Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Dash LLMQ backports part 5 #2951

Open
wants to merge 12 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

panleone
Copy link

as usual each commit backports a different PR

UdjinM6 and others added 12 commits November 15, 2024 19:39
…ay#3094)

* Introduce getbestchainlock rpc and fix llmq-is-cl-conflicts.py

* Add `known_block` field and move `getbestchainlock` to `blockchain` rpc category

* Add CChainLockSig::IsNull() and throw an exception in getbestchainlock if there is no known chainlock yet

* drop blockHash initializer
* More/better logging for InstantSend

* Implement CRecoveredSigsDb::TruncateRecoveredSig

* Truncate recovered sigs for ISLOCKs instead of completely removing them

This makes AlreadyHave() return true even when the recovered sig is deleted
locally. This avoids re-requesting and re-processing of old recovered sigs.

* Also truncate recovered sigs for freshly received ISLOCKs

* Fix comment
…hpay#3219)

* Implement re-signing of InstantSend inputs when TXs come in via blocks

* Use GetAdjustedTime instead of GetTimeMillis in CSigSharesManager

This allows use of mocktime in tests.

* Expose verifiedProRegTxHash in getpeerinfo and implement wait_for_mnauth

* Allow to wait for IS and CL to NOT happen

* Bump timeout for wait_for_instantlock

* Implement tests for retroactive signing of IS and CLs

* Add wait_for_tx function to DashTestFramework

* Add -whitelist=127.0.0.1 to node0

* Use node3 for isolated block generation

* Don't test for non-receival of TXs on node4/node5
Implement "concentrated recovery" of LLMQ signatures
Avoid unnecessary processing/verification of reconstructed recovered signatures
@panleone panleone added this to the 6.0.0 milestone Nov 15, 2024
@panleone panleone self-assigned this Nov 15, 2024
Copy link
Member

@Duddino Duddino left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

utACK a85b450

Copy link
Member

@Liquid369 Liquid369 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

uTACK a85b450

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants