From: Matt Corallo Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2018 03:52:44 +0000 (-0400) Subject: Expand test_funding_peer_disconnect somewhat by being non-symmetric X-Git-Tag: v0.0.12~272^2~2 X-Git-Url: http://git.bitcoin.ninja/index.cgi?a=commitdiff_plain;h=4a697dbdf2ff4f14075ca4fb214ab4bdb0cf7610;p=rust-lightning Expand test_funding_peer_disconnect somewhat by being non-symmetric I thought I found a bug in one-side-funded-first reconnect, but seems I can't reproduce it here. Either way worth improving the test coverage. --- diff --git a/src/ln/channelmanager.rs b/src/ln/channelmanager.rs index a650c89bb..e1975c08d 100644 --- a/src/ln/channelmanager.rs +++ b/src/ln/channelmanager.rs @@ -6212,7 +6212,7 @@ mod tests { /// pending_htlc_adds includes both the holding cell and in-flight update_add_htlcs, whereas /// for claims/fails they are separated out. - fn reconnect_nodes(node_a: &Node, node_b: &Node, pre_all_htlcs: bool, pending_htlc_adds: (i64, i64), pending_htlc_claims: (usize, usize), pending_cell_htlc_claims: (usize, usize), pending_cell_htlc_fails: (usize, usize), pending_raa: (bool, bool)) { + fn reconnect_nodes(node_a: &Node, node_b: &Node, send_funding_locked: (bool, bool), pending_htlc_adds: (i64, i64), pending_htlc_claims: (usize, usize), pending_cell_htlc_claims: (usize, usize), pending_cell_htlc_fails: (usize, usize), pending_raa: (bool, bool)) { node_a.node.peer_connected(&node_b.node.get_our_node_id()); let reestablish_1 = get_chan_reestablish_msgs!(node_a, node_b); node_b.node.peer_connected(&node_a.node.get_our_node_id()); @@ -6245,7 +6245,7 @@ mod tests { (pending_htlc_adds.1 == 0 && pending_htlc_claims.1 == 0 && pending_cell_htlc_claims.1 == 0 && pending_cell_htlc_fails.1 == 0)); for chan_msgs in resp_1.drain(..) { - if pre_all_htlcs { + if send_funding_locked.0 { node_a.node.handle_funding_locked(&node_b.node.get_our_node_id(), &chan_msgs.0.unwrap()).unwrap(); let announcement_event = node_a.node.get_and_clear_pending_msg_events(); if !announcement_event.is_empty() { @@ -6302,7 +6302,7 @@ mod tests { } for chan_msgs in resp_2.drain(..) { - if pre_all_htlcs { + if send_funding_locked.1 { node_b.node.handle_funding_locked(&node_a.node.get_our_node_id(), &chan_msgs.0.unwrap()).unwrap(); let announcement_event = node_b.node.get_and_clear_pending_msg_events(); if !announcement_event.is_empty() { @@ -6366,7 +6366,7 @@ mod tests { nodes[0].node.peer_disconnected(&nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id(), false); nodes[1].node.peer_disconnected(&nodes[0].node.get_our_node_id(), false); - reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], true, (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (false, false)); + reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], (true, true), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (false, false)); let payment_preimage_1 = route_payment(&nodes[0], &vec!(&nodes[1], &nodes[2])[..], 1000000).0; let payment_hash_2 = route_payment(&nodes[0], &vec!(&nodes[1], &nodes[2])[..], 1000000).1; @@ -6375,7 +6375,7 @@ mod tests { nodes[0].node.peer_disconnected(&nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id(), false); nodes[1].node.peer_disconnected(&nodes[0].node.get_our_node_id(), false); - reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], false, (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (false, false)); + reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], (false, false), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (false, false)); let payment_preimage_3 = route_payment(&nodes[0], &vec!(&nodes[1], &nodes[2])[..], 1000000).0; let payment_preimage_4 = route_payment(&nodes[0], &vec!(&nodes[1], &nodes[2])[..], 1000000).0; @@ -6388,7 +6388,7 @@ mod tests { claim_payment_along_route(&nodes[0], &vec!(&nodes[1], &nodes[2]), true, payment_preimage_3); fail_payment_along_route(&nodes[0], &[&nodes[1], &nodes[2]], true, payment_hash_5); - reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], false, (0, 0), (0, 0), (1, 0), (1, 0), (false, false)); + reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], (false, false), (0, 0), (0, 0), (1, 0), (1, 0), (false, false)); { let events = nodes[0].node.get_and_clear_pending_events(); assert_eq!(events.len(), 2); @@ -6469,19 +6469,19 @@ mod tests { if messages_delivered < 3 { // Even if the funding_locked messages get exchanged, as long as nothing further was // received on either side, both sides will need to resend them. - reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], true, (0, 1), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (false, false)); + reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], (true, true), (0, 1), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (false, false)); } else if messages_delivered == 3 { // nodes[0] still wants its RAA + commitment_signed - reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], false, (-1, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (true, false)); + reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], (false, false), (-1, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (true, false)); } else if messages_delivered == 4 { // nodes[0] still wants its commitment_signed - reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], false, (-1, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (false, false)); + reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], (false, false), (-1, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (false, false)); } else if messages_delivered == 5 { // nodes[1] still wants its final RAA - reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], false, (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (false, true)); + reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], (false, false), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (false, true)); } else if messages_delivered == 6 { // Everything was delivered... - reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], false, (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (false, false)); + reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], (false, false), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (false, false)); } let events_1 = nodes[1].node.get_and_clear_pending_events(); @@ -6493,7 +6493,7 @@ mod tests { nodes[0].node.peer_disconnected(&nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id(), false); nodes[1].node.peer_disconnected(&nodes[0].node.get_our_node_id(), false); - reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], false, (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (false, false)); + reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], (false, false), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (false, false)); nodes[1].node.channel_state.lock().unwrap().next_forward = Instant::now(); nodes[1].node.process_pending_htlc_forwards(); @@ -6567,7 +6567,7 @@ mod tests { nodes[0].node.peer_disconnected(&nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id(), false); nodes[1].node.peer_disconnected(&nodes[0].node.get_our_node_id(), false); if messages_delivered < 2 { - reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], false, (0, 0), (1, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (false, false)); + reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], (false, false), (0, 0), (1, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (false, false)); //TODO: Deduplicate PaymentSent events, then enable this if: //if messages_delivered < 1 { let events_4 = nodes[0].node.get_and_clear_pending_events(); @@ -6581,21 +6581,21 @@ mod tests { //} } else if messages_delivered == 2 { // nodes[0] still wants its RAA + commitment_signed - reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], false, (0, -1), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (false, true)); + reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], (false, false), (0, -1), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (false, true)); } else if messages_delivered == 3 { // nodes[0] still wants its commitment_signed - reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], false, (0, -1), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (false, false)); + reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], (false, false), (0, -1), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (false, false)); } else if messages_delivered == 4 { // nodes[1] still wants its final RAA - reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], false, (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (true, false)); + reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], (false, false), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (true, false)); } else if messages_delivered == 5 { // Everything was delivered... - reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], false, (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (false, false)); + reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], (false, false), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (false, false)); } nodes[0].node.peer_disconnected(&nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id(), false); nodes[1].node.peer_disconnected(&nodes[0].node.get_our_node_id(), false); - reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], false, (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (false, false)); + reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], (false, false), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (false, false)); // Channel should still work fine... let payment_preimage_2 = send_along_route(&nodes[0], route, &[&nodes[1]], 1000000).0; @@ -6636,20 +6636,28 @@ mod tests { _ => panic!("Unexpected event"), } + reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], (false, true), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (false, false)); + + nodes[0].node.peer_disconnected(&nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id(), false); + nodes[1].node.peer_disconnected(&nodes[0].node.get_our_node_id(), false); + confirm_transaction(&nodes[1].chain_monitor, &tx, tx.version); let events_2 = nodes[1].node.get_and_clear_pending_msg_events(); - assert_eq!(events_2.len(), 1); + assert_eq!(events_2.len(), 2); match events_2[0] { MessageSendEvent::SendFundingLocked { ref node_id, msg: _ } => { assert_eq!(*node_id, nodes[0].node.get_our_node_id()); }, _ => panic!("Unexpected event"), } + match events_2[1] { + MessageSendEvent::SendAnnouncementSignatures { ref node_id, msg: _ } => { + assert_eq!(*node_id, nodes[0].node.get_our_node_id()); + }, + _ => panic!("Unexpected event"), + } - reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], true, (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (false, false)); - nodes[0].node.peer_disconnected(&nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id(), false); - nodes[1].node.peer_disconnected(&nodes[0].node.get_our_node_id(), false); - reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], true, (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (false, false)); + reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], (true, true), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (false, false)); // TODO: We shouldn't need to manually pass list_usable_chanels here once we support // rebroadcasting announcement_signatures upon reconnect. @@ -6852,7 +6860,7 @@ mod tests { if disconnect { nodes[0].node.peer_disconnected(&nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id(), false); nodes[1].node.peer_disconnected(&nodes[0].node.get_our_node_id(), false); - reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], true, (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (false, false)); + reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], (true, true), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (false, false)); } *nodes[0].chan_monitor.update_ret.lock().unwrap() = Ok(()); @@ -6893,7 +6901,7 @@ mod tests { if disconnect { nodes[0].node.peer_disconnected(&nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id(), false); nodes[1].node.peer_disconnected(&nodes[0].node.get_our_node_id(), false); - reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], false, (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (false, false)); + reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], (false, false), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (false, false)); } // ...and make sure we can force-close a TemporaryFailure channel with a PermanentFailure @@ -7453,7 +7461,7 @@ mod tests { nodes[0].node = Arc::new(nodes_0_deserialized); check_added_monitors!(nodes[0], 1); - reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], false, (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (false, false)); + reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], (false, false), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (false, false)); fail_payment(&nodes[0], &[&nodes[1]], our_payment_hash); claim_payment(&nodes[0], &[&nodes[1]], our_payment_preimage); @@ -7523,8 +7531,8 @@ mod tests { nodes[0].node = Arc::new(nodes_0_deserialized); // nodes[1] and nodes[2] have no lost state with nodes[0]... - reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], false, (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (false, false)); - reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[2], false, (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (false, false)); + reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[1], (false, false), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (false, false)); + reconnect_nodes(&nodes[0], &nodes[2], (false, false), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (0, 0), (false, false)); //... and we can even still claim the payment! claim_payment(&nodes[2], &[&nodes[0], &nodes[1]], our_payment_preimage);