--- Log opened Thu May 28 00:00:33 2020 00:12 -!- Pavlenex [~Thunderbi@141.98.103.251] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 00:15 -!- proofofkeags [~proofofke@71-218-146-180.hlrn.qwest.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 00:16 -!- jonatack_ [~jon@37.172.61.28] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 00:17 -!- jonatack_ [~jon@184.75.221.3] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 00:18 -!- jonatack_ [~jon@184.75.221.3] has quit [Client Quit] 00:19 -!- proofofkeags [~proofofke@71-218-146-180.hlrn.qwest.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 00:28 -!- jonatack [~jon@184.75.221.3] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 00:34 -!- CubicEarth [~CubicEart@c-67-168-1-172.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 00:36 -!- CubicEarth [~CubicEart@c-67-168-1-172.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 00:38 -!- Deacyde [~Deacyde@unaffiliated/deacyde] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 00:40 -!- Deacyde [~Deacyde@unaffiliated/deacyde] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 00:42 -!- johanna1 [~johanna@184.75.223.235] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 00:42 -!- Guyver2 [Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 00:50 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 00:50 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake opened pull request #19088: validation: use std::chrono throughout some validation functions (master...validation_chrono) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19088 00:50 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev [] 00:54 -!- yojoots [~justin@2600:1700:19e0:4b10:5047:d6fb:a52a:fe7f] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 00:54 -!- yojoots [~justin@2600:1700:19e0:4b10:d84a:bd97:7a44:67ab] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 00:55 -!- kljasdfvv [~flack@p200300d46f079c00a9ddae03b700ad2c.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!] 00:57 -!- kljasdfvv [~flack@p200300d46f079c00450a6a91a9b10a2b.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 00:58 -!- jonatack [~jon@184.75.221.3] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 01:00 -!- jonatack [~jon@37.172.61.28] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 01:03 -!- lehnberg [~lehnberg@unaffiliated/lehnberg] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 01:06 -!- proofofkeags [~proofofke@71-218-146-180.hlrn.qwest.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 01:07 -!- proofofkeags [~proofofke@71-218-146-180.hlrn.qwest.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 01:19 -!- justanotheruser [~justanoth@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 01:20 -!- Mister_X1 [~Mister_X@84.39.116.180] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 01:29 -!- justanotheruser [~justanoth@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 01:30 -!- kristapsk [~KK@gateway/tor-sasl/kristapsk] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 01:30 -!- kristapsk [~KK@gateway/tor-sasl/kristapsk] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 01:34 -!- timothy [~tredaelli@redhat/timothy] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 01:37 -!- promag [~promag@bl19-22-20.dsl.telepac.pt] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 01:38 -!- jonatack [~jon@37.172.61.28] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 01:38 -!- jonatack_ [~jon@37.172.61.28] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 02:00 -!- Mister_X1 [~Mister_X@84.39.116.180] has quit [] 02:18 -!- Luke-Jr-jr [~Luke-Jr-j@185.189.114.11] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 02:21 -!- Pavlenex [~Thunderbi@141.98.103.251] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 02:37 -!- jonatack_ [~jon@37.172.61.28] has quit [Quit: jonatack_] 02:39 -!- Dean_Guss [~dean@gateway/tor-sasl/deanguss] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 02:40 -!- DeanWeen [~dean@gateway/tor-sasl/deanguss] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 02:43 -!- jonatack [~jon@184.75.221.163] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 02:44 -!- Pavlenex [~Thunderbi@141.98.103.251] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 02:46 -!- EagleTM [~EagleTM@unaffiliated/eagletm] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 02:47 -!- mrostecki [~mrostecki@gateway/tor-sasl/mrostecki] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 02:53 -!- mrostecki [~mrostecki@gateway/tor-sasl/mrostecki] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 02:53 -!- shesek [~shesek@unaffiliated/shesek] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 02:55 -!- Guyver2_ [Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 02:56 < hebasto> MarcoFalke: recent changes in #19064 introduced new circular deps. Which is the best: revert changes or allow new circular deps? 02:56 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19064 | refactor: Cleanup thread ctor calls by hebasto · Pull Request #19064 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub 02:58 -!- shaunsun [~shaunsun@c-76-26-29-34.hsd1.fl.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 02:58 -!- Guyver2 [Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 03:00 -!- shaunsun_ [shaunsun@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/shaunsun] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 03:02 -!- shaunsun [~shaunsun@c-76-26-29-34.hsd1.fl.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 03:03 -!- Mabelle34Bartole [~Mabelle34@static.57.1.216.95.clients.your-server.de] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 03:06 -!- Pavlenex [~Thunderbi@141.98.103.251] has quit [Quit: Pavlenex] 03:08 -!- Mabelle34Bartole [~Mabelle34@static.57.1.216.95.clients.your-server.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 03:11 -!- surja795 [~surja795@c-24-62-248-154.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 03:15 -!- justanotheruser [~justanoth@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds] 03:17 -!- EagleTM [~EagleTM@unaffiliated/eagletm] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 03:20 -!- Pavlenex [~Thunderbi@141.98.103.251] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 03:22 -!- midnight [~midnight@unaffiliated/midnightmagic] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 03:23 -!- midnight [~midnight@unaffiliated/midnightmagic] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 03:24 -!- justanotheruser [~justanoth@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 03:31 -!- shesek [~shesek@185.3.145.28] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 03:31 -!- shesek [~shesek@185.3.145.28] has quit [Changing host] 03:31 -!- shesek [~shesek@unaffiliated/shesek] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 03:35 -!- PaulTroon [~paultroon@h-5-150-248-150.NA.cust.bahnhof.se] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 03:38 -!- promag [~promag@bl19-22-20.dsl.telepac.pt] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 03:39 -!- promag [~promag@bl19-22-20.dsl.telepac.pt] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 03:39 -!- promag [~promag@bl19-22-20.dsl.telepac.pt] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 03:39 -!- promag [~promag@Bl19-22-20.dsl.telepac.pt] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 03:44 -!- promag [~promag@Bl19-22-20.dsl.telepac.pt] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 04:04 -!- PaulTroon [~paultroon@h-5-150-248-150.NA.cust.bahnhof.se] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 04:07 < wumpus> hebasto: as the goal of the PR is only 'readabillity and maintainability' I'd err on the site of reverting the part that introduces the circular dependency 04:08 < wumpus> if it was anything critical like a bugfix or feeature I'd say otherwise 04:10 -!- Dean_Guss [~dean@gateway/tor-sasl/deanguss] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 04:12 -!- jonatack [~jon@184.75.221.163] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] 04:13 < hebasto> wumpus: thanks 04:14 -!- jonatack [~jon@37.173.164.193] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 04:26 < wumpus> in general we have checks like 'prevent circular dependencies' because we want to work toward a state where there are none, ideally all commits should leave the source in a better state in that regard than they found is 04:30 < wumpus> or at least not worse 04:44 -!- instagibbs [~instagibb@pool-71-178-191-230.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 04:50 -!- promag [~promag@bl19-22-20.dsl.telepac.pt] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 04:55 -!- Zenton [~user@unaffiliated/vicenteh] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 04:55 -!- promag [~promag@bl19-22-20.dsl.telepac.pt] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 04:59 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 04:59 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonatack opened pull request #19089: cli, test, doc: bitcoin-cli -getinfo multiwallet balances follow-ups (master...cli-getinfo-multiwallet-follow-ups) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19089 04:59 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev [] 05:00 -!- Luke-Jr-jr [~Luke-Jr-j@185.189.114.11] has quit [] 05:16 -!- ghost43 [~daer@gateway/tor-sasl/daer] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 05:17 -!- ghost43 [~daer@gateway/tor-sasl/daer] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 05:23 -!- jonatack [~jon@37.173.164.193] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 05:33 -!- ghost43 [~daer@gateway/tor-sasl/daer] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 05:34 -!- ghost43 [~daer@gateway/tor-sasl/daer] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 05:49 -!- Guest37028 [~gac410@37.120.203.188] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 05:56 -!- Relis [~Relis@cpc96290-lewi18-2-0-cust910.2-4.cable.virginm.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 06:03 -!- Guyver2_ [Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Quit: Going offline, see ya! (www.adiirc.com)] 06:03 -!- jonatack [~jon@37.173.164.193] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 06:03 -!- Relis [~Relis@cpc96290-lewi18-2-0-cust910.2-4.cable.virginm.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 06:07 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 06:07 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #19090: refactor: Misc scheduler cleanups (master...2005-schedulerCleanup) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19090 06:07 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev [] 06:08 -!- jonatack [~jon@37.173.164.193] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 06:10 -!- troygiorshev [~troygiors@CPEdcef09a0ed55-CM0c473d74be00.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 06:11 -!- jonatack [~jon@184.75.223.195] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 06:13 -!- ghost43 [~daer@gateway/tor-sasl/daer] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 06:13 -!- ghost43 [~daer@gateway/tor-sasl/daer] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 06:15 -!- Highway61 [~Thunderbi@ip72-204-155-64.no.no.cox.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 06:21 -!- Dean_Guss [~dean@gateway/tor-sasl/deanguss] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 06:31 -!- shesek [~shesek@unaffiliated/shesek] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 06:34 -!- mdunnio [~mdunnio@208.59.170.5] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 06:44 -!- jonatack [~jon@184.75.223.195] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 06:46 -!- troygiorshev [~troygiors@CPEdcef09a0ed55-CM0c473d74be00.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has quit [Quit: Lost terminal] 06:47 -!- Relis [~Relis@85.255.237.215] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 06:48 -!- Pavlenex [~Thunderbi@141.98.103.251] has quit [Quit: Pavlenex] 06:50 -!- d_t [~dt@108-65-77-11.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 06:51 -!- Pavlenex [~Thunderbi@141.98.103.251] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 06:52 -!- Pavlenex [~Thunderbi@141.98.103.251] has quit [Client Quit] 06:54 -!- Pavlenex [~Thunderbi@141.98.103.251] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 06:55 -!- d_t [~dt@108-65-77-11.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 07:11 -!- a5m0 [~a5m0@unaffiliated/a5m0] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 07:17 -!- a5m0 [~a5m0@unaffiliated/a5m0] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 07:23 -!- a5m0 [~a5m0@unaffiliated/a5m0] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 07:24 -!- a5m0 [~a5m0@unaffiliated/a5m0] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 07:31 -!- ghost43 [~daer@gateway/tor-sasl/daer] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 07:32 -!- ghost43 [~daer@gateway/tor-sasl/daer] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 07:33 -!- Guyver2 [Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 07:35 -!- lehnberg [~lehnberg@unaffiliated/lehnberg] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 07:35 -!- promag [~promag@bl19-22-20.dsl.telepac.pt] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 07:35 -!- lehnberg [~lehnberg@unaffiliated/lehnberg] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 07:36 -!- jonatack [~jon@2a01:e0a:53c:a200:bb54:3be5:c3d0:9ce5] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 07:48 -!- Highway61 [~Thunderbi@ip72-204-155-64.no.no.cox.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 07:49 -!- Highway61 [~Thunderbi@209.95.56.142] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 07:50 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 07:50 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 6 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/55b4c65bd1d8...082a417abcce 07:50 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 79be487 Hennadii Stepanov: Add thread safety annotated wrapper for std::mutex 07:50 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master dfb75ae Hennadii Stepanov: refactor: Rename LockGuard to StdLockGuard for consistency with StdMutex 07:50 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 971a468 Hennadii Stepanov: Use template function instead of void* parameter 07:50 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev [] 07:51 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 07:51 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke merged pull request #18635: Replace -Wthread-safety-analysis with broader -Wthread-safety (master...200414-threads) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18635 07:51 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev [] 08:00 -!- Guest37028 [~gac410@37.120.203.188] has quit [] 08:08 -!- justanotheruser [~justanoth@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 08:15 -!- mrostecki [~mrostecki@gateway/tor-sasl/mrostecki] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 08:16 -!- Pavlenex [~Thunderbi@141.98.103.251] has quit [Quit: Pavlenex] 08:17 -!- mrostecki [~mrostecki@gateway/tor-sasl/mrostecki] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 08:18 -!- Toflar [~Toflar@217.138.204.90] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 08:20 -!- Highway62 [~Thunderbi@ip72-204-155-64.no.no.cox.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 08:21 -!- Highway61 [~Thunderbi@209.95.56.142] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 08:21 -!- Highway62 is now known as Highway61 08:30 -!- Talkless [~Talkless@hst-227-49.splius.lt] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 08:32 -!- Pavlenex [~Thunderbi@141.98.103.251] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 08:33 -!- proofofkeags [~proofofke@71-218-146-180.hlrn.qwest.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 08:34 -!- kristapsk_ [~KK@gateway/tor-sasl/kristapsk] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 08:34 -!- kristapsk [~KK@gateway/tor-sasl/kristapsk] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 08:38 -!- justanotheruser [~justanoth@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 08:39 -!- proofofkeags [~proofofke@71-218-146-180.hlrn.qwest.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 08:41 -!- proofofkeags [~proofofke@71-218-146-180.hlrn.qwest.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 08:43 -!- troygiorshev [~troygiors@CPEdcef09a0ed55-CM0c473d74be00.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 08:53 -!- ghost43 [~daer@gateway/tor-sasl/daer] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 08:53 -!- ghost43 [~daer@gateway/tor-sasl/daer] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 08:55 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 08:55 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/082a417abcce...ea3e9e0b84c5 08:55 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master e8fa0a3 Samuel Dobson: Fix WSL file locking by using flock instead of fcntl 08:55 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master ea3e9e0 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #18700: Fix locking on WSL using flock instead of fcntl 08:55 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev [] 08:56 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 08:56 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj merged pull request #18700: Fix locking on WSL using flock instead of fcntl (master...202004_file_lock_windows) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18700 08:56 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev [] 08:57 -!- PaulTroon [~paultroon@h-5-150-248-150.NA.cust.bahnhof.se] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 09:05 -!- jarthur [~jarthur@2605:6000:1019:4971:3031:8f5:23ec:28b] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 09:08 -!- justanotheruser [~justanoth@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds] 09:12 -!- Pavlenex [~Thunderbi@141.98.103.251] has quit [Quit: Pavlenex] 09:17 < MarcoFalke> #proposedmeetingtopic 0.20.0-final 09:17 < MarcoFalke> #proposedmeetingtopic separate repo for the gui 09:17 -!- PaulTroon [~paultroon@h-5-150-248-150.NA.cust.bahnhof.se] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 09:19 -!- Talkless [~Talkless@hst-227-49.splius.lt] has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!] 09:20 -!- vasild_ [~vd@gateway/tor-sasl/vasild] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 09:20 -!- Talkless [~Talkless@hst-227-49.splius.lt] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 09:23 -!- Highway62 [~Thunderbi@173.244.209.142] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 09:24 -!- vasild [~vd@gateway/tor-sasl/vasild] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 09:24 -!- vasild_ is now known as vasild 09:24 -!- Highway61 [~Thunderbi@ip72-204-155-64.no.no.cox.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 09:24 -!- Highway62 is now known as Highway61 09:25 -!- justanotheruser [~justanoth@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 09:29 -!- Relis [~Relis@85.255.237.215] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 09:32 -!- Highway61 [~Thunderbi@173.244.209.142] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 09:34 -!- Relis [~Relis@cpc96290-lewi18-2-0-cust910.2-4.cable.virginm.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 09:36 -!- PaulTroon [~paultroon@h-5-150-248-150.NA.cust.bahnhof.se] has quit [] 09:46 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 09:46 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonatack opened pull request #19092: cli: display multiwallet total balance in -getinfo (master...cli-getinfo-multiwallet-total-balance) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19092 09:46 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev [] 09:51 -!- ghost43 [~daer@gateway/tor-sasl/daer] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 09:51 -!- ghost43 [~daer@gateway/tor-sasl/daer] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 09:54 -!- joerodgers [~joerodger@c-76-125-83-191.hsd1.ar.comcast.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 09:58 -!- Sammie51Dibbert [~Sammie51D@static.57.1.216.95.clients.your-server.de] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 10:04 -!- Highway61 [~Thunderbi@ip72-204-155-64.no.no.cox.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 10:05 -!- timothy [~tredaelli@redhat/timothy] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 10:05 -!- Sammie51Dibbert [~Sammie51D@static.57.1.216.95.clients.your-server.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 10:07 -!- mmitech_ [sid446259@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-fmwsctdqrbqrcyyx] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 10:12 -!- troygiorshev [~troygiors@CPEdcef09a0ed55-CM0c473d74be00.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 10:22 -!- cltrbreak_MAD2 [~ctrlbreak@159.2.182.106] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 10:23 -!- cltrbreak_MAD2 [~ctrlbreak@159.2.182.106] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 10:23 -!- Hilario58Smith [~Hilario58@static.57.1.216.95.clients.your-server.de] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 10:30 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 10:30 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] rajarshimaitra opened pull request #19093: RPC: testmempoolaccept returns transaction fee (master...fee-trial3) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19093 10:30 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev [] 10:33 -!- mol [~mol@unaffiliated/molly] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 10:36 -!- mol_ [~mol@unaffiliated/molly] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 10:37 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 10:37 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj opened pull request #19094: build: Only allow ASCII identifiers (master...2020_05_no_extended_identifiers) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19094 10:37 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev [] 10:38 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 10:38 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jnewbery opened pull request #19095: [tools] Update clang-format config for multi-line function declarations and calls (master...2020-05-clang-tidy) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19095 10:38 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev [] 10:39 -!- troygiorshev [~troygiors@CPEdcef09a0ed55-CM0c473d74be00.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 10:49 -!- Hilario58Smith [~Hilario58@static.57.1.216.95.clients.your-server.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 10:50 -!- Noemi32Moore [~Noemi32Mo@static.57.1.216.95.clients.your-server.de] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 10:53 -!- dgenr8 [~dgenr8@unaffiliated/dgenr8] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 10:55 -!- Highway62 [~Thunderbi@208.131.139.147] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 10:56 -!- Highway61 [~Thunderbi@ip72-204-155-64.no.no.cox.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 10:56 -!- Highway62 is now known as Highway61 10:58 -!- Noemi32Moore [~Noemi32Mo@static.57.1.216.95.clients.your-server.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 11:00 -!- Toflar [~Toflar@217.138.204.90] has quit [] 11:05 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 11:05 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] ryanofsky opened pull request #19096: Remove g_rpc_chain global (master...pr/wc) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19096 11:05 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev [] 11:16 -!- Highway61 [~Thunderbi@208.131.139.147] has quit [Quit: Highway61] 11:20 -!- promag_ [~promag@bl19-22-20.dsl.telepac.pt] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 11:21 -!- promag [~promag@bl19-22-20.dsl.telepac.pt] has quit [Disconnected by services] 11:21 -!- promag_ is now known as promag 11:21 -!- promag_ [~promag@bl19-22-20.dsl.telepac.pt] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 11:22 -!- esandeen [~esandeen@217.146.82.122] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 11:22 -!- proofofkeags [~proofofke@71-218-146-180.hlrn.qwest.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 11:29 -!- proofofkeags [~proofofke@71-218-146-180.hlrn.qwest.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 11:29 -!- proofofkeags [~proofofke@71-218-146-180.hlrn.qwest.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 11:29 -!- proofofkeags [~proofofke@71-218-146-180.hlrn.qwest.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 11:34 -!- lehnberg [~lehnberg@unaffiliated/lehnberg] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 11:48 -!- go11111111111 is now known as go1111111 11:58 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 11:58 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] achow101 opened pull request #19097: qt: Add missing QPainterPath include (master...qpainterpath-include) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19097 11:58 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev [] 12:00 < wumpus> #startmeeting 12:00 < lightningbot> Meeting started Thu May 28 19:00:39 2020 UTC. The chair is wumpus. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 12:00 < lightningbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 12:00 < achow101> hi 12:00 < sipa> hi 12:00 < fjahr> hi 12:00 < provoostenator> hi 12:00 < jnewbery> hi 12:01 < instagibbs> hi 12:01 < amiti> hi 12:01 < wumpus> #bitcoin-core-dev Meeting: wumpus sipa gmaxwell jonasschnelli morcos luke-jr sdaftuar jtimon cfields petertodd kanzure bluematt instagibbs phantomcircuit codeshark michagogo marcofalke paveljanik NicolasDorier jl2012 achow101 meshcollider jnewbery maaku fanquake promag provoostenator aj Chris_Stewart_5 dongcarl gwillen jamesob ken281221 ryanofsky gleb moneyball kvaciral ariard digi_james amiti fjahr 12:01 < harding> hi 12:01 < wumpus> jeremyrubin lightlike emilengler jonatack hebasto jb55 elichai2 12:01 < promag> hi 12:01 < jamesob> Hi 12:01 < dongcarl> hi 12:01 < troygiorshev> hi 12:01 < ariard> hi 12:01 < aj> hi 12:01 < wumpus> two proposed topics (by MarcoFalke): 0.20.0-final, separate repo for the gui 12:02 < MarcoFalke> hi, anyone heard or seen of issues with 0.20.0? 12:02 < kanzure> hi 12:02 < wumpus> none! 12:02 < sipa> yes, it's not released yet 12:02 < MarcoFalke> *rc2 12:02 < sipa> ;) 12:02 < MarcoFalke> ah 12:03 < jonasschnelli> hi 12:03 < provoostenator> I'm using rc2 on a Linux and macOS machine, so far so good. 12:03 < wumpus> if not, it's probably time to do the release soon 12:03 < MarcoFalke> ack 12:04 < wumpus> #topic High priority for review 12:04 < fjahr> #18000 can be removed from chasing concept ACK 12:04 < wumpus> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/projects/8 currently 5 blockers, 1 bugfix, 4 chasing concept ACK 12:04 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18000 | [WIP] Index for UTXO Set Statistics by fjahr · Pull Request #18000 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub 12:05 < MarcoFalke> Can I exchange mine for #18968 plz 12:05 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18968 | doc: noban precludes maxuploadtarget disconnects by MarcoFalke · Pull Request #18968 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub 12:05 < achow101> add ##18971 12:05 < wumpus> fjahr: done 12:05 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18971 | wallet: Refactor the classes in wallet/db.{cpp/h} by achow101 · Pull Request #18971 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub 12:05 < fjahr> And i would like to add #19055 to blockers, it’s the start of #18000 being split up 12:05 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19055 | Calculate UTXO set hash using Muhash by fjahr · Pull Request #19055 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub 12:05 < promag> #19033 its tagged for 0.20 12:05 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18000 | [WIP] Index for UTXO Set Statistics by fjahr · Pull Request #18000 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub 12:05 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19033 | http: Release work queue after event base finish by promag · Pull Request #19033 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub 12:05 -!- nullptr| [~nullptr|@ip-94-112-129-192.net.upcbroadband.cz] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 12:05 < sipa> can i have #18468 ? 12:05 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18468 | Span improvements by sipa · Pull Request #18468 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub 12:06 -!- nullptr| [~nullptr|@ip-94-112-129-192.net.upcbroadband.cz] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 12:06 < sipa> also, thanks everyone for getting the serialization improvements in 12:06 < sipa> it took a while :) 12:06 < wumpus> MarcoFalke: done 12:06 < provoostenator> I'd like to nominate #15382 12:06 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15382 | util: add runCommandParseJSON by Sjors · Pull Request #15382 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub 12:06 -!- shaunsun_ [shaunsun@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/shaunsun] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 12:06 < jonatack> hi 12:07 < provoostenator> For code review, but if it gets stuck in another concept discussion, we can bump it to that column. 12:08 < wumpus> achow101, sipa, fjahr: added 12:08 < wumpus> sipa: yess finally 12:08 < sipa> thanks 12:08 < fjahr> Thank you! 12:09 < MarcoFalke> sipa: Was good that they were split up into reviewable chunks 12:09 < wumpus> provoostenator: added 12:09 < wumpus> right, that really helped 12:10 -!- shaunsun [shaunsun@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/shaunsun] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 12:11 < wumpus> promag: added 12:11 < sipa> MarcoFalke: yes, it really helped; the resulting changes were much better than the original monolithic PR too 12:11 -!- Talkless [~Talkless@hst-227-49.splius.lt] has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!] 12:11 < MarcoFalke> #18971 has almost 20 commits and changes 1000 lines of code. that sounds like a whole afternoon of review. I wonder if it can be split up as well 12:11 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18971 | wallet: Refactor the classes in wallet/db.{cpp/h} by achow101 · Pull Request #18971 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub 12:12 < achow101> MarcoFalke: I'll look into it 12:12 < provoostenator> achow101: MarcoFalke I'm getting used to the behemoths :-) 12:12 < wumpus> achow101: great work on the sqlite wallet stuff 12:12 < jamesob> if high prio list isn't too full, can add #18637? 12:13 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18637 | coins: allow cache resize after init by jamesob · Pull Request #18637 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub 12:13 < MarcoFalke> jamesob: Every contributor is allowed to add one thing, so it's not full yet for you ;) 12:13 * sipa spins up his sybils 12:14 < wumpus> jamesob: added 12:14 < jamesob> thanks maintainers 12:15 < wumpus> #topic Separate repository for GUI (MarcoFalke) 12:15 < MarcoFalke> Some more background in #19071 12:15 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19071 | [WIP RFC DONOTMERGE] meta: Separate repository for the gui by MarcoFalke · Pull Request #19071 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub 12:16 < wumpus> I like the idea at least 12:17 < provoostenator> Same, it seems worth a try and easy to reverse. 12:17 < MarcoFalke> It is hard to predict if that is going to be benefical for the GUI (Does it increase review or decrease?) 12:17 < jnewbery> concept ACK. Haven't thought too much about the approach 12:17 < achow101> i feel like that might kill the gui further.. 12:17 < wumpus> I'd like it to increase contributions mainly 12:17 < MarcoFalke> Yes, the change is only "meta" (no build system changes), so it should be trivial to revert 12:17 < wumpus> currently it's *scary* to contribute to the GUI being part of the same repository as the consensus code 12:17 < MarcoFalke> wumpus: Same, and I think it will. 12:18 < wumpus> this turns away some ppl 12:18 < jonasschnelli> Yeah. Definitively worth a try. 12:18 < jamesob> wumpus: do you really think it actually turns away people, just that GUI is under bitcoin/bitcoin? 12:18 < wumpus> jamesob: yes 12:18 < MarcoFalke> The GUI review isn't in the best state anyway right now. It can't get much worse tbh 12:18 < wumpus> the bar is really high 12:18 < provoostenator> It's hard to predict. The smaller Github repo might create more of a critical mass for GUI devs. Or it slows down. But in that case we can undo. 12:18 < jamesob> wumpus: but won't process be the same in the GUI "repo"? 12:18 < wumpus> MarcoFalke: also true, we could get some more people involed then too 12:19 < jonatack> I think the key question is if it will draw new contributors to it. 12:19 < wumpus> jamesob: the process, yeah, I guess, but we don't have to have exactly the same team there 12:19 < MarcoFalke> jonatack: Even if it didn't draw any new contributors, but the existing ones can more effectively work on core or the gui (or both), then that is already a win, imo 12:19 < promag> but in what way does it ease new comers and progress if it's another repo? and at the end its all built together? 12:19 < jamesob> afaict all this change (as proposed) accomplishes is segmentation of email/github alerts & issue/PR queues - and I'm certainly not knocking that 12:20 < wumpus> promag: marcofalke's work is one step 12:20 < MarcoFalke> jamesob: Yes, it is mostly a meta way to form different notification streams 12:20 < wumpus> I think eventually the GUI should evolve faster / partially separate from the rest 12:20 < jonasschnelli> The PR/issue separation is IMO already solvable 12:20 < promag> isn't it better to do this after multiprocess is in? 12:20 < wumpus> but even separating things like issues is probably good 12:21 < wumpus> promag: it doesn't matter 12:21 < provoostenator> I've _rarely_ used the GUI tag to look for GUI PR's. I don't know if I'm more likely to look at a seperate repo, but I image that I'm reviewing 1 GUI PR, I'm more likely to notice another one. 12:21 < wumpus> the current repository just has too wide a scope 12:22 < wumpus> it makes sense, conceptually, in the long term to separate things out so why not try to make a little progress 12:22 < MarcoFalke> It is not only about the tag, but any kind of communication or notifications 12:22 < harding> I think it's important for Bitcoin Core to continue to ship releases with a default GUI, which this allows, and making it easier for people to follow just GUI issues sounds very nice to me, so +1 12:22 < jnewbery> promag: there aren't any dependencies between separating GUI into a different repo and multiprocess 12:22 < troygiorshev> i can imagine it may help attract people who are more UI/UX focused, and who would be scared away by the breadth of the main repo 12:22 < wumpus> harding: yeah what we ship is not going to change 12:23 < harding> wumpus: excellent! I was rather worried about that when I saw the proposed meeting topic. 12:23 < gwillen> jnewbery: I was going to kind of ask about the same thing, I imagine that a clean interface separation would make it much easier for people to work on the GUI with confidence about not touching anything in consensus or whatever 12:23 < jamesob> troygiorshev: per this proposal, the breadth in terms of code will be the same (which I think may confuse people) 12:23 < wumpus> troygiorshev: right 12:23 -!- joerodgers [~joerodger@c-76-125-83-191.hsd1.ar.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 12:23 < MarcoFalke> I think the only requirement for this split was the src/interfaces cleanup, because previously the gui directly accessed node globals and state IIRC 12:23 < wumpus> gwillen: there is a clear interface separation already 12:23 -!- jarthur [~jarthur@2605:6000:1019:4971:3031:8f5:23ec:28b] has quit [Quit: BBL] 12:23 < jnewbery> gwillen: there already is clean interface separation 12:23 < wumpus> has been there, for a while 12:24 < achow101> I think this will make some wallet improvements harder. the gui almost has direct access to wallet things and some wallet changes have an effect on the gui 12:24 < gwillen> I guess a lot of GUI changes do respect that, it's my own fault that my own GUI changes also require changes to that interface and so touch both sides 12:24 < achow101> so then you end up with having a wallet change that requires simultaneous gui changes. with 2 repos, that's more difficult 12:24 < jnewbery> at the moment, both sides of that interface are in the same process. But everything goes through src/interfaces/node 12:25 < promag> but whats the idea? someone clones the gui repo, pulls core somehow and builds eveything? 12:25 < gwillen> one thing I see a lot of is the GUI reaching "through" the interface layer to grab a direct pointer to an object on the other side and twiddle it 12:25 < gwillen> but anyway maybe this is off the current topic 12:25 < wumpus> achow101: for most things the GUI shouldn't care about the *kind* of wallet though 12:26 < jnewbery> that interface was introduced a couple of years ago and has been cleaned up continually. If separating the GUI dev process into a separate repo makes us clean it up faster, so much the better! 12:26 < wumpus> achow101: e.g. imagine the GUI or some other software accesses the core wallet through RPC, why would it care the wallet was implemented differently? 12:26 < MarcoFalke> achow101: If a wallet change has an effect on the gui (e.g. a wallet method was renamed), then that simply goes into the main repo 12:26 < sipa> i don't have much of an opinion on the repo separation here... i'm skeptical that it will help, but i agree it's easy to revert if not 12:26 < wumpus> achow101: seems also a matter of interface design 12:27 < jamesob> it sounds like some people are conflating this proposal with having separate source trees in separate repos; the proposal as-is (IIUC) is to have the same source tree in two separate github repos just to segment github workflow 12:27 < promag> adding stuff to core+gui at the same time will take longer too right? 12:27 < wumpus> promag: yes 12:27 < wumpus> promag: but the preferred flow *already* is, and has been for a long time: implement it in bitcoind, then later add it to the GUI 12:27 < MarcoFalke> I also don't think we will see groundbreaking changes, but at least we can gather some data points and experience. And based on those a future "complete" split will be easier to reject or accept. 12:28 < sipa> as for better defined interfaces... if the hope is that this will result in more GUI work, and that happens, I expect we'll find out that more work on the GUI will entail more changes to the interface as well... and having things in separate repositories will only complicate things (i realize that this is not what this PR does, but if that's the eventual goal... it can cut both ways) 12:28 < jamesob> sipa: agreed 12:28 < jnewbery> sipa: sounds like a good problem 12:28 < wumpus> I like to split up the repository, ideally I'd like to have started at seperating out consensus code, but we all agree it's much harder than the GUI :) 12:28 < achow101> wumpus: I think a specific example of what I'm talking about was with descriptor wallets and watchonly. The GUI had to display different things for descriptor wallets because of the different watchonly behavior, so there needed to be simultaneous wallet and gui changes otherwise the gui would show the wrong thing. 12:28 < MarcoFalke> sipa: It is currently not decided if interfaces count to the gui side or the node side 12:28 < achow101> I suppose that's more an artifact of legacy wallets though and maybe doesn't matter moving forwards 12:28 -!- kvaciral [~kvaciral@185.198.57.211] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 12:29 < sipa> MarcoFalke: node side, obviously? 12:29 < jonasschnelli> why would the interface be on the GUI side? 12:29 < wumpus> achow101: I agree it will make some things more difficult, though, that seems like a one-time thing 12:29 < sipa> they're also used by RPC, no? 12:29 < MarcoFalke> are they? 12:29 < wumpus> the interface would be node-side, I guess 12:29 < MarcoFalke> the rpc directly calls into the node right now 12:29 < wumpus> that's the idea of an interface 12:29 < jonasschnelli> it's an interface,.. the GUI consumes/adapts to it. 12:29 < wumpus> yes 12:29 -!- Highway61 [~Thunderbi@ip72-204-155-64.no.no.cox.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 12:29 -!- mol [~mol@unaffiliated/molly] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds] 12:29 < wumpus> the node defines the interface the GUI uses it 12:30 < jnewbery> the rpc doesn't use the interface (but I agree with everyone else that it's part of the node) 12:30 < sipa> huh 12:30 < wumpus> the GUI can have arbitrary changes as long as the interface doesn't need to change 12:30 < jonasschnelli> and since the interface is on the node/core side, I think changing the GUI will be much harder 12:30 < wumpus> no, the RPC doesn't use that interface 12:30 < wumpus> that doesn't matter here though 12:30 < sipa> ok, i never paid attention to the interface side, but i assumed it would be shared between GUI and RPC 12:30 -!- dgenr8 [~dgenr8@unaffiliated/dgenr8] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 12:30 < wumpus> RPC is very tightly bound to the node and that's not going to change any time soon 12:31 < jamesob> ironic that the guy leading process sep (ryanofsky) isn't saying anything! 12:31 < MarcoFalke> silence means ACK, right? 12:31 < jamesob> maxim of the law, yes 12:31 < jonatack> What were the pain points driving the proposed change? ISTM this isn't clear in the RFC. Lack of GUI review? Other things? 12:31 < troygiorshev> is there confusion in where PRs that touch both sides would go? 12:31 < jnewbery> but again, process sep is almost completely orthogonal 12:31 < wumpus> jonasschnelli: it will make changing the GUI harder *if* it needs an interface change 12:31 < provoostenator> Two seperate repos might also make it (slightly) easier to demo more radical forms of splitting the code. 12:32 < jamesob> jnewbery: right 12:32 < jonasschnelli> MarcoFalke: I'm currently working on a GUI PR that (mempool histogram) that changes the interface.. how would I have to proceed? 12:32 < wumpus> jonasschnelli: if it's internal to the GUI, say, moving around some buttons or changing dialogs, not so much, and that's the kind of thing that *needs* to be easier 12:32 < provoostenator> troygiorshev: no, they go to the main repo 12:32 < jonasschnelli> First PR the interface change (without an consuming element),... then PR the GUI part? Or simultanously... how do we handle the merge? 12:32 < promag> wumpus: why? is it hard? 12:33 < provoostenator> jonasschnelli: I usually make two PR's that build on eachother 12:33 < MarcoFalke> jonasschnelli: Well, everyone except me said that interfaces are node code, so I guess you will have to add the interface first and then make the gui changes 12:33 < sipa> jnewbery: i don't know if an outcome where it's easier to make nitty changes, but harder to make substantial changes, is an improvement 12:33 < wumpus> yes, you'll have to change the interface first 12:34 < wumpus> same as if you were going to change an RPC-facing application and needed some new interface 12:34 < jonasschnelli> MarcoFalke: what would be merged first? Or simulatnously? 12:34 < MarcoFalke> Obviously this means there will be an unsused method in the interface temporarily, but that should be ok 12:34 < gwillen> sipa: well, I think it depends on what your goal is for the GUI 12:34 < MarcoFalke> the interface change will be merged first 12:34 < gwillen> right now it is clearly a user interface designed by programmers who would rather be doing literally anything other than designing a user interface ;-) 12:34 < jonasschnelli> what is the GUI change never gets merged? 12:34 -!- lehnberg [~lehnberg@unaffiliated/lehnberg] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 12:34 < MarcoFalke> It can also be merged at the same time, I guess? 12:34 < gwillen> I assume the hope is that separating it means that the GUI can get a lot more work from people who have more expertise in GUIs and less in the backend behind it 12:34 -!- owowo [~ovovo@unaffiliated/ovovo] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 12:34 < jonasschnelli> If we merge at the same time... do we have really benefits? 12:35 < wumpus> jonasschnelli: sure, you'd have to coordinate that 12:35 < provoostenator> I hope eventually the GUI and RPC use the same interface, but that's not anytime soon... 12:35 < sipa> as an example... btcd started out with separate repos and well-defined interfaces between wallet and node and p2p and ... and after a while they realized it's too much of a pain and moved everything into one repo 12:35 < MarcoFalke> jonasschnelli: The majority of GUI changes hopefully don't change the interface 12:35 < wumpus> provoostenator: that was always my preference, but it's not going to happen, face it 12:35 < sipa> because interesting changes invariable change the interface 12:35 < jonasschnelli> ^ +1 12:35 < MarcoFalke> I hope the interface converges over time 12:35 < jonasschnelli> That would mean the GUI has stalled 12:36 < jonasschnelli> (eventually) 12:36 < jonasschnelli> (maybe not) 12:36 < wumpus> I do think it's absurd to have everything from the consensus code to GUI in the same repo, and would like to change this 12:36 < wumpus> but yes where to start 12:36 < jamesob> I was going to argue that true repo separation is good because it makes us more likely to screw up the dangerous stuff (consensus, network), but I'm not even sure there's a good argument for that 12:36 < sipa> wumpus: yes, i know 12:36 < jonasschnelli> wumpus. Yes. I agree. 12:36 < ryanofsky> sorry missed earlier discussion, but i think there's a lot of work can get done in gui that doesn't require changing interfaces 12:36 < jamesob> *less likely! 12:37 < jonasschnelli> But still,... a tiny GUI change can draw the code node down (since everything runs in the same process) 12:37 -!- Highway61 [~Thunderbi@ip72-204-155-64.no.no.cox.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 12:37 < jonasschnelli> We still have to be careful 12:37 < jnewbery> sipa: "if this will result in more GUI work ... more work on the GUI will entail more changes to the interface" is the good problem :) 12:37 < wumpus> jonasschnelli: hence the process separation work 12:37 < ryanofsky> for changes that do affect interfaces, just submit the pr in the main repo. or if it's easy just add the interface in one pr and use it in a different pr 12:37 < promag> how would this benefit new GUIs? 12:37 < jonasschnelli> Yes. I just wonder if it would be wiser to seperate the repositories with merging "the" process seprataion 12:37 < elichai2> Sipa I can give an example of where it does work. In the rust compiler there's a monorepo that contains most of the complex compiler stuff and it contains submodules of interface tools (static analysis, dynamic analysis, more lints etc) and when a PR changes both repos they're linked together and after ACK on both sides they first merge the compiler side and then the tool's side. 12:38 < MarcoFalke> promag: Right now the change does not benefit new GUIs 12:38 < wumpus> it's only one step 12:38 < wumpus> come on 12:38 < jonasschnelli> Yeah. I agree that its worth a try 12:38 < jonasschnelli> It might be simpler and more efficient that we initially think. 12:38 < MarcoFalke> It is a step in the direction. If we can't get that done, then we shouldn't attempt any further splits imo 12:38 < jonasschnelli> Lets try 12:38 < achow101> I suppose that if we can easily revert it later then it's fine 12:38 < sipa> yeah, this discussion isn't about this PR anymore but more longer-term effects 12:39 < jamesob> heck I'm ACK. it'll be easy to revert, and if maintainers want it then so be it - they're the ones who it affects most 12:39 < ryanofsky> yeah, it's just a minor step. i can't see how it would help anything that email filtering wouldn't help, but it seems harmless 12:39 < sipa> i agree with this because it's so easy to revert 12:39 < jonasschnelli> PR/email filtering is easy... that should not be the reason to split off 12:39 < wumpus> yes, filtering is easy, that's not the point 12:39 < jonasschnelli> review style,.. contributors should it be 12:39 < wumpus> delegation is 12:39 < jonasschnelli> yes 12:39 < wumpus> I don't want to be the bottleneck for everything 12:39 < wumpus> certainly not on the long run 12:40 < sipa> of course 12:40 < jonasschnelli> indeed. 12:40 < wumpus> the bitcoi repositry is way too broad 12:40 < jb55> I wouldn't say its that easy, there's no way to filter based on labels via email 12:40 < elichai2> The downside of "reverting" is losing PRs/Issues history.(by having some of it in a deprecated out of date repo) Altough that's probably not a big deal 12:40 < promag> wumpus: right, one step, I'm just wondering about the next steps 12:40 < ryanofsky> how is this different than you just filtering out gui-tagged prs and issues? 12:40 < provoostenator> I don't even use email for notifications :-) 12:40 < wumpus> sigh... 12:40 < achow101> elichai2: issues can be moved between repos now. not sure about prs 12:40 < elichai2> achow101: you're right. Forgot about that feature 12:40 < jamesob> jb55: agree, also curious how people are filtering gui emails out... 12:41 < MarcoFalke> elichai2: The same pr (commit hash) can be opened against either repo 12:41 < sipa> ryanofsky: someone has to merge things still, and i think wumpus feels responsible for that eventually 12:41 < wumpus> yes, how are you even doing that? 12:41 -!- owowo [~ovovo@unaffiliated/ovovo] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 12:41 < MarcoFalke> I click on "mute conversation" manually on most gui emails 12:41 < achow101> isn't jonasschnelli supposed to be the gui maintainer? 12:42 < jamesob> achow101: LOL 12:42 < jonasschnelli> I try to take care of the GUI prs... 12:42 < jonasschnelli> though there are a lot of PR waiting for more reviewers.. 12:42 < wumpus> currently, yes 12:42 < jonasschnelli> or are of isigificance that it doesnt attact reviewers 12:42 < jonatack> github-cli now works quite well for filtering things by label 12:42 < jnewbery> MarcoFalke: what's the process for merging from the GUI repo to the main repo? Do you propose that it happens immediately after a PR is merged, or do you batch it? Do all of the reviewer ACKs get lost? 12:42 < jonasschnelli> if a GUI misses review or maintainer action,.. just point me to it. 12:42 < wumpus> I can't be the only person why things it's, in principle, absurd for the GUI to be in the same repository as critical consensus code 12:43 < MarcoFalke> jnewbery: The github-merge.py script does it 12:43 < jonasschnelli> wumpus: agre 12:43 < MarcoFalke> It is instantaneous to both repos, nothing is lost 12:43 < jamesob> what is the anticipated burden of rerouting people filing issues/PRs in bitcoin/bitcoin to bitcoin/bitcoin-gui when appropriate? 12:43 < MarcoFalke> jonasschnelli: I think #16432 is close to merge (off-topic) 12:43 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/16432 | qt: Add privacy to the Overview page by hebasto · Pull Request #16432 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub 12:43 < wumpus> but in any case it seems I have a large disconnect with other developers in that regard 12:43 -!- jarthur [~jarthur@2605:6000:1019:4971:1d3c:d43:4170:7278] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 12:44 < MarcoFalke> jamesob: A linter could do that 12:44 < jamesob> wumpus: no I think there's broad agreement there. does *anyone* think that all else equal, gui + consensus is a good thing? 12:44 < jonasschnelli> MarcoFalke: indeed... will take a final look 12:44 < ryanofsky> MarcoFalke, master branch is effectively mirrored both repos? 12:44 < provoostenator> One can make the same argument for the wallet, but that's about the only think I can think of splitting. 12:44 < MarcoFalke> ryanofsky: Yes. monotree 12:44 -!- Highway61 [~Thunderbi@ip72-204-155-64.no.no.cox.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 12:44 < wumpus> jamesob: I don't know, this comes up every few years and it seems besides a few people agreeing, most thing the status quo is okay 12:45 < MarcoFalke> The gui repo only has the master branch (or tree) 12:45 < wumpus> provoostenator: yes, one can make the same argument for the walet, but that's a discussion for another time 12:45 < provoostenator> agreed, GUI is a good place to start 12:45 < MarcoFalke> Yes, let's wait with the wallet until at least next year :) 12:45 < MarcoFalke> No need to rush 12:46 < wumpus> right, need to start somewheere and with some small step 12:46 < MarcoFalke> Separation was suggested in 2013. At one point we need to take a small step 12:46 < wumpus> yes... 12:46 < MarcoFalke> (or even earlier) 12:46 < jonasschnelli> heh 12:46 < wumpus> 2012 I think 12:46 < wumpus> I was ther 12:46 < sipa> you wrote the qt gui :p 12:46 < MarcoFalke> blame wumpus 12:46 < wumpus> biggest mistake in my life 12:47 < MarcoFalke> xD 12:47 < sipa> no it wasn't 12:47 < wumpus> well ,second (but not going into details there) 12:47 < jonasschnelli> hah 12:47 < jamesob> lol 12:47 < jb55> at least it wasn't an electron gui 12:47 < sipa> imagine we'd still be stuck on a pre-release wxwindows version 12:47 < MarcoFalke> the gui made me contribute to Core 12:47 < wumpus> heh 12:47 < jonasschnelli> me 2 12:47 < jonasschnelli> the GUI is a great module to win new contributors 12:48 < aj> jamesob: (consensus and a block-explorer gui; p2p and a p2p gui; and wallet and wallet gui make sense as individual pairs; consensus and wallet gui seem weird, but not an unreasonable consequence of us not having split consensus, p2p and wallet into separate repos) 12:48 < wumpus> I'm sorry to not have addressed #17145 though when I could 12:48 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/17145 | GUI event loop should be block free · Issue #17145 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub 12:48 < jonasschnelli> without the interfaces, it was also easier to learn about the internals 12:48 < elichai2> I know dozens of people that run full nodes only because of the gui 12:48 < jonasschnelli> wumpus: no worries. Don't blame yourself. Things evolve. No-one would have started everything async in 2011. 12:48 < wumpus> I'm glad to hear some people do appreciate it :) 12:49 < jb55> elichai2: yeah I mainly use gui now due to the recent psbt/hww features 12:49 < jamesob> aj: I see what you're getting at there - but I think the rationale is that consensus is so sensitive that you want it as isolated as is practical 12:49 < jonasschnelli> Yeah. We should not underestimate the GUI (even if most of us devs won't use it). 12:50 < MarcoFalke> I like the RPC console :) 12:50 < MarcoFalke> (10 min left) 12:50 < jonasschnelli> m2 12:50 < gwillen> jb55: :D that's exciting to hear, and I swear I am going to go rebase #18027 today so you can use it on master :-) 12:50 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18027 | "PSBT Operations" dialog by gwillen · Pull Request #18027 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub 12:50 < ariard> side-topic, on altnet, I've started to gather issues here : https://github.com/ariard/altnet-proposals 12:50 < wumpus> jamesob: yes, isolating the consensus code would be the other side to start, but it technically much more difficult 12:50 * sipa idly wonders if bitcoin 0.4.0 would compile against wxwidget 3.0 (as the 2.9 that was used at the time was never released...) 12:50 < ariard> currently in the process talking with people who do actually alt-coms, to learn what could help them 12:51 < jb55> gwillen: :+1: 12:51 < instagibbs> gwillen, :D 12:51 < jamesob> ariard: nice ascii art 12:51 < provoostenator> jonasschnelli: without the interfaces, you had no choice but to learn the internals :-) 12:51 < jonasschnelli> right! 12:51 < MarcoFalke> writing new interfaces will also teach the internals ;) 12:52 < gwillen> instagibbs: :D thanks for the reminder about that PR last week, you put it back on my radar, then I avoided replying out of embarrassment 12:52 < jonatack> gwillen: nice! 12:52 < wumpus> but definitely, if someone was to start designing a GUI nowadays, they'd start with using RPC and an all-async design 12:52 < MarcoFalke> And maybe it is a good thing that new gui contributors don't need to learn the cs_main horror 12:52 < provoostenator> Looking forward to reviewing that one gwillen 12:53 < wumpus> but hey my GUI was better separated from the core code than Satoshi's was… 12:53 < promag> MarcoFalke: re separation, all in to help out - still skeptical though 12:53 < instagibbs> gwillen, non-0 amount of people including me will use it 12:53 < jamesob> "How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love cs_main" 12:53 < jb55> we should bring back the poker client as per satoshi's vision 12:53 < MarcoFalke> Also fun draw transaction (requested in 2016) 12:54 < sipa> wumpus: you mean it was a problem that main.cpp called into the GUI directly? 12:54 < sipa> MarcoFalke: and savage wallet 12:54 < wumpus> sipa: heh 12:54 < MarcoFalke> what could possibly go wrong? 12:55 < jamesob> hey uh by the way when's the next coredev? 12:55 < jamesob> should we do something digitally? 12:55 < jonasschnelli> in person?! 😱 12:55 < MarcoFalke> Wait for the vaccine first, maybe 12:55 < instagibbs> jamesob, might be worth asking fulmo folks they've done a few hackathons 12:55 < wumpus> at the first next year I guess 12:56 < sipa> i don't know how valuable a virtual coredev would be 12:56 < wumpus> travel is going to be a mess for a while 12:56 < jonasschnelli> we have that already 12:56 < MarcoFalke> IRC! 12:56 < sipa> i feel IRC is pretty good for communication 12:56 < wumpus> yesss 12:56 < sipa> in-person is definitely better... but, we'll need to wait for that 12:56 < wumpus> I personally don't feel like doing vr or video chat or something 12:57 < MarcoFalke> I am certainly not buying VR glasses 12:57 < sipa> i like vr meetups... but not for more than 1-2 hours 12:57 < jb55> can't get my vr setup working on my linux distro :( 12:57 < sipa> and they're more a social thing than a communication thing 12:57 < jonasschnelli> yes 12:57 < jamesob> right 12:57 < jonatack> agree 12:57 < jonasschnelli> Lets aim for next year... 12:57 < jonasschnelli> plz hawaii. :) 12:57 < jnewbery> jonasschnelli: do you mind taking a look at https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15206#issuecomment-634707439? I like the approach there that moves the header checking to net.cpp and doesn't change behaviour 12:58 < jonasschnelli> jnewbery: it's on my list 12:58 < jonasschnelli> will do first thing tmr 12:58 < wumpus> :D 12:58 < jnewbery> great. Thanks! 12:58 < promag> facebook has this rooms thing now -.- 12:59 < wumpus> concept ACK #15206 somehow missed that one 12:59 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15206 | Immediately disconnect on invalid net message checksum by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #15206 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub 12:59 < wumpus> oh I didn't but it's more than a year old hehe 13:00 < promag> dong 13:00 < jonasschnelli> Yeah.. you concept ACKd long time ago 13:00 < wumpus> #endmeeting 13:00 < lightningbot> Meeting ended Thu May 28 20:00:06 2020 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) 13:00 < lightningbot> Minutes: http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2020/bitcoin-core-dev.2020-05-28-19.00.html 13:00 < lightningbot> Minutes (text): http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2020/bitcoin-core-dev.2020-05-28-19.00.txt 13:00 < lightningbot> Log: http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2020/bitcoin-core-dev.2020-05-28-19.00.log.html 13:00 < jamesob> pretty good meeting. missed you guys :) 13:00 < MarcoFalke> jamesob: wen assumeutxo? 13:00 < jnewbery> wumpus: I think https://github.com/troygiorshev/bitcoin/tree/p2p-refactor-header is possibly a cleaner implementation 13:00 < jamesob> MarcoFalke: as fast as you can merge it buddy 13:01 < MarcoFalke> jnewbery: I am happy to review both versions. From the perspective of the disconnected peer, they should behave identical. 13:02 < jnewbery> the p2p-refactor-header doesn't disconnect the peer (maintains current behaviour) 13:03 -!- kristapsk_ [~KK@gateway/tor-sasl/kristapsk] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 13:03 < MarcoFalke> The tests are changed, so it changes log behavior at least :) 13:03 < wumpus> jamesob: welcome back! 13:04 < wumpus> jnewbery: wait, isn't the disconnection the point? 13:06 < troygiorshev> wumpus: not really. Yes from the title of the PR, but the discussion has moved to it just being a refactor of the checks into net from net_processing 13:06 < troygiorshev> #15197 is the "other half" 13:06 < wumpus> if a peer sends invalid data it should be disconnected imo 13:06 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15197 | Refactor and slightly stricter p2p message processing by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #15197 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub 13:06 < wumpus> if it's just a refactor I'm not sure it's that interesting 13:07 -!- promag [~promag@bl19-22-20.dsl.telepac.pt] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 13:11 -!- shaunsun_ [shaunsun@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/shaunsun] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 13:12 -!- shaunsun [shaunsun@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/shaunsun] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 13:13 < wumpus> I guess the only thing causing it to disconnect on complete garbage is the invalid messagestart bytes now 13:14 < troygiorshev> i found in testing that most of the time garbage was being rejected on message size 13:14 < troygiorshev> (pretty likely to have a 1 in the first 15 bits of the message size field) 13:15 < wumpus> will it disconnect for invalid size though? 13:15 < wumpus> m_valid_header=false doesn't seem to be a disconnect condition 13:15 < troygiorshev> it's in readheader 13:16 < troygiorshev> it's there so that we don't possibly read and hash >4G from the peer before disconnecting 13:17 < wumpus> yes there's that :) 13:19 -!- DeanWeen [~dean@gateway/tor-sasl/deanguss] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 13:21 < troygiorshev> m_valid_header effectively only pertains to the messagetype. The other two checks (size and netmagic) are done and dealt with beforehand. I think (hope) i caught all of the overlap in my branch 13:21 < achow101> MarcoFalke: How split up do you want #18971 to be? Most of the commits are self contained and could standalone, but don't necessarily make sense by themselves. So I could make 10 PRs with 2 or so commits each, but would that really be beneficial? 13:21 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18971 | wallet: Refactor the classes in wallet/db.{cpp/h} by achow101 · Pull Request #18971 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub 13:21 -!- Dean_Guss [~dean@gateway/tor-sasl/deanguss] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 13:22 < wumpus> troygiorshev: right, invalid message types are okay to ignore 13:22 < wumpus> explicitly shouldn't disconnect for those as it's an extension mechanism 13:22 < MarcoFalke> achow101: Not sure. I guess reviewers can also do several afternoons reviewing 5 commits each and then sharing their intermediate review comments incrementally 13:26 < wumpus> (though having NUL bytes in between the name, what it checks for there, is questionable, and also tends to indicate corruption or a buggy implementation) 13:33 < troygiorshev> imo we should disconnect on those two checks (0s and invalid chars), and disconnect on checksum fail, and stay connected on an unrecognized but otherwise well-constructed message type. There was a lot of disagreement in the pr and the pr review club though. At least my branch will make it easier to do that in the future :) 13:35 -!- lehnberg [~lehnberg@unaffiliated/lehnberg] has quit [Quit: lehnberg] 13:38 < wumpus> I guess checksum failures can *rarely* happen for users that are on really crappy networks, TCP and IP checksums will catch most corruption, it needs to be really bad for it to sometimes slip through that 13:39 < wumpus> in the case of something like SSH that's annoying because yo ureally want to remain connected to that one host, for bitcoin P2P though ,they'll just connect to a different node 13:39 -!- Guyver2 [Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Quit: Going offline, see ya! (www.adiirc.com)] 13:42 -!- jarthur [~jarthur@2605:6000:1019:4971:1d3c:d43:4170:7278] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 13:46 < jnewbery> wumpus: there was lots of discussion about whether we should drop the message or disconnect in the case of a bad checksum. See here onwards if you're interested: https://bitcoincore.reviews/15206.html#l-81 13:47 -!- marcoagner [~user@2001:8a0:6a5f:a900:6d3e:1158:b50:97b6] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 13:47 < wumpus> jnewbery: thanks! 13:48 < jnewbery> the short answer is that jonasschnelli's PR did two things: move checksum checking from net_processing into net (definitely good), and change behaviour from drop message to disconnect peer (probably good, but at least worth discussion) 13:48 < jnewbery> Troy's branch just does the first, so discussion of the behaviour change can be separated 13:49 < wumpus> I understand, disconnecting a peer for one corrupted message sounds like overkill somehow, and not really robust 13:49 < wumpus> especially as bitcoin's P2P protocol is more or less stateless and can handle lost messages 13:50 < jnewbery> right. There was some discussion about whether an overzelous firewall could mess around with IP addresses in version or addr messages and break the checksum. Anyway, it's all in the review club notes :) 13:50 < jonasschnelli> I start to agree with wumpus... 13:51 < jonasschnelli> The longer i noodle about it,... the more sense it makes to close 15206 13:51 < jnewbery> jonasschnelli: not changing behaviour is the conservative choice 13:52 < jonasschnelli> Yeah. But the refactor alone doesn't really make much sense... 13:52 -!- mol [~mol@unaffiliated/molly] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 13:52 < jonasschnelli> its nice. but not necessary anymore for future transport protocols (like BIP324) 13:53 -!- jarthur [~jarthur@2605:6000:1019:4971:1d3c:d43:4170:7278] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 13:53 < jnewbery> I think it does. Moving header checking down and making net processing unaware of p2p header format is a useful thing 13:53 -!- jarthur [~jarthur@2605:6000:1019:4971:1d3c:d43:4170:7278] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 13:53 < jnewbery> both for BIP324 and altnet 13:53 < jnewbery> and just good architecture 13:53 < jonasschnelli> Yes. I agree. 13:53 -!- jarthur [~jarthur@2605:6000:1019:4971:e896:8e40:a3f1:b7b8] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 13:53 -!- kristapsk [~KK@gateway/tor-sasl/kristapsk] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 13:53 < jonasschnelli> I strip down the PR... but it's impact and refactoring leverage is minimal. 13:54 < wumpus> jnewbery: that's an interesting thought though: if it replaces a certain 4-byte sequence with another one, consistently, that will also interfere with some blocks and header propagation at the least 13:54 < jnewbery> take a look at Troy's branch before you spend too much time changing yours. It's slightly fiddly to do the checking in net.cpp without causing a disconnect 13:54 < jonasschnelli> Yes. I'll do that. 13:57 < jnewbery> wumpus: I'm not personally convinced about the firewalls changing messages argument, but it was presented as a reason to be careful about changing behaviour 14:00 -!- esandeen [~esandeen@217.146.82.122] has quit [] 14:01 < wumpus> jnewbery: clearly we should do scrambling + error correction at the application layer to work around network layer corruption :-) 14:02 < wumpus> or even just scrabling, at least the bit patterns that cause packet drop would be unpredictable then 14:03 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 14:03 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] ryanofsky opened pull request #19098: test: Remove duplicate NodeContext hacks (master...pr/qtx) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19098 14:03 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev [] 14:03 -!- promag [~promag@bl19-22-20.dsl.telepac.pt] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 14:04 -!- waxwing [~waxwing@unaffiliated/waxwing] has quit [Excess Flood] 14:04 -!- waxwing_ [~waxwing@193.29.57.116] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 14:07 < wumpus> in any case the only reason this is controversial at all is because bitcoin's P2P is semi-stateless so losing a packet is not necessarily fatal, in a stateful protocol the only sensible thing is to disconnect 14:08 < sipa> many messages aren't stateless at all 14:08 < wumpus> I know, hence the semi- 14:08 < wumpus> otherwise the best suggestion would be to just go UDP 14:08 < sipa> right 14:15 < wumpus> when corruption happens in the middle of something stateful it's probably better to disconnect immediately instead of continue and wait for expiration 14:19 -!- JesusFreke [~JesusFrek@195.206.169.238] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 14:25 < wumpus> the firewall case is statistically mostly bound to happen in addr messages of course 14:25 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 14:25 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] ryanofsky opened pull request #19099: refactor: Move wallet methods out of chain.h and node.h (master...pr/wclient) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19099 14:25 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev [] 14:25 < sipa> and the initial version message 14:26 < sipa> but yes... if it's in addr messages, maintaining the connection would be preferable 14:26 < wumpus> that's an interesting one, if the checksum of the initial version message fails ... the connection will never go anywhere 14:26 < sipa> though it could be a firewall that's only rewriting some address ranges, which only occur in randomly gossiped addressed, not the addresses of the connection partners 14:27 < wumpus> I know it disconnects if some other message is sent as first message, but a checksum failure will probably keep open the connection 14:28 < sipa> if anyone is interested: an evolution of current libsecp256k1 master's verification speed in various gcc versions: https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/548488/83195267-d4bc6b00-a0ee-11ea-8e47-4489cd9824ae.png 14:28 < wumpus> yes it could be very specific about that 14:29 < wumpus> interesting 14:29 < sipa> which gcc are 0.20 release binaries built with? 14:30 < wumpus> so O3 is faster than O3 with asm with 10.0.1? 14:30 < sipa> indeed 14:30 < luke-jr> interesting 14:30 < sipa> but -O2 without asm is suddenly a lot slower 14:31 < sipa> (note that the y axis isn't rooted at 0) 14:31 < wumpus> we should do the same check for ARM, I sometimes wonder if gcc already managed to beat my ARM assembly, for RISC-V I couldn't beat it 14:31 < luke-jr> could it be CPU-specific? 14:31 < sipa> it's not -march=native or so 14:32 < sipa> so this is optimized for generic x86_64 14:32 < luke-jr> but CPUs do perform differently 14:32 < sipa> of course, my CPU could be more or less close to the generic thing GCC optimizes for 14:32 < sipa> but that'd be coincidence 14:32 < wumpus> sipa: gcc 8.x 14:32 < luke-jr> IMO it'd be an interesting datapoint to get march=native on a few Intel vs AMD CPUs 14:33 < luke-jr> probably harder to compare tho 14:33 < sipa> i'll run the same on a ARM threadripper 14:33 < sipa> eh, AMD 14:33 * sipa wishes: ARM threadripper 14:33 < luke-jr> heh 14:33 < luke-jr> sipa: why wouldn't you just use POWER for that use case? 14:33 * wumpus wishes: RISC-V threadripper 14:34 < luke-jr> wumpus: but POWER is more open than RISC-V last I checked ;) 14:34 < sipa> return -ETOOMANYHYPOTHETICALS; 14:38 < tryphe> sipa: wow, that's cool! and here i am using gcc 6.3 like a cave man. 14:39 < sipa> same for clang: https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/548488/83189237-c584ef80-a0e5-11ea-828c-ffea26c50ea1.png 14:39 < sipa> interestingly for clang, -O2 asm and -O3 asm seem indistinguishable 14:42 -!- Pavlenex [~Thunderbi@141.98.103.251] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 14:43 < wumpus> weird 14:44 < wumpus> so there, too, asm makes -O3 slower and -O2 faster 14:45 < wumpus> but not as extreme as for gcc 10.0.1, so they end up on top of each other 14:46 < luke-jr> could it be issues were found with some optimisers so got demoted to -O3? 15:06 < wumpus> it wouldn't be the first time secp256k1 triggers a compiler bug, but i doubt compilers are self-aware enough to demote optimizations in that case :) 15:07 < sipa> wumpus: hmm, i can't recall any examples 15:07 < luke-jr> well, as long as the bug doesn't impact correctness.. 15:07 < sipa> of secp256k1 triggering a known bug 15:08 < sipa> maybe it's some meltdown/spectre style protections that got enabled by default? 15:08 < sipa> unsure about that 15:09 < luke-jr> speaking of, did anyone ever figure out if we should be enabling retpolines? 15:11 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 15:11 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] ryanofsky opened pull request #19101: refactor: remove ::vpwallets and related global variables (master...pr/novp) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19101 15:11 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev [] 15:11 < wumpus> it's probably better to leave such things to the OS/compiler 15:12 -!- troygiorshev [~troygiors@CPEdcef09a0ed55-CM0c473d74be00.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 15:13 < sipa> gcc has some flags to enable protections, but they're not enabled by default afaik 15:13 < wumpus> likely because they make things much slower 15:13 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 15:13 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] achow101 opened pull request #19102: wallet: Introduce and use DummyDatabase instead of dummy BerkeleyDatabase (master...true-dummydb) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19102 15:13 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev [] 15:14 < luke-jr> wumpus: the OS/compiler can't guess at what we need 15:17 < wumpus> there's quite a few kernel-level workarounds at least that activate based on the actual CPU 15:20 < wumpus> this mostly has to do with guarding the userspace-kernel space interface, which is a clear boundary, inside applications it's a lot less clear what you can do, and there's been such a cesspool of different vulnerabilities I'm not sure anyone does 15:21 < sipa> applications that have JIT compiled code executed in the same process also are particularly vulnerable, but that's not the case for us either 15:22 < sipa> or more specifically, untrusted JIT compiled code 15:22 < sipa> (browser tab spying on another browser tab etc) 15:23 -!- Pavlenex [~Thunderbi@141.98.103.251] has quit [Quit: Pavlenex] 15:25 < wumpus> yup, that's another trusted-untrusted boundary 15:27 -!- EagleTM [~EagleTM@unaffiliated/eagletm] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 15:40 -!- mdunnio [~mdunnio@208.59.170.5] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 15:45 -!- IGHOR [~quassel@176.121.4.135] has quit [Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.] 15:46 < fanquake> sipa: it depends on the distribution you’re using, if the flags are on by default 15:47 -!- IGHOR [~quassel@176.121.4.135] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 15:49 < fanquake> If we were to upgrade to a newer Ubuntu for gitian builds, we’d end up with a few new protections turned on unless we start explicitly opting out. 15:51 < sipa> fanquake: ah good to know 15:51 < sipa> i'm on ubuntu focal, so this may have influenced my measurements 15:51 < fanquake> Yep. They started patching new things in from unit in 19.10 onwards 15:51 < fanquake> *Ubuntu 15:52 < fanquake> I have a PR open with some details, but haven’t gotten to any significant benchmarking 15:52 -!- troygiorshev [~troygiors@CPEdcef09a0ed55-CM0c473d74be00.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 15:53 < fanquake> #18921 15:53 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/18921 | build: add stack-clash and control-flow protection options to hardening flags by fanquake · Pull Request #18921 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub 15:53 < fanquake> Waiting to convince jamesob to throw it into bitcoinperf 16:03 < luke-jr> hmm, does that suggest we ought to be enabling those things? (new Ubuntu defaults) 16:08 -!- ghost43 [~daer@gateway/tor-sasl/daer] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 16:09 -!- ghost43 [~daer@gateway/tor-sasl/daer] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 16:13 -!- DeanWeen [~dean@gateway/tor-sasl/deanguss] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 16:18 -!- promag [~promag@bl19-22-20.dsl.telepac.pt] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 16:21 -!- jarthur [~jarthur@2605:6000:1019:4971:e896:8e40:a3f1:b7b8] has quit [] 16:27 -!- Highway61 [~Thunderbi@ip72-204-155-64.no.no.cox.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 16:27 -!- justanotheruser [~justanoth@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 16:29 -!- troygiorshev [~troygiors@CPEdcef09a0ed55-CM0c473d74be00.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 16:41 -!- promag [~promag@bl19-22-20.dsl.telepac.pt] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 16:41 -!- justanotheruser [~justanoth@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 16:51 -!- shaunsun_ [shaunsun@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/shaunsun] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 16:53 -!- troygiorshev [~troygiors@CPEdcef09a0ed55-CM0c473d74be00.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 17:00 -!- JesusFreke [~JesusFrek@195.206.169.238] has quit [] 17:05 -!- cltrbreak_MAD2 [~ctrlbreak@159.2.182.106] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 17:05 -!- cltrbreak_MAD2 [~ctrlbreak@159.2.182.106] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 17:09 -!- promag [~promag@bl19-22-20.dsl.telepac.pt] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 17:11 -!- ghost43 [~daer@gateway/tor-sasl/daer] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 17:12 -!- ghost43 [~daer@gateway/tor-sasl/daer] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 17:16 -!- IGHOR [~quassel@176.121.4.135] has quit [Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.] 17:16 -!- langseth1 [~langseth@139.28.218.198] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 17:17 -!- troygiorshev [~troygiors@CPEdcef09a0ed55-CM0c473d74be00.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 17:18 -!- IGHOR [~quassel@176.121.4.135] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 17:21 -!- proofofkeags [~proofofke@71-218-146-180.hlrn.qwest.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 17:31 -!- Relis [~Relis@cpc96290-lewi18-2-0-cust910.2-4.cable.virginm.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 17:32 -!- Relis [~Relis@cpc96290-lewi18-2-0-cust910.2-4.cable.virginm.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 17:37 < jamesob> fanquake: roger that, will queue. Expect some bitcoinperf developments soon 17:42 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [] 17:43 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 17:43 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/ea3e9e0b84c5...fc1fb4dd7c05 17:43 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 399d84d Wladimir J. van der Laan: build: Only allow ASCII identifiers 17:43 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master fc1fb4d fanquake: Merge #19094: build: Only allow ASCII identifiers 17:43 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev [] 17:43 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 17:43 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake merged pull request #19094: build: Only allow ASCII identifiers (master...2020_05_no_extended_identifiers) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19094 17:43 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev [] 17:51 -!- jarthur [~jarthur@2605:6000:1019:4971:5c3e:70ab:3ef0:551c] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 17:54 -!- troygiorshev [~troygiors@CPEdcef09a0ed55-CM0c473d74be00.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 17:54 -!- EagleTM [~EagleTM@unaffiliated/eagletm] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds] 18:02 -!- proofofkeags [~proofofke@71-218-146-180.hlrn.qwest.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 18:07 -!- proofofkeags [~proofofke@71-218-146-180.hlrn.qwest.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 18:09 -!- jarthur [~jarthur@2605:6000:1019:4971:5c3e:70ab:3ef0:551c] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 18:09 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~Chris_Ste@unaffiliated/chris-stewart-5/x-3612383] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 18:10 -!- jarthur [~jarthur@2605:6000:1019:4971:5c3e:70ab:3ef0:551c] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 18:14 -!- filchef [~filchef@212.104.97.177] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 18:15 -!- filchef [~filchef@212.104.97.177] has quit [Client Quit] 18:17 -!- troygiorshev [~troygiors@CPEdcef09a0ed55-CM0c473d74be00.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 18:19 -!- troygiorshev [~troygiors@CPEdcef09a0ed55-CM0c473d74be00.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 18:27 -!- troygiorshev [~troygiors@CPEdcef09a0ed55-CM0c473d74be00.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 18:28 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 18:28 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/fc1fb4dd7c05...adc143fc2b9a 18:28 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 79b0a69 Andrew Chow: Add missing QPainterPath include 18:28 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master adc143f fanquake: Merge #19097: qt: Add missing QPainterPath include 18:28 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev [] 18:28 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 18:28 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake merged pull request #19097: qt: Add missing QPainterPath include (master...qpainterpath-include) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19097 18:28 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev [] 18:29 < fanquake> jamesob: sounds good 18:29 -!- troygiorshev [~troygiors@CPEdcef09a0ed55-CM0c473d74be00.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 18:38 -!- troygiorshev [~troygiors@CPEdcef09a0ed55-CM0c473d74be00.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has quit [Quit: Lost terminal] 18:46 -!- jarthur [~jarthur@2605:6000:1019:4971:5c3e:70ab:3ef0:551c] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 18:48 -!- proofofkeags [~proofofke@71-218-146-180.hlrn.qwest.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 18:48 -!- jarthur [~jarthur@2605:6000:1019:4971:5c3e:70ab:3ef0:551c] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 18:53 -!- troygiorshev [~troygiors@CPEdcef09a0ed55-CM0c473d74be00.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 19:42 -!- surja795 [~surja795@c-24-62-248-154.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 19:49 -!- surja795 [~surja795@c-24-62-248-154.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 19:57 -!- surja795 [~surja795@c-24-62-248-154.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 19:58 -!- surja795 [~surja795@c-24-62-248-154.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 20:00 -!- langseth1 [~langseth@139.28.218.198] has quit [] 20:02 -!- kristapsk [~KK@gateway/tor-sasl/kristapsk] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 20:02 -!- kristapsk_ [~KK@gateway/tor-sasl/kristapsk] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 20:10 < luke-jr> I wonder if #19097 warrants a rc3 :x 20:10 < gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19097 | qt: Add missing QPainterPath include by achow101 · Pull Request #19097 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub 20:11 < luke-jr> certainly could use a backport at least 20:12 < fanquake> Given that 5.15 only came out 3 days ago, I don't think there's any need to delay 0.20.0 20:12 < fanquake> Can backport into 0.20.1 20:13 < luke-jr> lots of other sw needs fixing too, so at least we're not that unusual in this 20:13 < luke-jr> (been idly noticing it dealt with as Gentoo rolls it out) 20:21 -!- hoobop1 [~hoobop@139.28.218.198] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 20:31 -!- surja795 [~surja795@c-24-62-248-154.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 20:36 -!- surja795 [~surja795@c-24-62-248-154.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 20:41 -!- surja795 [~surja795@c-24-62-248-154.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 20:51 -!- proofofkeags [~proofofke@71-218-146-180.hlrn.qwest.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 20:52 -!- proofofkeags [~proofofke@71-218-146-180.hlrn.qwest.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 20:55 -!- Lessie75Barton [~Lessie75B@static.57.1.216.95.clients.your-server.de] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 20:56 -!- proofofkeags [~proofofke@71-218-146-180.hlrn.qwest.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 21:01 -!- Relis [~Relis@cpc96290-lewi18-2-0-cust910.2-4.cable.virginm.net] has quit [Quit: This computer has gone to sleep] 21:02 -!- vasild [~vd@gateway/tor-sasl/vasild] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 21:03 -!- vasild [~vd@gateway/tor-sasl/vasild] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 21:23 -!- vasild [~vd@gateway/tor-sasl/vasild] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 21:29 -!- Lessie75Barton [~Lessie75B@static.57.1.216.95.clients.your-server.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 21:30 -!- vasild [~vd@gateway/tor-sasl/vasild] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 21:34 -!- joerodgers [~joerodger@c-76-125-83-191.hsd1.ar.comcast.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 21:43 -!- luke-jr [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 21:44 -!- luke-jr [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 21:48 -!- mrostecki [~mrostecki@gateway/tor-sasl/mrostecki] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 21:48 -!- mrostecki [~mrostecki@gateway/tor-sasl/mrostecki] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 21:54 -!- mazout [~mazout@197.1.8.82] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 21:55 -!- mazout [~mazout@197.1.8.82] has left #bitcoin-core-dev [] 22:26 -!- ineedhelp [2578c064@37.120.192.100] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 22:34 -!- marcoagner [~user@2001:8a0:6a5f:a900:6d3e:1158:b50:97b6] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 22:59 -!- Highway61 [~Thunderbi@ip72-204-155-64.no.no.cox.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 23:00 -!- hoobop1 [~hoobop@139.28.218.198] has quit [] 23:09 -!- jarthur [~jarthur@2605:6000:1019:4971:5c3e:70ab:3ef0:551c] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 23:10 -!- jarthur [~jarthur@2605:6000:1019:4971:5c3e:70ab:3ef0:551c] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 23:17 -!- ineedhelp [2578c064@37.120.192.100] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 23:22 -!- Antonet [~Antonet@217.138.204.90] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 23:26 -!- troygiorshev [~troygiors@CPEdcef09a0ed55-CM0c473d74be00.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 23:27 -!- jarthur_ [~jarthur@cpe-66-68-134-212.austin.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 23:29 -!- jarthur [~jarthur@2605:6000:1019:4971:5c3e:70ab:3ef0:551c] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 23:34 -!- morcos [~morcos@gateway/tor-sasl/morcos] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 23:35 -!- morcos [~morcos@gateway/tor-sasl/morcos] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 23:55 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 23:55 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli pushed 3 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/adc143fc2b9a...5f75c5e7df14 23:55 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 73d8ef7 Hennadii Stepanov: qt: Add BitcoinUnits::formatWithPrivacy() function 23:55 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 8d75115 Hennadii Stepanov: qt: Add privacy feature to Overview page 23:55 < bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 5f75c5e Jonas Schnelli: Merge #16432: qt: Add privacy to the Overview page 23:55 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev [] 23:57 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 23:57 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli merged pull request #16432: qt: Add privacy to the Overview page (master...20190721-privacy) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16432 23:57 -!- bitcoin-git [~bitcoin-g@x0f.org] has left #bitcoin-core-dev [] --- Log closed Fri May 29 00:00:36 2020