use enum Level instead of bool main_only":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33354#discussion_r2336531027)
Indeed, done!
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33354#discussion_r2336531027)
Indeed, done!
💬 TheCharlatan commented on pull request "multiprocess: Don't require bitcoin -m argument when IPC options are used":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33229#discussion_r2336547527)
Right, I think I missed the context, because the changed lines also run when processing the help command. Should we fix the output?
```diff
diff --git a/src/bitcoind.cpp b/src/bitcoind.cpp
index a4373dafdf..e046be19aa 100644
--- a/src/bitcoind.cpp
+++ b/src/bitcoind.cpp
@@ -140 +140,3 @@ static bool ProcessInitCommands(interfaces::Init& init, ArgsManager& args)
- if (const char* exe_name{init.exeName()}) {
+ const char* exe_name_ptr = init.exeName();
+ std::string e
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33229#discussion_r2336547527)
Right, I think I missed the context, because the changed lines also run when processing the help command. Should we fix the output?
```diff
diff --git a/src/bitcoind.cpp b/src/bitcoind.cpp
index a4373dafdf..e046be19aa 100644
--- a/src/bitcoind.cpp
+++ b/src/bitcoind.cpp
@@ -140 +140,3 @@ static bool ProcessInitCommands(interfaces::Init& init, ArgsManager& args)
- if (const char* exe_name{init.exeName()}) {
+ const char* exe_name_ptr = init.exeName();
+ std::string e
...
👍 vasild approved a pull request: "txgraph: use enum Level instead of bool main_only"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33354#pullrequestreview-3205867427)
ACK d45f3717d2c65d1a6012a4bc2f47ff75004fd171
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33354#pullrequestreview-3205867427)
ACK d45f3717d2c65d1a6012a4bc2f47ff75004fd171
💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "txgraph: use enum Level instead of bool main_only":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33354#issuecomment-3274757427)
concept ACK, having the two values was never confusing, it just took mental load to figure out what the implied argument meant in each context (and lead to bugs too)
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33354#issuecomment-3274757427)
concept ACK, having the two values was never confusing, it just took mental load to figure out what the implied argument meant in each context (and lead to bugs too)
💬 Raimo33 commented on issue "Higher **reported** memory usage of Bitcoin Core after version 29":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33351#issuecomment-3274820688)
looks like a `top` issue to me.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33351#issuecomment-3274820688)
looks like a `top` issue to me.
💬 sipa commented on issue "Higher **reported** memory usage of Bitcoin Core after version 29":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33351#issuecomment-3274837345)
Yeah, it's just a reporting issue.
The behavior is largely unchanged: the OS will cache disk content in memory regardless if there is a spare physical memory. The difference is that with (more) mmap'ed content, that memory usage will be accounted for by the process itself as shared memory, while otherwise it'll be accounted for as kernel disk cache memory.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33351#issuecomment-3274837345)
Yeah, it's just a reporting issue.
The behavior is largely unchanged: the OS will cache disk content in memory regardless if there is a spare physical memory. The difference is that with (more) mmap'ed content, that memory usage will be accounted for by the process itself as shared memory, while otherwise it'll be accounted for as kernel disk cache memory.
💬 fanquake commented on pull request "guix: build for Linux HOSTS with `-static-libgcc`":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33181#issuecomment-3274851562)
Guix Build:
```bash
f5dd809bc855dcefed04e4f5d55385c9a4381a4939458db9c7c0e17fd2ad486a guix-build-0520713033eb/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/SHA256SUMS.part
9384da5429754f03755c5f0dda61c51ec13dc0402007691064da7d8baa8b215f guix-build-0520713033eb/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-0520713033eb-aarch64-linux-gnu-debug.tar.gz
febdaab451c56edb669df98d04d4244766880c21f097b98c90f919129797294a guix-build-0520713033eb/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-0520713033eb-aarch64-linux-gnu.tar.gz
dc30a64d619ea7b9
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33181#issuecomment-3274851562)
Guix Build:
```bash
f5dd809bc855dcefed04e4f5d55385c9a4381a4939458db9c7c0e17fd2ad486a guix-build-0520713033eb/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/SHA256SUMS.part
9384da5429754f03755c5f0dda61c51ec13dc0402007691064da7d8baa8b215f guix-build-0520713033eb/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-0520713033eb-aarch64-linux-gnu-debug.tar.gz
febdaab451c56edb669df98d04d4244766880c21f097b98c90f919129797294a guix-build-0520713033eb/output/aarch64-linux-gnu/bitcoin-0520713033eb-aarch64-linux-gnu.tar.gz
dc30a64d619ea7b9
...
💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "txgraph: use enum Level instead of bool main_only":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33354#issuecomment-3274911970)
ACK d45f3717d2c65d1a6012a4bc2f47ff75004fd171
significantly easier to read usages, thank you
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33354#issuecomment-3274911970)
ACK d45f3717d2c65d1a6012a4bc2f47ff75004fd171
significantly easier to read usages, thank you
💬 Eunovo commented on pull request "validation: ensure assumevalid is always used during reindex":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31615#issuecomment-3274934398)
> Just tried this on my [rpi4b server which keeps enabling signature validation](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33336#issuecomment-3273277122) after a reindex. Restarting it with only the args `./build/bin/bitcoind -dbcache=5000 -datadir=$DATA_DIR -assumevalid=0000000000000000000087564caa77e7b3f29d0464256c04d5539e43663f8698` still shows heavy signature validation
Can you share steps to reproduce? Did previous reindex use signature validation? Was your node pruned?
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31615#issuecomment-3274934398)
> Just tried this on my [rpi4b server which keeps enabling signature validation](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33336#issuecomment-3273277122) after a reindex. Restarting it with only the args `./build/bin/bitcoind -dbcache=5000 -datadir=$DATA_DIR -assumevalid=0000000000000000000087564caa77e7b3f29d0464256c04d5539e43663f8698` still shows heavy signature validation
Can you share steps to reproduce? Did previous reindex use signature validation? Was your node pruned?
💬 darosior commented on issue "Higher **reported** memory usage of Bitcoin Core after version 29":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33351#issuecomment-3275021850)
Yes this issue is intended for documentation purpose, in case someone looking up for "bitcoind higher memory usage" on the tracker or a search engine.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33351#issuecomment-3275021850)
Yes this issue is intended for documentation purpose, in case someone looking up for "bitcoind higher memory usage" on the tracker or a search engine.
💬 Sjors commented on pull request "guix: update time-machine to 5cb84f2013c5b1e48a7d0e617032266f1e6059e2":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33185#issuecomment-3275225094)
More recent time-machine versions, e.g. d4ee55ee19c0ded199b815e36b20232bb76fe41e) bump into this: https://codeberg.org/guix/guix/issues/1257
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33185#issuecomment-3275225094)
More recent time-machine versions, e.g. d4ee55ee19c0ded199b815e36b20232bb76fe41e) bump into this: https://codeberg.org/guix/guix/issues/1257
👍 brunoerg approved a pull request: "wallet: warn against accidental unsafe older() import"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33135#pullrequestreview-3206472463)
reACK 5e9737ff493a96566f4fc11b1733b4b5a5393f6b
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33135#pullrequestreview-3206472463)
reACK 5e9737ff493a96566f4fc11b1733b4b5a5393f6b
🤔 rkrux reviewed a pull request: "wallet: Be able to receive and spend inputs involving MuSig2 aggregate keys"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29675#pullrequestreview-3206223831)
Partial Code review 2 - a06017dfce7ce72afbebe6f68d9a29cf72d26593
`wallet_musig.py` & `descriptor_tests.cpp` tests pass with these suggestions.
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29675#pullrequestreview-3206223831)
Partial Code review 2 - a06017dfce7ce72afbebe6f68d9a29cf72d26593
`wallet_musig.py` & `descriptor_tests.cpp` tests pass with these suggestions.
💬 rkrux commented on pull request "wallet: Be able to receive and spend inputs involving MuSig2 aggregate keys":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29675#discussion_r2336962962)
In 7c085554dce336eb1597ab2fc482163876a49270 "sign: Create MuSig2 signatures for known MuSig2 aggregate keys"
Easy candidate to deduplicate and improve readability.
```diff
diff --git a/src/musig.cpp b/src/musig.cpp
index 28de6dc819..d5da34feb7 100644
--- a/src/musig.cpp
+++ b/src/musig.cpp
@@ -61,6 +61,16 @@ std::optional<CPubKey> MuSig2AggregatePubkeys(const std::vector<CPubKey>& pubkey
return MuSig2AggregatePubkeys(pubkeys, keyagg_cache, std::nullopt);
}
+CExtPubKey Crea
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29675#discussion_r2336962962)
In 7c085554dce336eb1597ab2fc482163876a49270 "sign: Create MuSig2 signatures for known MuSig2 aggregate keys"
Easy candidate to deduplicate and improve readability.
```diff
diff --git a/src/musig.cpp b/src/musig.cpp
index 28de6dc819..d5da34feb7 100644
--- a/src/musig.cpp
+++ b/src/musig.cpp
@@ -61,6 +61,16 @@ std::optional<CPubKey> MuSig2AggregatePubkeys(const std::vector<CPubKey>& pubkey
return MuSig2AggregatePubkeys(pubkeys, keyagg_cache, std::nullopt);
}
+CExtPubKey Crea
...
💬 rkrux commented on pull request "wallet: Be able to receive and spend inputs involving MuSig2 aggregate keys":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29675#discussion_r2336873078)
In 6b01d7379b9e29760abd7b549a04db43937a7b8d "sign: Add CreateMuSig2Nonce"
In 10b7148efa754169cc625e93c98fa54f7b375e5d "sign: Add CreateMuSig2PartialSig"
To avoid reading these very long types multiple times, also to avoid duplication.
An alternative is to have these 3 objects in a struct that could be used in psbt.h and sign.h, but that'd increase the diff.
```diff
diff --git a/src/musig.h b/src/musig.h
index 95f495a40a..020fdc09c3 100644
--- a/src/musig.h
+++ b/src/musig.h
@@ -14,6
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29675#discussion_r2336873078)
In 6b01d7379b9e29760abd7b549a04db43937a7b8d "sign: Add CreateMuSig2Nonce"
In 10b7148efa754169cc625e93c98fa54f7b375e5d "sign: Add CreateMuSig2PartialSig"
To avoid reading these very long types multiple times, also to avoid duplication.
An alternative is to have these 3 objects in a struct that could be used in psbt.h and sign.h, but that'd increase the diff.
```diff
diff --git a/src/musig.h b/src/musig.h
index 95f495a40a..020fdc09c3 100644
--- a/src/musig.h
+++ b/src/musig.h
@@ -14,6
...
💬 rkrux commented on pull request "wallet: Be able to receive and spend inputs involving MuSig2 aggregate keys":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29675#discussion_r2336806292)
In 6b01d7379b9e29760abd7b549a04db43937a7b8d "sign: Add CreateMuSig2Nonce"
Nit: Reordering to defer getting the private key.
```diff
diff --git a/src/script/sign.cpp b/src/script/sign.cpp
index b183be8939..d208f44626 100644
--- a/src/script/sign.cpp
+++ b/src/script/sign.cpp
@@ -106,10 +106,6 @@ std::vector<uint8_t> MutableTransactionSignatureCreator::CreateMuSig2Nonce(const
{
assert(sigversion == SigVersion::TAPROOT || sigversion == SigVersion::TAPSCRIPT);
- // Retrieve
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29675#discussion_r2336806292)
In 6b01d7379b9e29760abd7b549a04db43937a7b8d "sign: Add CreateMuSig2Nonce"
Nit: Reordering to defer getting the private key.
```diff
diff --git a/src/script/sign.cpp b/src/script/sign.cpp
index b183be8939..d208f44626 100644
--- a/src/script/sign.cpp
+++ b/src/script/sign.cpp
@@ -106,10 +106,6 @@ std::vector<uint8_t> MutableTransactionSignatureCreator::CreateMuSig2Nonce(const
{
assert(sigversion == SigVersion::TAPROOT || sigversion == SigVersion::TAPSCRIPT);
- // Retrieve
...
💬 rkrux commented on pull request "wallet: Be able to receive and spend inputs involving MuSig2 aggregate keys":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29675#discussion_r2337004847)
It was mostly to put the related code in a block, not for reusability; calling the inline sub-functions is an alternate imho.
```python
def do_test(self, ...):
self.log.info(f"Testing {comment}")
def prepare_musig_wallets_for_spending(...):
...
def spend_from_musig_address(...):
...
musig_spending_data = prepare_musig_wallets_for_spending()
spend_from_musig_address(musig_spending_data)
```
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29675#discussion_r2337004847)
It was mostly to put the related code in a block, not for reusability; calling the inline sub-functions is an alternate imho.
```python
def do_test(self, ...):
self.log.info(f"Testing {comment}")
def prepare_musig_wallets_for_spending(...):
...
def spend_from_musig_address(...):
...
musig_spending_data = prepare_musig_wallets_for_spending()
spend_from_musig_address(musig_spending_data)
```
⚠️ Zws758857 opened an issue: "把虚拟的“挖矿”货币应用到真实的实体“挖有机矿”，采用IoT设备记录真实的生产数据构成NFT，实现可追溯，不可簒改，去中心化的区块链Pi公链分布式"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33357)
### Please describe the feature you'd like to see added.
[常见的] 服务器地址 = 47.238.221.199 服务器端口 = 5443 代币 = Nndu0WLR74D6daAF303zwstls_启用 = true[ 3389 ] 类型 = TCP 本地IP = 127.0.0.1 本地端口 = 3389 远程端口 = 3389[ 31400 ] 类型 = TCP 本地IP = 127.0.0.1 本地端口 = 31400 远程端口 = 31400 [ 31401 ] 类型 = TCP 本地IP = 127.0.0.1 本地端口 = 31401 远程端口 = 31401 [ 31402 ] 类型 = TCP 本地IP = 127.0.0.1 本地端口 = 31402 远程端口 = 31402 [ 31403 ] 类型 = TCP 本地IP = 127.0.0.1 本地端口 = 31403 远程端口 = 31403 [ 31404 ] 类型 = TCP 本地IP = 127.0.0.1 本地端口 = 31404 远程端口
...
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/33357)
### Please describe the feature you'd like to see added.
[常见的] 服务器地址 = 47.238.221.199 服务器端口 = 5443 代币 = Nndu0WLR74D6daAF303zwstls_启用 = true[ 3389 ] 类型 = TCP 本地IP = 127.0.0.1 本地端口 = 3389 远程端口 = 3389[ 31400 ] 类型 = TCP 本地IP = 127.0.0.1 本地端口 = 31400 远程端口 = 31400 [ 31401 ] 类型 = TCP 本地IP = 127.0.0.1 本地端口 = 31401 远程端口 = 31401 [ 31402 ] 类型 = TCP 本地IP = 127.0.0.1 本地端口 = 31402 远程端口 = 31402 [ 31403 ] 类型 = TCP 本地IP = 127.0.0.1 本地端口 = 31403 远程端口 = 31403 [ 31404 ] 类型 = TCP 本地IP = 127.0.0.1 本地端口 = 31404 远程端口
...