< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jb55 opened pull request #19866: RFC: eBPF Linux tracepoints (master...usdt-probes) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19866
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake opened pull request #19867: build: document and cleanup Qt hacks (master...document_remaining_sed) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19867
< fanquake> #hacking
< wumpus> qt haxx
< jnewbery> wumpus: #19854 is a fairly simple PR that looks RFM
< gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19854 | Avoid locking CTxMemPool::cs recursively in simple cases by hebasto · Pull Request #19854 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
< hebasto> jnewbery: did you see #19865 ?
< gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19865 | scripted-diff: Restore AssertLockHeld after #19668, remove LockAssertion by ryanofsky · Pull Request #19865 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
< wumpus> jnewbery: will take a look, thanks
< wumpus> amiti would like to help labeling issues and PRs, and to restart travis, everyone ok with addding her to the issues management group?
< jnewbery> ACK adding amiti
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] hebasto opened pull request #19868: build: Fix target name (master...200904-make) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19868
< jnewbery> hebasto: yes, I saw it. I don't have anything to add to what aj and you have already said
< hebasto> jnewbery: thanks
< gleb> It seems like we might connect to tried_collision while looking for a feeler?
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] naumenkogs opened pull request #19869: Better intervals between feelers (master...2020-09-feeler-time-fixes) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19869
< gleb> this pr is unrelated to my question above :)
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 7 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/a0a422c34cfd...99a8eb605180
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 9398077 Hennadii Stepanov: refactor: CTxMemPool::UpdateParent() requires CTxMemPool::cs lock
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 66e47e5 Hennadii Stepanov: refactor: CTxMemPool::UpdateChild() requires CTxMemPool::cs lock
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 7140b31 Hennadii Stepanov: refactor: CTxMemPool::ApplyDelta() requires CTxMemPool::cs lock
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj merged pull request #19854: Avoid locking CTxMemPool::cs recursively in simple cases (master...200901-mmx3) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19854
< jonatack> #19405 has 5 tested ACKs and user demand for the rpc to expose the data
< gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19405 | rpc, cli: add network in/out connections to `getnetworkinfo` and `-getinfo` by jonatack · Pull Request #19405 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
< jonatack> (organic acks fwiw, i did not actively ask anyone to review)
< wumpus> jonatack: thanks, will take a look
< jonatack> thanks wumpus
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonatack opened pull request #19870: doc: update PyZMQ installation instructions, ZeroMQ link (master...zmq-doc-fix) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19870
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake pushed 3 commits to 0.20: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/bf0dc356ac4a...30926997fa15
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/0.20 06f9c5c Suhas Daftuar: Add txids with non-standard inputs to reject filter
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/0.20 107cf15 Gregory Sanders: test addition of unknown segwit spends to txid reject filter
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/0.20 3092699 fanquake: Merge #19680: 0.20: Add txids with non-standard inputs to reject filter
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake merged pull request #19680: 0.20: Add txids with non-standard inputs to reject filter (0.20...2020-08-reject-unknown-wit-0.20) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19680
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 4 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/99a8eb605180...23d3ae7accfc
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 1ab49b8 Jon Atack: Add in/out connections to rpc getnetworkinfo
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master d9cc13e Jon Atack: UNIX_EPOCH_TIME fixup in rpc getnettotals
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 581b343 Jon Atack: Add in/out connections to cli -getinfo
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj merged pull request #19405: rpc, cli: add network in/out connections to `getnetworkinfo` and `-getinfo` (master...in-and-out-connections) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19405
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] ariard opened pull request #19871: Clarify scope of eviction protection of outbound block-relay peers (master...2020-09-clarify-eviction-block-relay) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19871
< jnewbery> oops. I'm just realising that we should have aimed to merge #19606 before #19680 (so they're merged into v0.20 in the same order as in master)
< gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19606 | Backport wtxid relay to v0.20 by jnewbery · Pull Request #19606 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
< gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19680 | 0.20: Add txids with non-standard inputs to reject filter by sdaftuar · Pull Request #19680 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
< jnewbery> merging them in the opposite order just makes the commits a little bit more different from master and the backport a little harder to review
< wumpus> agree, merging them on the same order in 0.20 would make sense, this is always what i aim for too
< wumpus> maybe we could revert it for now
< jnewbery> I've rebased #19606 onto the new 0.20 head. Let's see what reviewers think.
< gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19606 | Backport wtxid relay to v0.20 by jnewbery · Pull Request #19606 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
< jnewbery> it only conflicts in a couple of places, but it's a little fiddly to get those bits right
< sdaftuar> wumpus: jnewbery: didn't marco propose the opposite order in a meeting a few weeks ago, so that if we cut another release on the 0.20 branch we could delay releasing wtxid-relay before 0.21?
< sdaftuar> while still getting the other fix out there
< sdaftuar> that was what i understood at any rate...
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] hebasto opened pull request #19872: 200904 mmx4 (master...200904-mmx4) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19872
< jnewbery> I think marco was advising caution rather than saying that 19680 should go in first: http://www.erisian.com.au/bitcoin-core-dev/log-2020-07-30.html#l-535
< jnewbery> I said at the time that it didn't matter which order they're merged in (and it doesn't - it's just a bit cleaner if they go in the same order as master)
< sdaftuar> i'm confused about how you could cut an 0.20.x release without wtxid-relay but with the other mitigation, if wtxid-relay were merged first?
< sdaftuar> i agree that doing things in the same order as master makes sense by default, just confused about how to reconcile that with marco's suggestion
< jnewbery> I think marco was saying that we shouldn't ship backported code in a v0.20 minor release before it's been released in master, not specifically that the other mitigation should go in a release first
< jnewbery> *been released in v0.21
< sdaftuar> ah, thanks for the clarification
< sipa> that was my understanding as well
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] luke-jr opened pull request #19873: [WIP] Flush dbcache early if system is under memory pressure (master...mempressure) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19873
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonatack opened pull request #19874: cli: degrade -getinfo gracefully for older servers (master...getinfo-handle-older-servers-gracefully) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19874
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fjahr opened pull request #19876: wallet: Fix wallet loading race during node start (master...wallet_race) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19876
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] amitiuttarwar opened pull request #19877: [test] Clarify rpc_net functional test (master...2020-09-rpcnet-fixes) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19877
< pinheadmz> combinerawtransaction doesn't seem to do entirely what I expect. I noticed the help message doesn't seem right (it says the param is an array of tx hashes, but I think it is actually an array of raw hex txs) so I was going to open a PR just for that, and write some tests for bonus points. But it doesn't really fully combine transactions like I'd expect (produce a nex tx with all the ins and outs of all the txs
< pinheadmz> that are passed to it) -- is this by design / I'm missing something?
< sipa> it's supposed to merge signatures
< sipa> not create coinjoins
< pinheadmz> so it only preserves the outputs of the first tx in the array
< sipa> the inputs/outputs of all transactions need to match
< sipa> it's so you can merge signatures for multiple parties for creating a multisig spend
< sipa> also, use psbt :)
< sipa> joinpsbts sounds more like what you're looking for
< pinheadmz> sure yeah - and actually I was going to use it to RBF by adding outputs to an existing TX
< pinheadmz> not coinjoin
< sipa> right, sure - combinerawtransaction doesn't do that
< sipa> all these RPCs are for transactions that are "decided" already, and all you're doing is gathering signatures
< pinheadmz> ok I'll open this PR just for the help message then
< sipa> joinpsbts is an exception in that regard
< pinheadmz> side note - sendmany and createrawtransaction don't like multiple outputs with the same address... is there any raw tx rpc that does?
< sipa> i don't think so
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] pinheadmz opened pull request #19878: rawtransaction: fix argument in combinerawtransaction help message (master...combinetx1) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19878
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] amitiuttarwar opened pull request #19879: [p2p] miscellaneous wtxid followups (master...2020-08-wtxid-unbroadcast-followups) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19879
< amiti> #19339 and #19794 might be RFM, 3 ACKs on tip each & CI failures look unrelated
< gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19339 | validation: re-delegate absurd fee checking from mempool to clients by gzhao408 · Pull Request #19339 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
< gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/19794 | p2p: Remove fGetAddr flag by mzumsande · Pull Request #19794 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub