But only if we're actually going to change the feerate, otherwise we'd
log every time.
Suggested-by: @ZmnSCPxj
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Naively, this would be 250 satoshi per sipa, but it's not since bitcoind's
fee calculation was not rewritten to deal with weight, but instead bolted
on using vbytes.
The resulting calculations made me cry; I dried my tears on the thorns
of BUILD_ASSERT (I know that makes no sense, but bear with me here as I'm
trying not to swear at my bitcoind colleagues right now).
Fixes: #1194
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
This bug is a classic case of being lazy:
1. peer_accept_channel() allocated its return off the input message,
rather than taking an explicit allocation context. This concealed the
lifetime nature of the return.
2. The context for sanitize_error was the error itself, rather than the
more obvious tmpctx (connect_failed does not take).
The global tmpctx removes the "efficiency" excuse for grabbing a random
object to use as context, and is also nice and explicit.
All-the-hard-work-by: @ZmnSCPxj
This fixes the root cause of https://github.com/ElementsProject/lightning/issues/1212
where we deleted the payment because we wanted to retry, then retry failed
so we had an (old) HTLC without a matching payment. We then fed that
HTLC to onchaind, which tells us it's missing, and we try to fail the
payment and deref a NULL pointer.
Fixes: #1212
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Fixes: #1221
We were using `\x0` to match NUL chars in the input (on the
assumption that NUL chars are "impossible" for decent LFS-compliant
systems).
However `\x0` is a GNUism.
Use the `\n` and the newline character, which is supported by (most)
POSIX sed.
We would `block_map_add` inside `add_tip`, but we never
`block_map_del` inside `remove_tip`, which is dangerous as
we actually `tal_free` the block inside `remove_tip`.
Our CI did not reliably trap this problem since block
hashes are random and rerunning the `test_blockchaintrack`
often passed spuriously.
If we're going to simply take() a pointer, don't allocate it off a random
object. Using NULL makes our intent clear, particularly with allocating
packets we're going to take() onto a queue.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
This one is a bit more subtle than others: we can't just free it
inside the read_peer_msg() loop since we hand tmpctx in, so open-code
the two callers and it's clearer.
They're inside the only loops closingd has.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
ZmnSCPxj
Rusty Russell
practicalswift