We don't preserve detailed asset information at the moment, so provide a
way to convert from a sat to an amount_asset struct.
We also need a way to convert from an 'amount_asset' to a 'value' for
elements, which for explicit (i.e. non-blinded) asssets is a 0x01 prefix
plus the big-endian encoded value.
Our existing coin_moves tracking logic assumed that any tx we had an
input in belonged to *all* of our wallet (not a bad assumption as long
as there was no way to update a tx that spends our wallets)
Now that we've got `signpsbt` implemented, however, we need to be
careful about how we account for withdrawals. For now we do a best guess
at what the feerate is, and lump all of our spent outputs as a
'withdrawal' when it's impossible to disambiguate
It returns NULL, so you can simply `return fromwire_fail(...)`
if you want to return NULL in this case. Use that more.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
We did this originally because these types are referred to in the bolts, and we
had no way of injecting the correct include lines into those. Now we do, so
there's less excuse for this.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Currently the only source for amount_asset is the value getter on a tx output,
and we don't hand it too far around (mainly ignoring it if it isn't the
chain's main currency). Eventually we could bubble them up to the wallet, use
them to select outputs or actually support assets in the channels.
Since we don't hand them around too widely I thought it was ok for them to be
pass-by-value rather than having to allocate them and pass them around by
reference. They're just 41 bytes currently so the overhead should be ok.
Signed-off-by: Christian Decker <@cdecker>
I did a brief audit of tmpctx uses, and we do leak them in various
corner cases. Fortunely, all our daemons are based on some kind of
I/O loop, so it's fairly easy to clean a global tmpctx at that point.
This makes things a bit neater, and slightly more efficient, but also
clearer: I avoided creating a tmpctx in a few places because I didn't
want to add another allocation. With that penalty removed, I can use
it more freely and hopefully write clearer code.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
We alternated between using a sha256 and using a privkey, but there are
numerous places where we have a random 32 bytes which are neither.
This fixes many of them (plus, struct privkey is now defined in terms of
struct secret).
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
niftynei
Rusty Russell
Christian Decker
practicalswift