From a6a6b481020cf3c3cc9591b5c0306fbbc7270fec Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: shaavan Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2024 17:44:58 +0530 Subject: [PATCH] Add tests to check the introduced behaviour - The first test make sure that the OutboundV1Channel is not immediately removed when peers disconnect, but is removed after N timer ticks. - The second test makes sure that the SendOpenChannel is rebroadcasted for the OutboundV1Channel if peer reconnects within time. --- lightning/src/ln/functional_tests.rs | 84 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 84 insertions(+) diff --git a/lightning/src/ln/functional_tests.rs b/lightning/src/ln/functional_tests.rs index 8d1912f3..7b84f56f 100644 --- a/lightning/src/ln/functional_tests.rs +++ b/lightning/src/ln/functional_tests.rs @@ -10513,6 +10513,90 @@ fn test_remove_expired_inbound_unfunded_channels() { check_closed_event(&nodes[1], 1, ClosureReason::HolderForceClosed, false, &[nodes[0].node.get_our_node_id()], 100000); } +#[test] +fn test_channel_close_when_not_timely_accepted() { + // Create network of two nodes + let chanmon_cfgs = create_chanmon_cfgs(2); + let node_cfgs = create_node_cfgs(2, &chanmon_cfgs); + let node_chanmgrs = create_node_chanmgrs(2, &node_cfgs, &[None, None]); + let nodes = create_network(2, &node_cfgs, &node_chanmgrs); + + // Simulate peer-disconnects mid-handshake + // The channel is initiated from the node 0 side, + // but the nodes disconnect before node 1 could send accept channel + let create_chan_id = nodes[0].node.create_channel(nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id(), 100000, 10001, 42, None, None).unwrap(); + let open_channel_msg = get_event_msg!(nodes[0], MessageSendEvent::SendOpenChannel, nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id()); + assert_eq!(open_channel_msg.temporary_channel_id, create_chan_id); + + nodes[0].node.peer_disconnected(&nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id()); + nodes[1].node.peer_disconnected(&nodes[0].node.get_our_node_id()); + + // Make sure that we have not removed the OutboundV1Channel from node[0] immediately. + assert_eq!(nodes[0].node.list_channels().len(), 1); + + // Since channel was inbound from node[1] perspective, it should have been dropped immediately. + assert_eq!(nodes[1].node.list_channels().len(), 0); + + // In the meantime, some time passes. + for _ in 0..UNFUNDED_CHANNEL_AGE_LIMIT_TICKS { + nodes[0].node.timer_tick_occurred(); + } + + // Since we disconnected from peer and did not connect back within time, + // we should have forced-closed the channel by now. + check_closed_event!(nodes[0], 1, ClosureReason::HolderForceClosed, [nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id()], 100000); + assert_eq!(nodes[0].node.list_channels().len(), 0); + + { + // Since accept channel message was never received + // The channel should be forced close by now from node 0 side + // and the peer removed from per_peer_state + let node_0_per_peer_state = nodes[0].node.per_peer_state.read().unwrap(); + assert_eq!(node_0_per_peer_state.len(), 0); + } +} + +#[test] +fn test_rebroadcast_open_channel_when_reconnect_mid_handshake() { + // Create network of two nodes + let chanmon_cfgs = create_chanmon_cfgs(2); + let node_cfgs = create_node_cfgs(2, &chanmon_cfgs); + let node_chanmgrs = create_node_chanmgrs(2, &node_cfgs, &[None, None]); + let nodes = create_network(2, &node_cfgs, &node_chanmgrs); + + // Simulate peer-disconnects mid-handshake + // The channel is initiated from the node 0 side, + // but the nodes disconnect before node 1 could send accept channel + let create_chan_id = nodes[0].node.create_channel(nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id(), 100000, 10001, 42, None, None).unwrap(); + let open_channel_msg = get_event_msg!(nodes[0], MessageSendEvent::SendOpenChannel, nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id()); + assert_eq!(open_channel_msg.temporary_channel_id, create_chan_id); + + nodes[0].node.peer_disconnected(&nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id()); + nodes[1].node.peer_disconnected(&nodes[0].node.get_our_node_id()); + + // Make sure that we have not removed the OutboundV1Channel from node[0] immediately. + assert_eq!(nodes[0].node.list_channels().len(), 1); + + // Since channel was inbound from node[1] perspective, it should have been immediately dropped. + assert_eq!(nodes[1].node.list_channels().len(), 0); + + // The peers now reconnect + nodes[0].node.peer_connected(&nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id(), &msgs::Init { + features: nodes[1].node.init_features(), networks: None, remote_network_address: None + }, true).unwrap(); + nodes[1].node.peer_connected(&nodes[0].node.get_our_node_id(), &msgs::Init { + features: nodes[0].node.init_features(), networks: None, remote_network_address: None + }, false).unwrap(); + + // Make sure the SendOpenChannel message is added to node_0 pending message events + let msg_events = nodes[0].node.get_and_clear_pending_msg_events(); + assert_eq!(msg_events.len(), 1); + match &msg_events[0] { + MessageSendEvent::SendOpenChannel { msg, .. } => assert_eq!(msg, &open_channel_msg), + _ => panic!("Unexpected message."), + } +} + fn do_test_multi_post_event_actions(do_reload: bool) { // Tests handling multiple post-Event actions at once. // There is specific code in ChannelManager to handle channels where multiple post-Event -- 2.30.2