Our handling of SIGPIPE was incoherent and inconsistent, and we had much
cut & paste between the daemons. They should *ALL* ignore SIGPIPE, and
much of the rest of the boilerplate can be shared, so should be.
Reported-by: @ZmnSCPxjFixes: #528
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
It's just a sha256_double, but importantly when we convert it to a
string (in type_to_string, which is used in logging) we use
bitcoin_blkid_to_hex() so it's reversed as people expect.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
It's just a sha256_double, but importantly when we convert it to a
string (in type_to_string, which is used in logging) we use
bitcoin_txid_to_hex() so it's reversed as people expect.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
We create a temporary tx which is a child of the real tx, for simplicity of
marshalling. That's OK.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
When gossipd sends a message, have a gossip_index. When it gets back a
peer, the current gossip_index is included, so it can know exactly where
it's up to.
Most of this is mechanical plumbing through openingd, channeld and closingd,
even though openingd and closingd don't (currently) read gossip, so their
gossip_index will be unchanged.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
All peers come from gossipd, and maintain an fd to talk to it. Sometimes
we hand the peer back, but to avoid a race, we always recreated it.
The race was that a daemon closed the gossip_fd, which made gossipd
forget the peer, then master handed the peer back to gossipd. We stop
the race by never closing the gossipfd, but hand it back to gossipd
for closing.
Now gossipd has to accept two fds, but the handling of peers is far
clearer.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
All the callers need to pass it in: currently channeld and openingd just
fake it by copying the payment point.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
In particular, the main daemon needs to pass it about (marshal/unmarshal)
but it won't need to actually use it after the next patch.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
We were sending a channeld message to onchaind, which was v. confusing
due to overlap. We make all the numbers distinct, which means we can
also add an assert() that it's valid for that daemon, which catches
such errors immediately.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
This change is really to allow us to have a --dev-fail-on-subdaemon-fail option
so we can handle failures from subdaemons generically.
It also neatens handling so we can have an explicit callback for "peer
did something wrong" (which matters if we want to close the channel in
that case).
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Rusty Russell
practicalswift