<sdaftuar>
I was looking at the code coverage report for the PR I just opened (#31122), which seems really neat. One thing it flagged is a benchmark slowdown, which I can't reproduce locally -- is there a way to get further information about a reported slowdown?
<sdaftuar>
specifically in https://corecheck.dev/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls/31122, it reports MempoolEviction has slowed down, but for me I see no significant difference running on master versus my branch
<sdaftuar>
actually, maybe it's not saying there's a slowdown, just that there are more instructions being invoked? does that make sense that there could be a 141% instruction count increase, with no meaningful runtime change?
kevkevin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
ion- has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
kevkevin has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
ion- has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
kevkevin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
ion- has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
mcey_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
emcy__ has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
ion- has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
kevkevin has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
ion- has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
kevkevin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
kevkevin has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
kevkevin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
nordbjorn has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
nordbjorn has quit [Client Quit]
ion- has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
nordbjorn has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
nordbjorn has quit [Client Quit]
nordbjorn has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
nordbjorn has quit [Client Quit]
jonatack has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
jonatack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
ion- has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
Guest87 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
Guest87 has quit [Client Quit]
metta has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
emzy has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
<bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 77b2923 Sjors Provoost: Add Signet launch shortcut for Windows
<bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master cfd03de Sjors Provoost: Add Testnet4 launch shortcut for Windows
<bitcoin-git>
bitcoin/master 6848739 merge-script: Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#26334: Add Signet and testnet4 launch shortcuts for ...
<bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] fanquake merged pull request #26334: Add Signet and testnet4 launch shortcuts for Windows (master...2022/10/windows-signet) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/26334
oneeyedalien has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
vasild has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
vasild has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<stevenroose>
Thanks vasild :)
<stevenroose>
Feel free to take this as a loose piece of feedback that I would expect the presence of -port= to overwrite all the -bind options, so it was confusing to me. But maybe just fixing the docs for -bind= (which currently only mention a single interface IIRC), could be sufficient.
preimage has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
jonatack has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
<vasild>
stevenroose: can't have port= overwrite all bind= options because of the onion binding, i.e. can't have port=5555 result in bind=0.0.0.0:5555 bind=127.0.0.1:5555=onion
<vasild>
that would conflict on port 5555
jonatack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<vasild>
-bind=<addr>[:<port>][=onion]
<vasild>
Bind to given address and always listen on it (default: 0.0.0.0). Use
<vasild>
[host]:port notation for IPv6. Append =onion to tag any incoming
<vasild>
connections to that address and port as incoming Tor connections
<vasild>
it mentions "default: 0.0.0.0" and then in another place "default: 127.0.0.1:8334=onion"
<vasild>
stevenroose: by "fixing the docs for -bind=", do you mean to change it to have just one "default: ..."?
<vasild>
if yes, then it should be default: bind=0.0.0.0:port bind=[::]:port bind=127.0.0.1:8334=onion (where port is whatever is provided to -port= or 8333)
oneeyedalien has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
ion-_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
ion- has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
andrewtoth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
jon_atack has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
jonatack has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
Randolf has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
zeropoint has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
ion- has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
Randolf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<stevenroose>
vasild: -bind= doesn't mention there is a non-onion default bind, right? It only mentions the onion bind in full. The inline default: 0.0.0.0 is kinda random, I'd expect it to mention explicitly that there are two binds by default, one for clearnet at 0.0.0.0:8333, etc and one for onion on 127.0.0.1:8334=onion.
<stevenroose>
This might just be my intuition but I expected the -port=xxxx to overwrite all binds to just have one bind 0.0.0.0:xxxx
Randolf has quit [Quit: Leaving]
Murch[m] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
ion- has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
ion- has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
ion- has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
brunoerg has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<sipa>
stevenroose: so that would mean disabling the onion bind?
bugs_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
oneeyedalien has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
toshiba has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<bitcoin-git>
[bitcoin] fanquake opened pull request #31125: depends: add *FLAGS to gen_id (master...external_flags_plus_linker_cache) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31125
brunoerg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
toshiba has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
toshiba has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
Talkless has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
oneeyedalien has quit [Quit: Leaving]
brunoerg has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<stevenroose>
sipa: yeah, I guess.. wouldn't it be more clear if onion binds were separated? like -listen and -listenonion already is? -bindonion would be intuitive
<stevenroose>
(I also read something that -listenonion doesn't do what it sounds like, so I might be off on that analogy; though arguably it would make sense if the analogy held..)
<sipa>
stevenroose: you mean -portonion ?
<stevenroose>
I meant listenonion. You're suggesting having -bindonion and -portonion? Or -onionbind and -onionport, I mean vasild's suggestion that bind and port are kinda redundant makes sense. But if kept, having something that is equivalent for onion does make sense
<sipa>
ah ok
brunoerg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<stevenroose>
I'm sorry I don't have a concrete suggestion, just wanted to leave behind the piece of feedback that I couldn't figure out why my bitcoind's suddenly were bindin on another port than the -port I provided. I now added an explicit -bind instead of -port and it overrides the implicit default onion bind as well.
<sipa>
stevenroose: yeah, i didn't mean to argue; just trying to reason through the implications
brunoerg has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<padillac>
so here's the deal - patch the exploit or archive the repo. until uptime (remote orphan witchcraft) is solved, if it can be in the face of massive botnets - bitcoin can never, ever - ever - be a global reserve asset. it isn't bulletproof whatsoever. people are fucking religious about exploitable software and assume it's a magical thing when it's
<padillac>
just a program with an ez, public protocol
<padillac>
satoshi's last post on bitcointalk detailed that they were unable to solve dos - as am i - as the authority on blockchain d/dos
<padillac>
dead chat
Murch[m] has quit [Changing host]
Murch[m] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
brunoerg has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<padillac>
btw - read dates - mine was a year before that
<padillac>
you fumbled the ball darosior - you thought you knew what you were talking about, and you pretended to be smart for a moment, and the consequence is light shed on your intellectual disability
padillac was kicked from #bitcoin-core-dev by achow101 [Kindergarten is elsewhere!]
padillac has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
padillac was banned on #bitcoin-core-dev by achow101 [*!~padillac@user/padillac]
padillac was kicked from #bitcoin-core-dev by achow101 [Kindergarten is elsewhere!]
<darosior>
Getting mods to waste time kicking him is the only DoS he can pull
Talkless has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
___nick___ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
___nick___ has quit [Client Quit]
<laanwj>
hehe, this must be like the most boring channel to troll ever, that person has some stamina
___nick___ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
xxxxxxxx has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
xxxxxxxx has quit [Changing host]
xxxxxxxx has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<xxxxxxxx>
achow101 is a censor and someone with gender bending psychological chaos happening - lopping your genitalia off is pretty out there. i hope your fellow censorship cultists from blockstream/core (i'm banned from the repo - much decentralized) - you're a cocksucking retard and i hope you collapse
<xxxxxxxx>
i hope they're there for you
<xxxxxxxx>
during this crisis
<xxxxxxxx>
i'll flood this channel bruhz
<xxxxxxxx>
socks5 and automated acct registration with temp-mail.org api - over
<xxxxxxxx>
you retards will not disrespect me - and you clowns don't even know satoshi
<xxxxxxxx>
later
xxxxxxxx was banned on #bitcoin-core-dev by achow101 [*!~xxxxxxxx@user/xxxxxxxx]
xxxxxxxx was kicked from #bitcoin-core-dev by achow101 [Kindergarten is elsewhere!]
lukedashjr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<Murch[m]>
<padillac> "btw - read dates - mine was a..." <- According to the disclosure darosior linked, the fix to it was merged before CVE-2023-33297 was filed.
lukedashjr has left #bitcoin-core-dev [#bitcoin-core-dev]
ion- has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
johnny9dev584508 has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
blackhat1337 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
<blackhat1337>
"t-t-that was already discovered and patched" - why is it still unpatched for over a year? you guys either can't patch it or refuse to give me credit despite being referenced on nist.gov for it - which is dismissed mindlessly, despite it being an active exploit that i shared operational code for. none of you are hip to what's happening under the
<blackhat1337>
hood with bitcoin dos. otherwise they'd be patched. idiots.
<blackhat1337>
you literally have had a year to patch this unpatched exploit and you marked it as patched because you thought it was another exploit
blackhat1337 was banned on #bitcoin-core-dev by achow101 [*!~lukedashj@user/blackhat1337]
blackhat1337 was kicked from #bitcoin-core-dev by achow101 [Kindergarten is elsewhere!]