It's generally clearer to have simple hardcoded numbers with an
#if DEVELOPER around it, than apparent variables which aren't, really.
Interestingly, our pruning test was always kinda broken: we have to pass
two cycles, since l2 will refresh the channel once to avoid pruning.
Do the more obvious thing, and cut the network in half and check that
l1 and l3 time out.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
531c8d7d9b
In this one, we always send my_current_per_commitment_point, though it's
ignored. And we have our official feature numbers.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
As per BOLT02 #message-retransmission :
if `next_commitment_number` is 1 in both the `channel_reestablish` it sent and received:
- MUST retransmit `funding_locked`
Rather than reaching into data structures, let them register their own
callbacks. This avoids us having to expose "memleak_remove_xxx"
functions, and call them manually.
Under the hood, this is done by having a specially-named tal child of
the thing we want to assist, containing the callback.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
This removes the WIRE_FINAL_EXPIRY_TOO_SOON which leaked too much info,
and adds the blockheight to WIRE_INCORRECT_OR_UNKNOWN_PAYMENT_DETAILS.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
We currently send channel_announcement as soon as we and our
peer agree it's 6 blocks deep. In theory, our other peers might
not have seen that block yet though, so delay a little.
This is mitigated by two factors:
1. lnd will stash any "not ready yet" channel_announcements anyway.
2. c-lightning doesn't enforce the 6 depth minimum at all.
We should not rely on other nodes' generosity or laxity, however!
Next release, we can start enforcing the depth limit, and maybe stashing
ones which don't quite make it (or simply enforce depth 5, not 6).
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
The way we build transactions, serialize them, and compute fees depends on the
chain we are working on, so let's add some context to the transactions.
Signed-off-by: Christian Decker <decker.christian@gmail.com>
We track whether each change is affordable as we go;
test_channel_drainage got us so close that the difference mattered; we
hit an assert when we tried to commit the tx and realized we couldn't
afford it.
We should not be trying to add an HTLC if it will result in the funder
being unable to afford it on either the local *or remote* commitments.
Note the test still "fails" because it refuses to send the final
payment.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Subtracting both arbitrarily reduces our capacity, even for ourselves
since the routing logic uses this maximum.
I also changed 'advertise' to 'advertize', since we use american
spelling.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
@pm47 gave a great bug report showing c-lightning sending the same
UPDATE_FEE over and over, with the final surprise result being that we
blamed the peer for sending us multiple empty commits!
The spam is caused by us checking "are we at the desired feerate?" but
then if we can't afford the desired feerate, setting the feerate we
can afford, even though it's a duplicate. Doing the feerate cap before
we test if it's what we have already eliminates this.
But the empty commits was harder to find: it's caused by a heuristic in
channel_rcvd_revoke_and_ack:
```
/* For funder, ack also means time to apply new feerate locally. */
if (channel->funder == LOCAL &&
(channel->view[LOCAL].feerate_per_kw
!= channel->view[REMOTE].feerate_per_kw)) {
status_trace("Applying feerate %u to LOCAL (was %u)",
channel->view[REMOTE].feerate_per_kw,
channel->view[LOCAL].feerate_per_kw);
channel->view[LOCAL].feerate_per_kw
= channel->view[REMOTE].feerate_per_kw;
channel->changes_pending[LOCAL] = true;
}
```
We assume we never send duplicates, so we detect an otherwise-empty
change using the difference in feerates. If we don't set this flag,
we will get upset if we receive a commitment_signed since we consider
there to be no changes to commit.
This is actually hard to test: the previous commit adds a test which
spams update_fee and doesn't trigger this bug, because both sides
use the same "there's nothing outstanding" logic.
Fixes: #2701
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Keeping the uintmap ordering all the broadcastable messages is expensive:
130MB for the million-channels project. But now we delete obsolete entries
from the store, we can have the per-peer daemons simply read that sequentially
and stream the gossip itself.
This is the most primitive version, where all gossip is streamed;
successive patches will bring back proper handling of timestamp filtering
and initial_routing_sync.
We add a gossip_state field to track what's happening with our gossip
streaming: it's initialized in gossipd, and currently always set, but
once we handle timestamps the per-peer daemon may do it when the first
filter is sent.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Encapsulating the peer state was a win for lightningd; not surprisingly,
it's even more of a win for the other daemons, especially as we want
to add a little gossip information.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
We ask gossipd for the channel_update for the outgoing channel; any other
messages it sends us get queued for later processing.
But this is overzealous: we can shunt those msgs to the peer while
we're waiting. This fixes a nasty case where we have to handle
WIRE_GOSSIPD_NEW_STORE_FD messages by queuing the fd for later.
This then means that WIRE_GOSSIPD_NEW_STORE_FD can be handled
internally inside handle_gossip_msg(), since it's always dealt with
the same, simplifying all callers.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
1. Add remote_ann_node_sigs and remote_bitcoin_sigs fields in channel_init message;
2. Master add announcement signatures into channel_init message, and send this message to Channeld.
Channeld will initial the channel with this signatures when it reenables the channel.
Channeld sends announcement signatures to Master by this message.
When Channeld receive a new channel announcement msg, (After channel locking)it will sends announcement signatures to Master by this message.
Instead of reading the store ourselves, we can just send them an
offset. This saves gossipd a lot of work, putting it where it belongs
(in the daemon responsible for the specific peer).
MCP bench results:
store_load_msec:28509-31001(29206.6+/-9.4e+02)
vsz_kb:580004-580016(580006+/-4.8)
store_rewrite_sec:11.640000-12.730000(11.908+/-0.41)
listnodes_sec:1.790000-1.880000(1.83+/-0.032)
listchannels_sec:21.180000-21.950000(21.476+/-0.27)
routing_sec:2.210000-11.160000(7.126+/-3.1)
peer_write_all_sec:36.270000-41.200000(38.168+/-1.9)
Signficant savings in streaming gossip:
-peer_write_all_sec:48.160000-51.480000(49.608+/-1.1)
+peer_write_all_sec:35.780000-37.980000(36.43+/-0.81)
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
The spec says not to send a commitment_signed without any changes, but LND
does this. To understand why, you have to understand how LND works. I
haven't read the code, but I'm pretty sure it works like this:
1. lnd slows down to do garbage collection, because it's in Go.
2. When an alert timer goes off, noticing it's not making process, it
sends a twitter message to @roasbeef.
3. @roasbeef sshs into the user's machine and binary patches lnd to send
a commitment_signed message.
4. Unfortunately he works so fast that various laws of causality are broken,
meaning sometimes the commitment_signed is sent before any of thes
other things happen.
I'm fairly sure that this will stop as @roasbeef ages, or lnd introduces
some kind of causality enforcement fix.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Don't turn them to/from pubkeys implicitly. This means nodeids in the store
don't get converted, but bitcoin keys still do.
MCP results from 5 runs, min-max(mean +/- stddev):
store_load_msec:33934-35251(34531.4+/-5e+02)
vsz_kb:2637488
store_rewrite_sec:34.720000-35.130000(34.94+/-0.14)
listnodes_sec:1.020000-1.290000(1.146+/-0.086)
listchannels_sec:51.110000-58.240000(54.826+/-2.5)
routing_sec:30.000000-33.320000(30.726+/-1.3)
peer_write_all_sec:50.370000-52.970000(51.646+/-1.1)
MCP notable changes from previous patch (>1 stddev):
-store_load_msec:46184-47474(46673.4+/-4.5e+02)
+store_load_msec:33934-35251(34531.4+/-5e+02)
-vsz_kb:2638880
+vsz_kb:2637488
-store_rewrite_sec:46.750000-48.280000(47.512+/-0.51)
+store_rewrite_sec:34.720000-35.130000(34.94+/-0.14)
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
I tried to just do gossipd, but it was uncontainable, so this ended up being
a complete sweep.
We didn't get much space saving in gossipd, even though we should save
24 bytes per node.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
The `wally_tx_input`s do not keep track of their input value, which means we
need to track them ourselves if we try to sign these transactions at a later
point in time.
Signed-off-by: Christian Decker <decker.christian@gmail.com>
1. Rename channel_funding_locked to channel_funding_depth in
channeld/channel_wire.csv.
2. Add minimum_depth in struct channel in common/initial_channel.h and
change corresponding init function: new_initial_channel().
3. Add confirmation_needed in struct peer in channeld/channeld.c.
4. Rename channel_tell_funding_locked to channel_tell_depth.
5. Call channel_tell_depth even if depth < minimum, and still call
lockin_complete in channel_tell_depth, iff depth > minimum_depth.
6. channeld ignore the channel_funding_depth unless its >
minimum_depth(except to update billboard, and set
peer->confirmation_needed = minimum_depth - depth).
Basically we tell it that every field ending in '_msat' is a struct
amount_msat, and 'satoshis' is an amount_sat. The exceptions are
channel_update's fee_base_msat which is a u32, and
final_incorrect_htlc_amount's incoming_htlc_amt which is also a
'struct amount_msat'.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
As a side-effect of using amount_msat in gossipd/routing.c, we explicitly
handle overflows and don't need to pre-prune ridiculous-fee channels.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
LND seems to do this occasionally, though fixed in new versions. Workaround
in the meantime.
I tested this by hacking our code to send it prematurely, and this worked.
Fixes: #2219
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
This solves (or at least reduces probability of) a deadlock in channeld
when there is lot of gossip traffic, see issue #2286. That issue is
almost identical to #1943 (deadlock in openingd) and so is the fix.
Spurious errors were occuring around checking the provided
current commitment point from the peer on reconnect when
option_data_loss_protect is enabled. The problem was that
we were using an inaccurate measure to screen for which
commitment point to compare the peer's provided one to.
This fixes the problem with screening, plus makes our
data_loss test a teensy bit more robust.
Rusty Russell
trueptolemy
darosior
Christian Decker
Michael Schmoock
trueptolemy
Simon Vrouwe
lisa neigut