X-Git-Url: http://git.bitcoin.ninja/index.cgi?a=blobdiff_plain;f=lightning%2Fsrc%2Frouting%2Frouter.rs;h=add1726623541d11f328635b56ab3e6622ef76e4;hb=5c38e09b2616ee78ccaa257dc4502f2f373c4a9e;hp=dd18f1bc716af92748e500469a1edb3344a0451a;hpb=e0600e5b1edc5be57258a4b28963789dbc69b431;p=rust-lightning diff --git a/lightning/src/routing/router.rs b/lightning/src/routing/router.rs index dd18f1bc..add17266 100644 --- a/lightning/src/routing/router.rs +++ b/lightning/src/routing/router.rs @@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ use bitcoin::secp256k1::key::PublicKey; use ln::channelmanager::ChannelDetails; -use ln::features::{ChannelFeatures, NodeFeatures}; +use ln::features::{ChannelFeatures, InvoiceFeatures, NodeFeatures}; use ln::msgs::{DecodeError, ErrorAction, LightningError, MAX_VALUE_MSAT}; use routing::network_graph::{NetworkGraph, RoutingFees}; use util::ser::{Writeable, Readable}; @@ -47,6 +47,7 @@ pub struct RouteHop { pub cltv_expiry_delta: u32, } +/// (C-not exported) impl Writeable for Vec { fn write(&self, writer: &mut W) -> Result<(), ::std::io::Error> { (self.len() as u8).write(writer)?; @@ -62,6 +63,7 @@ impl Writeable for Vec { } } +/// (C-not exported) impl Readable for Vec { fn read(reader: &mut R) -> Result, DecodeError> { let hops_count: u8 = Readable::read(reader)?; @@ -312,6 +314,9 @@ fn compute_fees(amount_msat: u64, channel_fees: RoutingFees) -> Option { /// Gets a route from us (payer) to the given target node (payee). /// +/// If the payee provided features in their invoice, they should be provided via payee_features. +/// Without this, MPP will only be used if the payee's features are available in the network graph. +/// /// Extra routing hops between known nodes and the target will be used if they are included in /// last_hops. /// @@ -326,7 +331,7 @@ fn compute_fees(amount_msat: u64, channel_fees: RoutingFees) -> Option { /// The fees on channels from us to next-hops are ignored (as they are assumed to all be /// equal), however the enabled/disabled bit on such channels as well as the /// htlc_minimum_msat/htlc_maximum_msat *are* checked as they may change based on the receiving node. -pub fn get_route(our_node_id: &PublicKey, network: &NetworkGraph, payee: &PublicKey, first_hops: Option<&[&ChannelDetails]>, +pub fn get_route(our_node_id: &PublicKey, network: &NetworkGraph, payee: &PublicKey, payee_features: Option, first_hops: Option<&[&ChannelDetails]>, last_hops: &[&RouteHint], final_value_msat: u64, final_cltv: u32, logger: L) -> Result where L::Target: Logger { // TODO: Obviously *only* using total fee cost sucks. We should consider weighting by // uptime/success in using a node in the past. @@ -367,8 +372,43 @@ pub fn get_route(our_node_id: &PublicKey, network: &NetworkGraph, paye // 8. Choose the best route by the lowest total fee. // As for the actual search algorithm, - // we do a payee-to-payer Dijkstra's sorting by each node's distance from the payee - // plus the minimum per-HTLC fee to get from it to another node (aka "shitty A*"). + // we do a payee-to-payer pseudo-Dijkstra's sorting by each node's distance from the payee + // plus the minimum per-HTLC fee to get from it to another node (aka "shitty pseudo-A*"). + // + // We are not a faithful Dijkstra's implementation because we can change values which impact + // earlier nodes while processing later nodes. Specifically, if we reach a channel with a lower + // liquidity limit (via htlc_maximum_msat, on-chain capacity or assumed liquidity limits) then + // the value we are currently attempting to send over a path, we simply reduce the value being + // sent along the path for any hops after that channel. This may imply that later fees (which + // we've already tabulated) are lower because a smaller value is passing through the channels + // (and the proportional fee is thus lower). There isn't a trivial way to recalculate the + // channels which were selected earlier (and which may still be used for other paths without a + // lower liquidity limit), so we simply accept that some liquidity-limited paths may be + // de-preferenced. + // + // One potentially problematic case for this algorithm would be if there are many + // liquidity-limited paths which are liquidity-limited near the destination (ie early in our + // graph walking), we may never find a path which is not liquidity-limited and has lower + // proportional fee (and only lower absolute fee when considering the ultimate value sent). + // Because we only consider paths with at least 5% of the total value being sent, the damage + // from such a case should be limited, however this could be further reduced in the future by + // calculating fees on the amount we wish to route over a path, ie ignoring the liquidity + // limits for the purposes of fee calculation. + // + // Alternatively, we could store more detailed path information in the heap (targets, below) + // and index the best-path map (dist, below) by node *and* HTLC limits, however that would blow + // up the runtime significantly both algorithmically (as we'd traverse nodes multiple times) + // and practically (as we would need to store dynamically-allocated path information in heap + // objects, increasing malloc traffic and indirect memory access significantly). Further, the + // results of such an algorithm would likely be biased towards lower-value paths. + // + // Further, we could return to a faithful Dijkstra's algorithm by rejecting paths with limits + // outside of our current search value, running a path search more times to gather candidate + // paths at different values. While this may be acceptable, further path searches may increase + // runtime for little gain. Specifically, the current algorithm rather efficiently explores the + // graph for candidate paths, calculating the maximum value which can realistically be sent at + // the same time, remaining generic across different payment values. + // // TODO: There are a few tweaks we could do, including possibly pre-calculating more stuff // to use as the A* heuristic beyond just the cost to get one node further than the current // one. @@ -386,13 +426,29 @@ pub fn get_route(our_node_id: &PublicKey, network: &NetworkGraph, paye let mut targets = BinaryHeap::new(); //TODO: Do we care about switching to eg Fibbonaci heap? let mut dist = HashMap::with_capacity(network.get_nodes().len()); + // During routing, if we ignore a path due to an htlc_minimum_msat limit, we set this, + // indicating that we may wish to try again with a higher value, potentially paying to meet an + // htlc_minimum with extra fees while still finding a cheaper path. + let mut hit_minimum_limit; + // When arranging a route, we select multiple paths so that we can make a multi-path payment. - // Don't stop searching for paths when we think they're - // sufficient to transfer a given value aggregately. - // Search for higher value, so that we collect many more paths, - // and then select the best combination among them. + // We start with a path_value of the exact amount we want, and if that generates a route we may + // return it immediately. Otherwise, we don't stop searching for paths until we have 3x the + // amount we want in total across paths, selecting the best subset at the end. const ROUTE_CAPACITY_PROVISION_FACTOR: u64 = 3; let recommended_value_msat = final_value_msat * ROUTE_CAPACITY_PROVISION_FACTOR as u64; + let mut path_value_msat = final_value_msat; + + // Allow MPP only if we have a features set from somewhere that indicates the payee supports + // it. If the payee supports it they're supposed to include it in the invoice, so that should + // work reliably. + let allow_mpp = if let Some(features) = &payee_features { + features.supports_basic_mpp() + } else if let Some(node) = network.get_nodes().get(&payee) { + if let Some(node_info) = node.announcement_info.as_ref() { + node_info.features.supports_basic_mpp() + } else { false } + } else { false }; // Step (1). // Prepare the data we'll use for payee-to-payer search by @@ -482,8 +538,13 @@ pub fn get_route(our_node_id: &PublicKey, network: &NetworkGraph, paye // the absolute liquidity contribution is lowered, // thus increasing the number of potential channels to be selected. - // Derive the minimal liquidity contribution with a ratio of 20 (5%, rounded up). - let minimal_value_contribution_msat: u64 = (recommended_value_msat - already_collected_value_msat + 19) / 20; + // Derive the minimal liquidity contribution with a ratio of 20 (5%, rounded up) + // or 100% if we're not allowed to do multipath payments. + let minimal_value_contribution_msat: u64 = if allow_mpp { + (recommended_value_msat - already_collected_value_msat + 19) / 20 + } else { + final_value_msat + }; // Verify the liquidity offered by this channel complies to the minimal contribution. let contributes_sufficient_value = available_value_contribution_msat >= minimal_value_contribution_msat; @@ -500,8 +561,9 @@ pub fn get_route(our_node_id: &PublicKey, network: &NetworkGraph, paye // Since we're choosing amount_to_transfer_over_msat as maximum possible, it can // be only reduced later (not increased), so this channel should just be skipped // as not sufficient. - // TODO: Explore simply adding fee to hit htlc_minimum_msat - if contributes_sufficient_value && amount_to_transfer_over_msat >= $directional_info.htlc_minimum_msat { + if amount_to_transfer_over_msat < $directional_info.htlc_minimum_msat { + hit_minimum_limit = true; + } else if contributes_sufficient_value { // Note that low contribution here (limited by available_liquidity_msat) // might violate htlc_minimum_msat on the hops which are next along the // payment path (upstream to the payee). To avoid that, we recompute path @@ -688,12 +750,13 @@ pub fn get_route(our_node_id: &PublicKey, network: &NetworkGraph, paye // the further iterations of path finding. Also don't erase first_hop_targets. targets.clear(); dist.clear(); + hit_minimum_limit = false; // If first hop is a private channel and the only way to reach the payee, this is the only // place where it could be added. if first_hops.is_some() { if let Some(&(ref first_hop, ref features, ref outbound_capacity_msat)) = first_hop_targets.get(&payee) { - add_entry!(first_hop, *our_node_id, payee, dummy_directional_info, Some(outbound_capacity_msat / 1000), features.to_context(), 0, recommended_value_msat); + add_entry!(first_hop, *our_node_id, payee, dummy_directional_info, Some(outbound_capacity_msat / 1000), features.to_context(), 0, path_value_msat); } } @@ -706,7 +769,7 @@ pub fn get_route(our_node_id: &PublicKey, network: &NetworkGraph, paye // If not, targets.pop() will not even let us enter the loop in step 2. None => {}, Some(node) => { - add_entries_to_cheapest_to_target_node!(node, payee, 0, recommended_value_msat); + add_entries_to_cheapest_to_target_node!(node, payee, 0, path_value_msat); }, } @@ -725,7 +788,7 @@ pub fn get_route(our_node_id: &PublicKey, network: &NetworkGraph, paye // bit lazy here. In the future, we should pull them out via our // ChannelManager, but there's no reason to waste the space until we // need them. - add_entry!(first_hop, *our_node_id , hop.src_node_id, dummy_directional_info, Some(outbound_capacity_msat / 1000), features.to_context(), 0, recommended_value_msat); + add_entry!(first_hop, *our_node_id , hop.src_node_id, dummy_directional_info, Some(outbound_capacity_msat / 1000), features.to_context(), 0, path_value_msat); true } else { // In any other case, only add the hop if the source is in the regular network @@ -745,7 +808,7 @@ pub fn get_route(our_node_id: &PublicKey, network: &NetworkGraph, paye htlc_maximum_msat: hop.htlc_maximum_msat, fees: hop.fees, }; - add_entry!(hop.short_channel_id, hop.src_node_id, payee, directional_info, None::, ChannelFeatures::empty(), 0, recommended_value_msat); + add_entry!(hop.short_channel_id, hop.src_node_id, payee, directional_info, None::, ChannelFeatures::empty(), 0, path_value_msat); } } @@ -864,13 +927,28 @@ pub fn get_route(our_node_id: &PublicKey, network: &NetworkGraph, paye } } + if !allow_mpp { + // If we don't support MPP, no use trying to gather more value ever. + break 'paths_collection; + } + // Step (3). - // Stop either when recommended value is reached, - // or if during last iteration no new path was found. - // In the latter case, making another path finding attempt could not help, - // because we deterministically terminate the search due to low liquidity. + // Stop either when the recommended value is reached or if no new path was found in this + // iteration. + // In the latter case, making another path finding attempt won't help, + // because we deterministically terminated the search due to low liquidity. if already_collected_value_msat >= recommended_value_msat || !found_new_path { break 'paths_collection; + } else if found_new_path && already_collected_value_msat == final_value_msat && payment_paths.len() == 1 { + // Further, if this was our first walk of the graph, and we weren't limited by an + // htlc_minimum_msat, return immediately because this path should suffice. If we were + // limited by an htlc_minimum_msat value, find another path with a higher value, + // potentially allowing us to pay fees to meet the htlc_minimum on the new path while + // still keeping a lower total fee than this path. + if !hit_minimum_limit { + break 'paths_collection; + } + path_value_msat = recommended_value_msat; } } @@ -944,7 +1022,7 @@ pub fn get_route(our_node_id: &PublicKey, network: &NetworkGraph, paye // TODO: this could also be optimized by also sorting by feerate_per_sat_routed, // so that the sender pays less fees overall. And also htlc_minimum_msat. cur_route.sort_by_key(|path| { path.hops.iter().map(|hop| hop.channel_fees.proportional_millionths as u64).sum::() }); - let mut expensive_payment_path = cur_route.first_mut().unwrap(); + let expensive_payment_path = cur_route.first_mut().unwrap(); // We already dropped all the small channels above, meaning all the // remaining channels are larger than remaining overpaid_value_msat. // Thus, this can't be negative. @@ -959,21 +1037,27 @@ pub fn get_route(our_node_id: &PublicKey, network: &NetworkGraph, paye // Step (8). // Select the best route by lowest total fee. drawn_routes.sort_by_key(|paths| paths.iter().map(|path| path.get_total_fee_paid_msat()).sum::()); - let mut selected_paths = Vec::>::new(); + let mut selected_paths = Vec::>::new(); for payment_path in drawn_routes.first().unwrap() { selected_paths.push(payment_path.hops.iter().map(|payment_hop| payment_hop.route_hop.clone()).collect()); } + if let Some(features) = &payee_features { + for path in selected_paths.iter_mut() { + path.last_mut().unwrap().node_features = features.to_context(); + } + } + let route = Route { paths: selected_paths }; log_trace!(logger, "Got route: {}", log_route!(route)); - return Ok(route); + Ok(route) } #[cfg(test)] mod tests { use routing::router::{get_route, RouteHint, RoutingFees}; use routing::network_graph::{NetworkGraph, NetGraphMsgHandler}; - use ln::features::{ChannelFeatures, InitFeatures, NodeFeatures}; + use ln::features::{ChannelFeatures, InitFeatures, InvoiceFeatures, NodeFeatures}; use ln::msgs::{ErrorAction, LightningError, OptionalField, UnsignedChannelAnnouncement, ChannelAnnouncement, RoutingMessageHandler, NodeAnnouncement, UnsignedNodeAnnouncement, ChannelUpdate, UnsignedChannelUpdate}; use ln::channelmanager; @@ -1402,11 +1486,11 @@ mod tests { // Simple route to 2 via 1 - if let Err(LightningError{err, action: ErrorAction::IgnoreError}) = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], None, &Vec::new(), 0, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)) { + if let Err(LightningError{err, action: ErrorAction::IgnoreError}) = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], None, None, &Vec::new(), 0, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)) { assert_eq!(err, "Cannot send a payment of 0 msat"); } else { panic!(); } - let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], None, &Vec::new(), 100, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); + let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], None, None, &Vec::new(), 100, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); assert_eq!(route.paths[0].len(), 2); assert_eq!(route.paths[0][0].pubkey, nodes[1]); @@ -1441,13 +1525,14 @@ mod tests { outbound_capacity_msat: 100000, inbound_capacity_msat: 100000, is_live: true, + counterparty_forwarding_info: None, }]; - if let Err(LightningError{err, action: ErrorAction::IgnoreError}) = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], Some(&our_chans.iter().collect::>()), &Vec::new(), 100, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)) { + if let Err(LightningError{err, action: ErrorAction::IgnoreError}) = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], None, Some(&our_chans.iter().collect::>()), &Vec::new(), 100, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)) { assert_eq!(err, "First hop cannot have our_node_id as a destination."); } else { panic!(); } - let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], None, &Vec::new(), 100, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); + let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], None, None, &Vec::new(), 100, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); assert_eq!(route.paths[0].len(), 2); } @@ -1551,7 +1636,7 @@ mod tests { }); // Not possible to send 199_999_999, because the minimum on channel=2 is 200_000_000. - if let Err(LightningError{err, action: ErrorAction::IgnoreError}) = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], None, &Vec::new(), 199_999_999, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)) { + if let Err(LightningError{err, action: ErrorAction::IgnoreError}) = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], None, None, &Vec::new(), 199_999_999, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)) { assert_eq!(err, "Failed to find a path to the given destination"); } else { panic!(); } @@ -1570,7 +1655,7 @@ mod tests { }); // A payment above the minimum should pass - let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], None, &Vec::new(), 199_999_999, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); + let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], None, None, &Vec::new(), 199_999_999, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); assert_eq!(route.paths[0].len(), 2); } @@ -1647,7 +1732,8 @@ mod tests { excess_data: Vec::new() }); - let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], None, &Vec::new(), 60_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); + let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], + Some(InvoiceFeatures::known()), None, &Vec::new(), 60_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); // Overpay fees to hit htlc_minimum_msat. let overpaid_fees = route.paths[0][0].fee_msat + route.paths[1][0].fee_msat; // TODO: this could be better balanced to overpay 10k and not 15k. @@ -1692,14 +1778,16 @@ mod tests { excess_data: Vec::new() }); - let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], None, &Vec::new(), 60_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); + let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], + Some(InvoiceFeatures::known()), None, &Vec::new(), 60_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); // Fine to overpay for htlc_minimum_msat if it allows us to save fee. assert_eq!(route.paths.len(), 1); assert_eq!(route.paths[0][0].short_channel_id, 12); let fees = route.paths[0][0].fee_msat; assert_eq!(fees, 5_000); - let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], None, &Vec::new(), 50_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); + let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], + Some(InvoiceFeatures::known()), None, &Vec::new(), 50_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); // Not fine to overpay for htlc_minimum_msat if it requires paying more than fee on // the other channel. assert_eq!(route.paths.len(), 1); @@ -1740,7 +1828,7 @@ mod tests { }); // If all the channels require some features we don't understand, route should fail - if let Err(LightningError{err, action: ErrorAction::IgnoreError}) = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], None, &Vec::new(), 100, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)) { + if let Err(LightningError{err, action: ErrorAction::IgnoreError}) = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], None, None, &Vec::new(), 100, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)) { assert_eq!(err, "Failed to find a path to the given destination"); } else { panic!(); } @@ -1755,8 +1843,9 @@ mod tests { outbound_capacity_msat: 250_000_000, inbound_capacity_msat: 0, is_live: true, + counterparty_forwarding_info: None, }]; - let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], Some(&our_chans.iter().collect::>()), &Vec::new(), 100, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); + let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], None, Some(&our_chans.iter().collect::>()), &Vec::new(), 100, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); assert_eq!(route.paths[0].len(), 2); assert_eq!(route.paths[0][0].pubkey, nodes[7]); @@ -1787,7 +1876,7 @@ mod tests { add_or_update_node(&net_graph_msg_handler, &secp_ctx, &privkeys[7], unknown_features.clone(), 1); // If all nodes require some features we don't understand, route should fail - if let Err(LightningError{err, action: ErrorAction::IgnoreError}) = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], None, &Vec::new(), 100, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)) { + if let Err(LightningError{err, action: ErrorAction::IgnoreError}) = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], None, None, &Vec::new(), 100, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)) { assert_eq!(err, "Failed to find a path to the given destination"); } else { panic!(); } @@ -1802,8 +1891,9 @@ mod tests { outbound_capacity_msat: 250_000_000, inbound_capacity_msat: 0, is_live: true, + counterparty_forwarding_info: None, }]; - let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], Some(&our_chans.iter().collect::>()), &Vec::new(), 100, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); + let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], None, Some(&our_chans.iter().collect::>()), &Vec::new(), 100, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); assert_eq!(route.paths[0].len(), 2); assert_eq!(route.paths[0][0].pubkey, nodes[7]); @@ -1831,7 +1921,7 @@ mod tests { let (_, our_id, _, nodes) = get_nodes(&secp_ctx); // Route to 1 via 2 and 3 because our channel to 1 is disabled - let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[0], None, &Vec::new(), 100, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); + let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[0], None, None, &Vec::new(), 100, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); assert_eq!(route.paths[0].len(), 3); assert_eq!(route.paths[0][0].pubkey, nodes[1]); @@ -1866,8 +1956,9 @@ mod tests { outbound_capacity_msat: 250_000_000, inbound_capacity_msat: 0, is_live: true, + counterparty_forwarding_info: None, }]; - let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], Some(&our_chans.iter().collect::>()), &Vec::new(), 100, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); + let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], None, Some(&our_chans.iter().collect::>()), &Vec::new(), 100, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); assert_eq!(route.paths[0].len(), 2); assert_eq!(route.paths[0][0].pubkey, nodes[7]); @@ -1940,12 +2031,12 @@ mod tests { let mut invalid_last_hops = last_hops(&nodes); invalid_last_hops.push(invalid_last_hop); { - if let Err(LightningError{err, action: ErrorAction::IgnoreError}) = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[6], None, &invalid_last_hops.iter().collect::>(), 100, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)) { + if let Err(LightningError{err, action: ErrorAction::IgnoreError}) = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[6], None, None, &invalid_last_hops.iter().collect::>(), 100, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)) { assert_eq!(err, "Last hop cannot have a payee as a source."); } else { panic!(); } } - let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[6], None, &last_hops(&nodes).iter().collect::>(), 100, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); + let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[6], None, None, &last_hops(&nodes).iter().collect::>(), 100, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); assert_eq!(route.paths[0].len(), 5); assert_eq!(route.paths[0][0].pubkey, nodes[1]); @@ -2002,9 +2093,10 @@ mod tests { outbound_capacity_msat: 250_000_000, inbound_capacity_msat: 0, is_live: true, + counterparty_forwarding_info: None, }]; let mut last_hops = last_hops(&nodes); - let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[6], Some(&our_chans.iter().collect::>()), &last_hops.iter().collect::>(), 100, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); + let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[6], None, Some(&our_chans.iter().collect::>()), &last_hops.iter().collect::>(), 100, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); assert_eq!(route.paths[0].len(), 2); assert_eq!(route.paths[0][0].pubkey, nodes[3]); @@ -2024,7 +2116,7 @@ mod tests { last_hops[0].fees.base_msat = 1000; // Revert to via 6 as the fee on 8 goes up - let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[6], None, &last_hops.iter().collect::>(), 100, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); + let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[6], None, None, &last_hops.iter().collect::>(), 100, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); assert_eq!(route.paths[0].len(), 4); assert_eq!(route.paths[0][0].pubkey, nodes[1]); @@ -2058,7 +2150,7 @@ mod tests { assert_eq!(route.paths[0][3].channel_features.le_flags(), &Vec::::new()); // We can't learn any flags from invoices, sadly // ...but still use 8 for larger payments as 6 has a variable feerate - let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[6], None, &last_hops.iter().collect::>(), 2000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); + let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[6], None, None, &last_hops.iter().collect::>(), 2000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); assert_eq!(route.paths[0].len(), 5); assert_eq!(route.paths[0][0].pubkey, nodes[1]); @@ -2130,8 +2222,9 @@ mod tests { outbound_capacity_msat: 100000, inbound_capacity_msat: 100000, is_live: true, + counterparty_forwarding_info: None, }]; - let route = get_route(&source_node_id, &NetworkGraph::new(genesis_block(Network::Testnet).header.block_hash()), &target_node_id, Some(&our_chans.iter().collect::>()), &last_hops.iter().collect::>(), 100, 42, Arc::new(test_utils::TestLogger::new())).unwrap(); + let route = get_route(&source_node_id, &NetworkGraph::new(genesis_block(Network::Testnet).header.block_hash()), &target_node_id, None, Some(&our_chans.iter().collect::>()), &last_hops.iter().collect::>(), 100, 42, Arc::new(test_utils::TestLogger::new())).unwrap(); assert_eq!(route.paths[0].len(), 2); @@ -2218,14 +2311,16 @@ mod tests { { // Attempt to route more than available results in a failure. - if let Err(LightningError{err, action: ErrorAction::IgnoreError}) = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], None, &Vec::new(), 250_000_001, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)) { + if let Err(LightningError{err, action: ErrorAction::IgnoreError}) = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], + Some(InvoiceFeatures::known()), None, &Vec::new(), 250_000_001, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)) { assert_eq!(err, "Failed to find a sufficient route to the given destination"); } else { panic!(); } } { // Now, attempt to route an exact amount we have should be fine. - let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], None, &Vec::new(), 250_000_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); + let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], + Some(InvoiceFeatures::known()), None, &Vec::new(), 250_000_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); assert_eq!(route.paths.len(), 1); let path = route.paths.last().unwrap(); assert_eq!(path.len(), 2); @@ -2259,18 +2354,21 @@ mod tests { outbound_capacity_msat: 200_000_000, inbound_capacity_msat: 0, is_live: true, + counterparty_forwarding_info: None, }]; { // Attempt to route more than available results in a failure. - if let Err(LightningError{err, action: ErrorAction::IgnoreError}) = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], Some(&our_chans.iter().collect::>()), &Vec::new(), 200_000_001, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)) { + if let Err(LightningError{err, action: ErrorAction::IgnoreError}) = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], + Some(InvoiceFeatures::known()), Some(&our_chans.iter().collect::>()), &Vec::new(), 200_000_001, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)) { assert_eq!(err, "Failed to find a sufficient route to the given destination"); } else { panic!(); } } { // Now, attempt to route an exact amount we have should be fine. - let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], Some(&our_chans.iter().collect::>()), &Vec::new(), 200_000_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); + let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], + Some(InvoiceFeatures::known()), Some(&our_chans.iter().collect::>()), &Vec::new(), 200_000_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); assert_eq!(route.paths.len(), 1); let path = route.paths.last().unwrap(); assert_eq!(path.len(), 2); @@ -2309,14 +2407,16 @@ mod tests { { // Attempt to route more than available results in a failure. - if let Err(LightningError{err, action: ErrorAction::IgnoreError}) = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], None, &Vec::new(), 15_001, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)) { + if let Err(LightningError{err, action: ErrorAction::IgnoreError}) = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], + Some(InvoiceFeatures::known()), None, &Vec::new(), 15_001, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)) { assert_eq!(err, "Failed to find a sufficient route to the given destination"); } else { panic!(); } } { // Now, attempt to route an exact amount we have should be fine. - let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], None, &Vec::new(), 15_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); + let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], + Some(InvoiceFeatures::known()), None, &Vec::new(), 15_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); assert_eq!(route.paths.len(), 1); let path = route.paths.last().unwrap(); assert_eq!(path.len(), 2); @@ -2378,14 +2478,16 @@ mod tests { { // Attempt to route more than available results in a failure. - if let Err(LightningError{err, action: ErrorAction::IgnoreError}) = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], None, &Vec::new(), 15_001, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)) { + if let Err(LightningError{err, action: ErrorAction::IgnoreError}) = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], + Some(InvoiceFeatures::known()), None, &Vec::new(), 15_001, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)) { assert_eq!(err, "Failed to find a sufficient route to the given destination"); } else { panic!(); } } { // Now, attempt to route an exact amount we have should be fine. - let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], None, &Vec::new(), 15_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); + let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], + Some(InvoiceFeatures::known()), None, &Vec::new(), 15_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); assert_eq!(route.paths.len(), 1); let path = route.paths.last().unwrap(); assert_eq!(path.len(), 2); @@ -2409,14 +2511,16 @@ mod tests { { // Attempt to route more than available results in a failure. - if let Err(LightningError{err, action: ErrorAction::IgnoreError}) = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], None, &Vec::new(), 10_001, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)) { + if let Err(LightningError{err, action: ErrorAction::IgnoreError}) = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], + Some(InvoiceFeatures::known()), None, &Vec::new(), 10_001, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)) { assert_eq!(err, "Failed to find a sufficient route to the given destination"); } else { panic!(); } } { // Now, attempt to route an exact amount we have should be fine. - let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], None, &Vec::new(), 10_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); + let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], + Some(InvoiceFeatures::known()), None, &Vec::new(), 10_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); assert_eq!(route.paths.len(), 1); let path = route.paths.last().unwrap(); assert_eq!(path.len(), 2); @@ -2515,14 +2619,16 @@ mod tests { }); { // Attempt to route more than available results in a failure. - if let Err(LightningError{err, action: ErrorAction::IgnoreError}) = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[3], None, &Vec::new(), 60_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)) { + if let Err(LightningError{err, action: ErrorAction::IgnoreError}) = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[3], + Some(InvoiceFeatures::known()), None, &Vec::new(), 60_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)) { assert_eq!(err, "Failed to find a sufficient route to the given destination"); } else { panic!(); } } { // Now, attempt to route 49 sats (just a bit below the capacity). - let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[3], None, &Vec::new(), 49_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); + let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[3], + Some(InvoiceFeatures::known()), None, &Vec::new(), 49_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); assert_eq!(route.paths.len(), 1); let mut total_amount_paid_msat = 0; for path in &route.paths { @@ -2535,7 +2641,8 @@ mod tests { { // Attempt to route an exact amount is also fine - let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[3], None, &Vec::new(), 50_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); + let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[3], + Some(InvoiceFeatures::known()), None, &Vec::new(), 50_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); assert_eq!(route.paths.len(), 1); let mut total_amount_paid_msat = 0; for path in &route.paths { @@ -2579,7 +2686,7 @@ mod tests { }); { - let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], None, &Vec::new(), 50_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); + let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], None, None, &Vec::new(), 50_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); assert_eq!(route.paths.len(), 1); let mut total_amount_paid_msat = 0; for path in &route.paths { @@ -2686,7 +2793,8 @@ mod tests { { // Attempt to route more than available results in a failure. - if let Err(LightningError{err, action: ErrorAction::IgnoreError}) = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], None, &Vec::new(), 300_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)) { + if let Err(LightningError{err, action: ErrorAction::IgnoreError}) = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), + &nodes[2], Some(InvoiceFeatures::known()), None, &Vec::new(), 300_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)) { assert_eq!(err, "Failed to find a sufficient route to the given destination"); } else { panic!(); } } @@ -2694,7 +2802,8 @@ mod tests { { // Now, attempt to route 250 sats (just a bit below the capacity). // Our algorithm should provide us with these 3 paths. - let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], None, &Vec::new(), 250_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); + let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], + Some(InvoiceFeatures::known()), None, &Vec::new(), 250_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); assert_eq!(route.paths.len(), 3); let mut total_amount_paid_msat = 0; for path in &route.paths { @@ -2707,7 +2816,8 @@ mod tests { { // Attempt to route an exact amount is also fine - let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], None, &Vec::new(), 290_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); + let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], + Some(InvoiceFeatures::known()), None, &Vec::new(), 290_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); assert_eq!(route.paths.len(), 3); let mut total_amount_paid_msat = 0; for path in &route.paths { @@ -2857,7 +2967,8 @@ mod tests { { // Attempt to route more than available results in a failure. - if let Err(LightningError{err, action: ErrorAction::IgnoreError}) = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[3], None, &Vec::new(), 350_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)) { + if let Err(LightningError{err, action: ErrorAction::IgnoreError}) = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[3], + Some(InvoiceFeatures::known()), None, &Vec::new(), 350_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)) { assert_eq!(err, "Failed to find a sufficient route to the given destination"); } else { panic!(); } } @@ -2865,7 +2976,8 @@ mod tests { { // Now, attempt to route 300 sats (exact amount we can route). // Our algorithm should provide us with these 3 paths, 100 sats each. - let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[3], None, &Vec::new(), 300_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); + let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[3], + Some(InvoiceFeatures::known()), None, &Vec::new(), 300_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); assert_eq!(route.paths.len(), 3); let mut total_amount_paid_msat = 0; @@ -3021,7 +3133,8 @@ mod tests { { // Now, attempt to route 180 sats. // Our algorithm should provide us with these 2 paths. - let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[3], None, &Vec::new(), 180_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); + let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[3], + Some(InvoiceFeatures::known()), None, &Vec::new(), 180_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); assert_eq!(route.paths.len(), 2); let mut total_value_transferred_msat = 0; @@ -3186,14 +3299,16 @@ mod tests { { // Attempt to route more than available results in a failure. - if let Err(LightningError{err, action: ErrorAction::IgnoreError}) = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[3], None, &Vec::new(), 210_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)) { + if let Err(LightningError{err, action: ErrorAction::IgnoreError}) = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[3], + Some(InvoiceFeatures::known()), None, &Vec::new(), 210_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)) { assert_eq!(err, "Failed to find a sufficient route to the given destination"); } else { panic!(); } } { // Now, attempt to route 200 sats (exact amount we can route). - let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[3], None, &Vec::new(), 200_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); + let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[3], + Some(InvoiceFeatures::known()), None, &Vec::new(), 200_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); assert_eq!(route.paths.len(), 2); let mut total_amount_paid_msat = 0; @@ -3302,7 +3417,8 @@ mod tests { { // Attempt to route more than available results in a failure. - if let Err(LightningError{err, action: ErrorAction::IgnoreError}) = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], None, &Vec::new(), 150_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)) { + if let Err(LightningError{err, action: ErrorAction::IgnoreError}) = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], + Some(InvoiceFeatures::known()), None, &Vec::new(), 150_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)) { assert_eq!(err, "Failed to find a sufficient route to the given destination"); } else { panic!(); } } @@ -3310,7 +3426,8 @@ mod tests { { // Now, attempt to route 125 sats (just a bit below the capacity of 3 channels). // Our algorithm should provide us with these 3 paths. - let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], None, &Vec::new(), 125_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); + let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], + Some(InvoiceFeatures::known()), None, &Vec::new(), 125_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); assert_eq!(route.paths.len(), 3); let mut total_amount_paid_msat = 0; for path in &route.paths { @@ -3323,7 +3440,8 @@ mod tests { { // Attempt to route without the last small cheap channel - let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], None, &Vec::new(), 90_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); + let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], + Some(InvoiceFeatures::known()), None, &Vec::new(), 90_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); assert_eq!(route.paths.len(), 2); let mut total_amount_paid_msat = 0; for path in &route.paths { @@ -3335,4 +3453,138 @@ mod tests { } } + #[test] + fn exact_fee_liquidity_limit() { + // Test that if, while walking the graph, we find a hop that has exactly enough liquidity + // for us, including later hop fees, we take it. In the first version of our MPP algorithm + // we calculated fees on a higher value, resulting in us ignoring such paths. + let (secp_ctx, net_graph_msg_handler, _, logger) = build_graph(); + let (our_privkey, our_id, _, nodes) = get_nodes(&secp_ctx); + + // We modify the graph to set the htlc_maximum of channel 2 to below the value we wish to + // send. + update_channel(&net_graph_msg_handler, &secp_ctx, &our_privkey, UnsignedChannelUpdate { + chain_hash: genesis_block(Network::Testnet).header.block_hash(), + short_channel_id: 2, + timestamp: 2, + flags: 0, + cltv_expiry_delta: 0, + htlc_minimum_msat: 0, + htlc_maximum_msat: OptionalField::Present(85_000), + fee_base_msat: 0, + fee_proportional_millionths: 0, + excess_data: Vec::new() + }); + + update_channel(&net_graph_msg_handler, &secp_ctx, &our_privkey, UnsignedChannelUpdate { + chain_hash: genesis_block(Network::Testnet).header.block_hash(), + short_channel_id: 12, + timestamp: 2, + flags: 0, + cltv_expiry_delta: (4 << 8) | 1, + htlc_minimum_msat: 0, + htlc_maximum_msat: OptionalField::Present(270_000), + fee_base_msat: 0, + fee_proportional_millionths: 1000000, + excess_data: Vec::new() + }); + + { + // Now, attempt to route 90 sats, which is exactly 90 sats at the last hop, plus the + // 200% fee charged channel 13 in the 1-to-2 direction. + let route = get_route(&our_id, &net_graph_msg_handler.network_graph.read().unwrap(), &nodes[2], None, None, &Vec::new(), 90_000, 42, Arc::clone(&logger)).unwrap(); + assert_eq!(route.paths.len(), 1); + assert_eq!(route.paths[0].len(), 2); + + assert_eq!(route.paths[0][0].pubkey, nodes[7]); + assert_eq!(route.paths[0][0].short_channel_id, 12); + assert_eq!(route.paths[0][0].fee_msat, 90_000*2); + assert_eq!(route.paths[0][0].cltv_expiry_delta, (13 << 8) | 1); + assert_eq!(route.paths[0][0].node_features.le_flags(), &id_to_feature_flags(8)); + assert_eq!(route.paths[0][0].channel_features.le_flags(), &id_to_feature_flags(12)); + + assert_eq!(route.paths[0][1].pubkey, nodes[2]); + assert_eq!(route.paths[0][1].short_channel_id, 13); + assert_eq!(route.paths[0][1].fee_msat, 90_000); + assert_eq!(route.paths[0][1].cltv_expiry_delta, 42); + assert_eq!(route.paths[0][1].node_features.le_flags(), &id_to_feature_flags(3)); + assert_eq!(route.paths[0][1].channel_features.le_flags(), &id_to_feature_flags(13)); + } + } +} + +#[cfg(all(test, feature = "unstable"))] +mod benches { + use super::*; + use util::logger::{Logger, Record}; + + use std::fs::File; + use test::Bencher; + + struct DummyLogger {} + impl Logger for DummyLogger { + fn log(&self, _record: &Record) {} + } + + #[bench] + fn generate_routes(bench: &mut Bencher) { + let mut d = File::open("net_graph-2021-02-12.bin").expect("Please fetch https://bitcoin.ninja/ldk-net_graph-879e309c128-2020-02-12.bin and place it at lightning/net_graph-2021-02-12.bin"); + let graph = NetworkGraph::read(&mut d).unwrap(); + + // First, get 100 (source, destination) pairs for which route-getting actually succeeds... + let mut path_endpoints = Vec::new(); + let mut seed: usize = 0xdeadbeef; + 'load_endpoints: for _ in 0..100 { + loop { + seed *= 0xdeadbeef; + let src = graph.get_nodes().keys().skip(seed % graph.get_nodes().len()).next().unwrap(); + seed *= 0xdeadbeef; + let dst = graph.get_nodes().keys().skip(seed % graph.get_nodes().len()).next().unwrap(); + let amt = seed as u64 % 1_000_000; + if get_route(src, &graph, dst, None, None, &[], amt, 42, &DummyLogger{}).is_ok() { + path_endpoints.push((src, dst, amt)); + continue 'load_endpoints; + } + } + } + + // ...then benchmark finding paths between the nodes we learned. + let mut idx = 0; + bench.iter(|| { + let (src, dst, amt) = path_endpoints[idx % path_endpoints.len()]; + assert!(get_route(src, &graph, dst, None, None, &[], amt, 42, &DummyLogger{}).is_ok()); + idx += 1; + }); + } + + #[bench] + fn generate_mpp_routes(bench: &mut Bencher) { + let mut d = File::open("net_graph-2021-02-12.bin").expect("Please fetch https://bitcoin.ninja/ldk-net_graph-879e309c128-2020-02-12.bin and place it at lightning/net_graph-2021-02-12.bin"); + let graph = NetworkGraph::read(&mut d).unwrap(); + + // First, get 100 (source, destination) pairs for which route-getting actually succeeds... + let mut path_endpoints = Vec::new(); + let mut seed: usize = 0xdeadbeef; + 'load_endpoints: for _ in 0..100 { + loop { + seed *= 0xdeadbeef; + let src = graph.get_nodes().keys().skip(seed % graph.get_nodes().len()).next().unwrap(); + seed *= 0xdeadbeef; + let dst = graph.get_nodes().keys().skip(seed % graph.get_nodes().len()).next().unwrap(); + let amt = seed as u64 % 1_000_000; + if get_route(src, &graph, dst, Some(InvoiceFeatures::known()), None, &[], amt, 42, &DummyLogger{}).is_ok() { + path_endpoints.push((src, dst, amt)); + continue 'load_endpoints; + } + } + } + + // ...then benchmark finding paths between the nodes we learned. + let mut idx = 0; + bench.iter(|| { + let (src, dst, amt) = path_endpoints[idx % path_endpoints.len()]; + assert!(get_route(src, &graph, dst, Some(InvoiceFeatures::known()), None, &[], amt, 42, &DummyLogger{}).is_ok()); + idx += 1; + }); + } }