Accept unrequested blocks with work equal to our tip
This is a simple change that makes our accept requirements the same as our request requirements, (ever so slightly) further decoupling our consensus logic from our FindNextBlocksToDownload logic in net_processing.
This commit is contained in:
parent
3d9c70ca0f
commit
932f118e6a
2 changed files with 5 additions and 8 deletions
|
@ -3115,7 +3115,7 @@ static bool AcceptBlock(const std::shared_ptr<const CBlock>& pblock, CValidation
|
|||
// process an unrequested block if it's new and has enough work to
|
||||
// advance our tip, and isn't too many blocks ahead.
|
||||
bool fAlreadyHave = pindex->nStatus & BLOCK_HAVE_DATA;
|
||||
bool fHasMoreWork = (chainActive.Tip() ? pindex->nChainWork > chainActive.Tip()->nChainWork : true);
|
||||
bool fHasMoreOrSameWork = (chainActive.Tip() ? pindex->nChainWork >= chainActive.Tip()->nChainWork : true);
|
||||
// Blocks that are too out-of-order needlessly limit the effectiveness of
|
||||
// pruning, because pruning will not delete block files that contain any
|
||||
// blocks which are too close in height to the tip. Apply this test
|
||||
|
@ -3133,7 +3133,7 @@ static bool AcceptBlock(const std::shared_ptr<const CBlock>& pblock, CValidation
|
|||
if (fAlreadyHave) return true;
|
||||
if (!fRequested) { // If we didn't ask for it:
|
||||
if (pindex->nTx != 0) return true; // This is a previously-processed block that was pruned
|
||||
if (!fHasMoreWork) return true; // Don't process less-work chains
|
||||
if (!fHasMoreOrSameWork) return true; // Don't process less-work chains
|
||||
if (fTooFarAhead) return true; // Block height is too high
|
||||
|
||||
// Protect against DoS attacks from low-work chains.
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -142,8 +142,7 @@ class AcceptBlockTest(BitcoinTestFramework):
|
|||
assert(tip_entry_found)
|
||||
|
||||
# But this block should be accepted by node since it has equal work.
|
||||
# TODO: We currently drop this block but likely shouldn't
|
||||
#self.nodes[0].getblock(block_h2f.hash)
|
||||
self.nodes[0].getblock(block_h2f.hash)
|
||||
self.log.info("Second height 2 block accepted, but not reorg'ed to")
|
||||
|
||||
# 4b. Now send another block that builds on the forking chain.
|
||||
|
@ -215,7 +214,6 @@ class AcceptBlockTest(BitcoinTestFramework):
|
|||
|
||||
test_node.wait_for_verack()
|
||||
test_node.send_message(msg_block(block_h1f))
|
||||
test_node.send_message(msg_block(block_h2f)) # This should not be required
|
||||
|
||||
test_node.sync_with_ping()
|
||||
assert_equal(self.nodes[0].getblockcount(), 2)
|
||||
|
@ -239,7 +237,6 @@ class AcceptBlockTest(BitcoinTestFramework):
|
|||
|
||||
# 7. Send the missing block for the third time (now it is requested)
|
||||
test_node.send_message(msg_block(block_h1f))
|
||||
test_node.send_message(msg_block(block_h2f)) # This should not be required
|
||||
|
||||
test_node.sync_with_ping()
|
||||
assert_equal(self.nodes[0].getblockcount(), 290)
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue