aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorWladimir J. van der Laan <laanwj@protonmail.com>2019-10-02 13:39:34 +0200
committerWladimir J. van der Laan <laanwj@protonmail.com>2019-10-02 13:40:39 +0200
commit30c2b0b1cb110c27e329e453210561ea5dcdbeb5 (patch)
treebb2470ddf2a97ec182adc64cd0dbd6a9ae8dc1ce
parent27322cd161dd03e60cf13cb5ba4bf8a73d66b614 (diff)
parent2a4e60b48261d3f0ec3d85f97af998ef989134e0 (diff)
downloadbitcoin-30c2b0b1cb110c27e329e453210561ea5dcdbeb5.tar.xz
Merge #16849: Fix block index inconsistency in InvalidateBlock()
2a4e60b48261d3f0ec3d85f97af998ef989134e0 Fix block index inconsistency in InvalidateBlock() (Suhas Daftuar) Pull request description: Previously, we could release `cs_main` while leaving the block index in a state that would fail `CheckBlockIndex()`, because `setBlockIndexCandidates` was not being fully populated before releasing `cs_main`. ACKs for top commit: TheBlueMatt: utACK 2a4e60b48261d3f0ec3d85f97af998ef989134e0. I also discovered another issue in InvalidateBlock while reviewing, see #16856. Sjors: ACK 2a4e60b. Tested on top of #16899. Also tested `invalidateblock` with `-checkblockindex=1`. fjahr: ACK 2a4e60b. Ran tests, reviewed code, inspected behavior while manually testing `invalidateblock`. Tree-SHA512: ced12f9dfff0d413258c709921543fb154789898165590b30d1ee0cdc72863382f189744f7669a7c924d3689a1cc623efdf4e5ae3efc60054572c1e6826de612
-rw-r--r--src/validation.cpp54
1 files changed, 52 insertions, 2 deletions
diff --git a/src/validation.cpp b/src/validation.cpp
index 1faaa411c4..ac98bd61c7 100644
--- a/src/validation.cpp
+++ b/src/validation.cpp
@@ -2926,6 +2926,38 @@ bool CChainState::InvalidateBlock(CValidationState& state, const CChainParams& c
bool pindex_was_in_chain = false;
int disconnected = 0;
+ // We do not allow ActivateBestChain() to run while InvalidateBlock() is
+ // running, as that could cause the tip to change while we disconnect
+ // blocks.
+ LOCK(m_cs_chainstate);
+
+ // We'll be acquiring and releasing cs_main below, to allow the validation
+ // callbacks to run. However, we should keep the block index in a
+ // consistent state as we disconnect blocks -- in particular we need to
+ // add equal-work blocks to setBlockIndexCandidates as we disconnect.
+ // To avoid walking the block index repeatedly in search of candidates,
+ // build a map once so that we can look up candidate blocks by chain
+ // work as we go.
+ std::multimap<const arith_uint256, CBlockIndex *> candidate_blocks_by_work;
+
+ {
+ LOCK(cs_main);
+ for (const auto& entry : m_blockman.m_block_index) {
+ CBlockIndex *candidate = entry.second;
+ // We don't need to put anything in our active chain into the
+ // multimap, because those candidates will be found and considered
+ // as we disconnect.
+ // Instead, consider only non-active-chain blocks that have at
+ // least as much work as where we expect the new tip to end up.
+ if (!m_chain.Contains(candidate) &&
+ !CBlockIndexWorkComparator()(candidate, pindex->pprev) &&
+ candidate->IsValid(BLOCK_VALID_TRANSACTIONS) &&
+ candidate->HaveTxsDownloaded()) {
+ candidate_blocks_by_work.insert(std::make_pair(candidate->nChainWork, candidate));
+ }
+ }
+ }
+
// Disconnect (descendants of) pindex, and mark them invalid.
while (true) {
if (ShutdownRequested()) break;
@@ -2968,11 +3000,24 @@ bool CChainState::InvalidateBlock(CValidationState& state, const CChainParams& c
setDirtyBlockIndex.insert(to_mark_failed);
}
+ // Add any equal or more work headers to setBlockIndexCandidates
+ auto candidate_it = candidate_blocks_by_work.lower_bound(invalid_walk_tip->pprev->nChainWork);
+ while (candidate_it != candidate_blocks_by_work.end()) {
+ if (!CBlockIndexWorkComparator()(candidate_it->second, invalid_walk_tip->pprev)) {
+ setBlockIndexCandidates.insert(candidate_it->second);
+ candidate_it = candidate_blocks_by_work.erase(candidate_it);
+ } else {
+ ++candidate_it;
+ }
+ }
+
// Track the last disconnected block, so we can correct its BLOCK_FAILED_CHILD status in future
// iterations, or, if it's the last one, call InvalidChainFound on it.
to_mark_failed = invalid_walk_tip;
}
+ CheckBlockIndex(chainparams.GetConsensus());
+
{
LOCK(cs_main);
if (m_chain.Contains(to_mark_failed)) {
@@ -2986,8 +3031,13 @@ bool CChainState::InvalidateBlock(CValidationState& state, const CChainParams& c
setBlockIndexCandidates.erase(to_mark_failed);
m_blockman.m_failed_blocks.insert(to_mark_failed);
- // The resulting new best tip may not be in setBlockIndexCandidates anymore, so
- // add it again.
+ // If any new blocks somehow arrived while we were disconnecting
+ // (above), then the pre-calculation of what should go into
+ // setBlockIndexCandidates may have missed entries. This would
+ // technically be an inconsistency in the block index, but if we clean
+ // it up here, this should be an essentially unobservable error.
+ // Loop back over all block index entries and add any missing entries
+ // to setBlockIndexCandidates.
BlockMap::iterator it = m_blockman.m_block_index.begin();
while (it != m_blockman.m_block_index.end()) {
if (it->second->IsValid(BLOCK_VALID_TRANSACTIONS) && it->second->HaveTxsDownloaded() && !setBlockIndexCandidates.value_comp()(it->second, m_chain.Tip())) {