X-Git-Url: http://git.bitcoin.ninja/index.cgi?a=blobdiff_plain;f=lightning%2Fsrc%2Fln%2Fpayment_tests.rs;h=4c228a3226aeaa6ce89b5056623d3747785c24cb;hb=d0b8f455fe86d3e55231d35d35dd96693abe2049;hp=a433f796a3f9a167a2d23497e879e501049465c7;hpb=30b9d9fbeaa62537beb8d3ea0b2866703d0d7c92;p=rust-lightning diff --git a/lightning/src/ln/payment_tests.rs b/lightning/src/ln/payment_tests.rs index a433f796..4c228a32 100644 --- a/lightning/src/ln/payment_tests.rs +++ b/lightning/src/ln/payment_tests.rs @@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ use crate::routing::gossip::NodeId; #[cfg(feature = "std")] use { crate::util::time::tests::SinceEpoch, - std::time::{SystemTime, Duration} + std::time::{SystemTime, Instant, Duration} }; #[test] @@ -941,6 +941,7 @@ fn successful_probe_yields_event() { }, _ => panic!(), }; + assert!(!nodes[0].node.has_pending_payments()); } #[test] @@ -986,6 +987,7 @@ fn failed_probe_yields_event() { }, _ => panic!(), }; + assert!(!nodes[0].node.has_pending_payments()); } #[test] @@ -1040,6 +1042,7 @@ fn onchain_failed_probe_yields_event() { } } assert!(found_probe_failed); + assert!(!nodes[0].node.has_pending_payments()); } #[test] @@ -2554,3 +2557,165 @@ fn test_simple_partial_retry() { expect_pending_htlcs_forwardable!(nodes[2]); expect_payment_claimable!(nodes[2], payment_hash, payment_secret, amt_msat); } + +#[test] +#[cfg(feature = "std")] +fn test_threaded_payment_retries() { + // In the first version of the in-`ChannelManager` payment retries, retries weren't limited to + // a single thread and would happily let multiple threads run retries at the same time. Because + // retries are done by first calculating the amount we need to retry, then dropping the + // relevant lock, then actually sending, we would happily let multiple threads retry the same + // amount at the same time, overpaying our original HTLC! + let chanmon_cfgs = create_chanmon_cfgs(4); + let node_cfgs = create_node_cfgs(4, &chanmon_cfgs); + let node_chanmgrs = create_node_chanmgrs(4, &node_cfgs, &[None, None, None, None]); + let nodes = create_network(4, &node_cfgs, &node_chanmgrs); + + // There is one mitigating guardrail when retrying payments - we can never over-pay by more + // than 10% of the original value. Thus, we want all our retries to be below that. In order to + // keep things simple, we route one HTLC for 0.1% of the payment over channel 1 and the rest + // out over channel 3+4. This will let us ignore 99% of the payment value and deal with only + // our channel. + let chan_1_scid = create_announced_chan_between_nodes_with_value(&nodes, 0, 1, 10_000_000, 0).0.contents.short_channel_id; + create_announced_chan_between_nodes_with_value(&nodes, 1, 3, 10_000_000, 0); + let chan_3_scid = create_announced_chan_between_nodes_with_value(&nodes, 0, 2, 10_000_000, 0).0.contents.short_channel_id; + let chan_4_scid = create_announced_chan_between_nodes_with_value(&nodes, 2, 3, 10_000_000, 0).0.contents.short_channel_id; + + let amt_msat = 100_000_000; + let (_, payment_hash, _, payment_secret) = get_route_and_payment_hash!(&nodes[0], nodes[2], amt_msat); + #[cfg(feature = "std")] + let payment_expiry_secs = SystemTime::UNIX_EPOCH.elapsed().unwrap().as_secs() + 60 * 60; + #[cfg(not(feature = "std"))] + let payment_expiry_secs = 60 * 60; + let mut invoice_features = InvoiceFeatures::empty(); + invoice_features.set_variable_length_onion_required(); + invoice_features.set_payment_secret_required(); + invoice_features.set_basic_mpp_optional(); + let payment_params = PaymentParameters::from_node_id(nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id(), TEST_FINAL_CLTV) + .with_expiry_time(payment_expiry_secs as u64) + .with_features(invoice_features); + let mut route_params = RouteParameters { + payment_params, + final_value_msat: amt_msat, + final_cltv_expiry_delta: TEST_FINAL_CLTV, + }; + + let mut route = Route { + paths: vec![ + vec![RouteHop { + pubkey: nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id(), + node_features: nodes[1].node.node_features(), + short_channel_id: chan_1_scid, + channel_features: nodes[1].node.channel_features(), + fee_msat: 0, + cltv_expiry_delta: 100, + }, RouteHop { + pubkey: nodes[3].node.get_our_node_id(), + node_features: nodes[2].node.node_features(), + short_channel_id: 42, // Set a random SCID which nodes[1] will fail as unknown + channel_features: nodes[2].node.channel_features(), + fee_msat: amt_msat / 1000, + cltv_expiry_delta: 100, + }], + vec![RouteHop { + pubkey: nodes[2].node.get_our_node_id(), + node_features: nodes[2].node.node_features(), + short_channel_id: chan_3_scid, + channel_features: nodes[2].node.channel_features(), + fee_msat: 100_000, + cltv_expiry_delta: 100, + }, RouteHop { + pubkey: nodes[3].node.get_our_node_id(), + node_features: nodes[3].node.node_features(), + short_channel_id: chan_4_scid, + channel_features: nodes[3].node.channel_features(), + fee_msat: amt_msat - amt_msat / 1000, + cltv_expiry_delta: 100, + }] + ], + payment_params: Some(PaymentParameters::from_node_id(nodes[2].node.get_our_node_id(), TEST_FINAL_CLTV)), + }; + nodes[0].router.expect_find_route(route_params.clone(), Ok(route.clone())); + + nodes[0].node.send_payment_with_retry(payment_hash, &Some(payment_secret), PaymentId(payment_hash.0), route_params.clone(), Retry::Attempts(0xdeadbeef)).unwrap(); + check_added_monitors!(nodes[0], 2); + let mut send_msg_events = nodes[0].node.get_and_clear_pending_msg_events(); + assert_eq!(send_msg_events.len(), 2); + send_msg_events.retain(|msg| + if let MessageSendEvent::UpdateHTLCs { node_id, .. } = msg { + // Drop the commitment update for nodes[2], we can just let that one sit pending + // forever. + *node_id == nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id() + } else { panic!(); } + ); + + // from here on out, the retry `RouteParameters` amount will be amt/1000 + route_params.final_value_msat /= 1000; + route.paths.pop(); + + let end_time = Instant::now() + Duration::from_secs(1); + macro_rules! thread_body { () => { { + // We really want std::thread::scope, but its not stable until 1.63. Until then, we get unsafe. + let node_ref = NodePtr::from_node(&nodes[0]); + move || { + let node_a = unsafe { &*node_ref.0 }; + while Instant::now() < end_time { + node_a.node.get_and_clear_pending_events(); // wipe the PendingHTLCsForwardable + // Ignore if we have any pending events, just always pretend we just got a + // PendingHTLCsForwardable + node_a.node.process_pending_htlc_forwards(); + } + } + } } } + let mut threads = Vec::new(); + for _ in 0..16 { threads.push(std::thread::spawn(thread_body!())); } + + // Back in the main thread, poll pending messages and make sure that we never have more than + // one HTLC pending at a time. Note that the commitment_signed_dance will fail horribly if + // there are HTLC messages shoved in while its running. This allows us to test that we never + // generate an additional update_add_htlc until we've fully failed the first. + let mut previously_failed_channels = Vec::new(); + loop { + assert_eq!(send_msg_events.len(), 1); + let send_event = SendEvent::from_event(send_msg_events.pop().unwrap()); + assert_eq!(send_event.msgs.len(), 1); + + nodes[1].node.handle_update_add_htlc(&nodes[0].node.get_our_node_id(), &send_event.msgs[0]); + commitment_signed_dance!(nodes[1], nodes[0], send_event.commitment_msg, false, true); + + // Note that we only push one route into `expect_find_route` at a time, because that's all + // the retries (should) need. If the bug is reintroduced "real" routes may be selected, but + // we should still ultimately fail for the same reason - because we're trying to send too + // many HTLCs at once. + let mut new_route_params = route_params.clone(); + previously_failed_channels.push(route.paths[0][1].short_channel_id); + new_route_params.payment_params.previously_failed_channels = previously_failed_channels.clone(); + route.paths[0][1].short_channel_id += 1; + nodes[0].router.expect_find_route(new_route_params, Ok(route.clone())); + + let bs_fail_updates = get_htlc_update_msgs!(nodes[1], nodes[0].node.get_our_node_id()); + nodes[0].node.handle_update_fail_htlc(&nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id(), &bs_fail_updates.update_fail_htlcs[0]); + // The "normal" commitment_signed_dance delivers the final RAA and then calls + // `check_added_monitors` to ensure only the one RAA-generated monitor update was created. + // This races with our other threads which may generate an add-HTLCs commitment update via + // `process_pending_htlc_forwards`. Instead, we defer the monitor update check until after + // *we've* called `process_pending_htlc_forwards` when its guaranteed to have two updates. + let last_raa = commitment_signed_dance!(nodes[0], nodes[1], bs_fail_updates.commitment_signed, false, true, false, true); + nodes[0].node.handle_revoke_and_ack(&nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id(), &last_raa); + + let cur_time = Instant::now(); + if cur_time > end_time { + for thread in threads.drain(..) { thread.join().unwrap(); } + } + + // Make sure we have some events to handle when we go around... + nodes[0].node.get_and_clear_pending_events(); // wipe the PendingHTLCsForwardable + nodes[0].node.process_pending_htlc_forwards(); + send_msg_events = nodes[0].node.get_and_clear_pending_msg_events(); + check_added_monitors!(nodes[0], 2); + + if cur_time > end_time { + break; + } + } +}