This patches over a test data race where the logger would try to read struct internals via `reflect` while these were concurrently modified (specifically `MemoryTransport.closeOnce`).
Executed a local network using simapp and looked for logs that seemed superfluous. This isn't by any means an exhaustive grooming, but should drastically help legibility of logs.
ref: #5912
This test occasionally fails because the peer is already stopped. It is unclear to me exactly what this test is supposed to do, since calling `FlushStop()` will stop the peer, but the test asserts that the peer shouldn't have been stopped by `FlushStop()` since calling `Stop()` afterwards will error in that case.
The current PEX reactor will be removed in the new P2P stack anyway.
Fixes#5998. Sometimes the connection returns "use of closed network connection" instead, so for now we just accept any error. The switch is not long for this world anyway.
This test relied on connecting to the external site `foo-bar.net`, and (predictably) the site went down and broke all of our CI runs. This changes it to use local HTTP servers instead.
This changes the new prototype PEX reactor to resolve peer address URLs into IP/port PEX addresses itself. Branched off of #5974.
I've spent some time thinking about address handling in the P2P stack. We currently use `PeerAddress` URLs everywhere, except for two places: when dialing a peer, and when exchanging addresses via PEX. We had two options:
1. Resolve addresses to endpoints inside `PeerManager`. This would introduce a lot of added complexity: we would have to track connection statistics per endpoint, have goroutines that asynchronously resolve and refresh these endpoints, deal with resolve scheduling before dialing (which is trickier than it sounds since it involves multiple goroutines in the peer manager and router and messes with peer rating order), handle IP address visibility issues, and so on.
2. Resolve addresses to endpoints (IP/port) only where they're used: when dialing, and in PEX. Everywhere else we use URLs.
I went with 2, because this significantly simplifies the handling of hostname resolution, and because I really think the PEX reactor should migrate to exchanging URLs instead of IP/port numbers anyway -- this allows operators to use DNS names for validators (and can easily migrate them to new IPs and/or load balance requests), and also allows different protocols (e.g. QUIC and `MemoryTransport`). Happy to discuss this.
Fixes#5899 by renaming a bunch of P2P Protobuf entities (while maintaining wire compatibility):
* `Message` to `PexMessage` (as it's only used for PEX messages).
* `PexAddrs` to `PexResponse`.
* `PexResponse.Addrs` to `PexResponse.Addresses`.
* `NetAddress` to `PexAddress` (as it's only used by PEX).
## Description
Fixes the data race in usage of `WaitGroup`. Specifically, the case where we invoke `Wait` _before_ the first delta `Add` call when the current waitgroup counter is zero. See https://golang.org/pkg/sync/#WaitGroup.Add.
Still not sure how this manifests itself in a test since the reactor has to be stopped virtually immediately after being started (I think?).
Regardless, this is the appropriate fix.
closes: #5968
Adds a naïve `PeerManager.Advertise()` method that the new PEX reactor can use to fetch addresses to advertise, as well as some other `FIXME`s on address advertisement.
Follow-up from #5947, branched off of #5954.
This simplifies the upgrade logic by adding explicit eviction requests, which can also be useful for other use-cases (e.g. if we need to ban a peer that's misbehaving). Changes:
* Add `evict` map which queues up peers to explicitly evict.
* `upgrading` now only tracks peers that we're upgrading via dialing (`DialNext` → `Dialed`/`DialFailed`).
* `Dialed` will unmark `upgrading`, and queue `evict` if still beyond capacity.
* `Accepted` will pick a random lower-scored peer to upgrade to, if appropriate, and doesn't care about `upgrading` (the dial will fail later, since it's already connected).
* `EvictNext` will return a peer scheduled in `evict` if any, otherwise if beyond capacity just evict the lowest-scored peer.
This limits all of the `upgrading` logic to `DialNext`, `Dialed`, and `DialFailed`, making it much simplier, and it should generally do the right thing in all cases I can think of.
This improves the `peerStore` prototype by e.g.:
* Using a database with Protobuf for persistence, but also keeping full peer set in memory for performance.
* Simplifying the API, by taking/returning struct copies for safety, and removing errors for in-memory operations.
* Caching the ranked peer set, as a temporary solution until a better data structure is implemented.
* Adding `PeerManagerOptions.MaxPeers` and pruning the peer store (based on rank) when it's full.
* Rewriting `PeerAddress` to be independent of `url.URL`, normalizing it and tightening semantics.
## Description
Update the faux router to either drop channel errors or handle them based on an argument. This prevents deadlocks in tests where we try to send an error on the mempool channel but there is no reader.
Closes: #5956
See #5936 and #5938 for background.
The plan was initially to have `DialNext()` and `EvictNext()` return a channel. However, implementing this became unnecessarily complicated and error-prone. As an example, the channel would be both consumed and populated (via method calls) by the same driving method (e.g. `Router.dialPeers()`) which could easily cause deadlocks where a method call blocked while sending on the channel that the caller itself was responsible for consuming (but couldn't since it was busy making the method call). It would also require a set of goroutines in the peer manager that would interact with the goroutines in the router in non-obvious ways, and fully populating the channel on startup could cause deadlocks with other startup tasks. Several issues like these made the solution hard to reason about.
I therefore simply made `DialNext()` and `EvictNext()` block until the next peer was available, using internal triggers to wake these methods up in a non-blocking fashion when any relevant state changes occurred. This proved much simpler to reason about, since there are no goroutines in the peer manager (except for trivial retry timers), nor any blocking channel sends, and it instead relies entirely on the existing goroutine structure of the router for concurrency. This also happens to be the same pattern used by the `Transport.Accept()` API, following Go stdlib conventions, so all router goroutines end up using a consistent pattern as well.
Co-authored-by: Emmanuel T Odeke <emmanuel@orijtech.com>
Closes#5907
- add init-corpus to blockchain reactor
- remove validator-set FromBytes test
now that we have proto, we don't need to test it! bye amino
- simplify mempool test
do we want to test remote ABCI app?
- do not recreate mux on every crash in jsonrpc test
- update p2p pex reactor test
- remove p2p/listener test
the API has changed + I did not understand what it's tested anyway
- update secretconnection test
- add readme and makefile
- list inputs in readme
- add nightly workflow
- remove blockchain fuzz test
EncodeMsg / DecodeMsg no longer exist
Fixes#5941.
Not entirely sure that this will fix the problem (couldn't reproduce), but in any case this is an artifact of a hack in the P2P transport refactor to make it work with the legacy P2P stack, and will be removed when the refactor is done anyway.
The `proto-gen-docker` target didn't pull an updated Docker image, and would use a local image if present which could be outdated and produce wrong results.
This improves the prototype peer manager by:
* Exporting `PeerManager`, making it accessible by e.g. reactors.
* Replacing `Router.SubscribePeerUpdates()` with `PeerManager.Subscribe()`.
* Tracking address/peer connection statistics, and retrying dial failures with exponential backoff.
* Prioritizing peers, with persistent peers configuration.
* Limiting simultaneous connections.
* Evicting peers and upgrading to higher-priority peers.
* Tracking peer heights, as a workaround for legacy shared peer state APIs.
This is getting to a point where we need to determine precise semantics and implement tests, so we should figure out whether it's a reasonable abstraction that we want to use. The main questions are around the API model (i.e. synchronous method calls with the router polling the manager, vs. an event-driven model using channels, vs. the peer manager calling methods on the router to connect/disconnect peers), and who should have the responsibility of managing actual connections (currently the router, while the manager only tracks peer state).
Conflicting votes are now sent to the evidence pool to form duplicate vote evidence only once
the height of the evidence is finished and the time of the block finalised.
This adds a prototype peer lifecycle manager, `peerManager`, which stores peer data in an internal `peerStore`. The overall idea here is to have methods for peer lifecycle events which exchange a very narrow subset of peer data, and to keep all of the peer metadata (i.e. the `peerInfo` struct) internal, to decouple this from the router and simplify concurrency control. See `peerManager` GoDoc for more information.
The router is still responsible for actually dialing and accepting peer connections, and routing messages across them, but the peer manager is responsible for determining which peers to dial next, preventing multiple connections being established for the same peer (e.g. both inbound and outbound), and making sure we don't dial the same peer several times in parallel. Later it will also track retries and exponential backoff, as well as peer and address quality. It also assumes responsibility for peer updates subscriptions.
It's a bit unclear to me whether we want the peer manager to take on the responsibility of actually dialing and accepting connections as well, or if it should only be tracking peer state for the router while the router is responsible for all transport concerns. Let's revisit this later.
Bumps [vuepress-theme-cosmos](https://github.com/cosmos/vuepress-theme-cosmos) from 1.0.179 to 1.0.180.
<details>
<summary>Commits</summary>
<ul>
<li>See full diff in <a href="https://github.com/cosmos/vuepress-theme-cosmos/commits">compare view</a></li>
</ul>
</details>
<br />
[](https://docs.github.com/en/github/managing-security-vulnerabilities/about-dependabot-security-updates#about-compatibility-scores)
Dependabot will resolve any conflicts with this PR as long as you don't alter it yourself. You can also trigger a rebase manually by commenting `@dependabot rebase`.
[//]: # (dependabot-automerge-start)
[//]: # (dependabot-automerge-end)
---
<details>
<summary>Dependabot commands and options</summary>
<br />
You can trigger Dependabot actions by commenting on this PR:
- `@dependabot rebase` will rebase this PR
- `@dependabot recreate` will recreate this PR, overwriting any edits that have been made to it
- `@dependabot merge` will merge this PR after your CI passes on it
- `@dependabot squash and merge` will squash and merge this PR after your CI passes on it
- `@dependabot cancel merge` will cancel a previously requested merge and block automerging
- `@dependabot reopen` will reopen this PR if it is closed
- `@dependabot close` will close this PR and stop Dependabot recreating it. You can achieve the same result by closing it manually
- `@dependabot ignore this major version` will close this PR and stop Dependabot creating any more for this major version (unless you reopen the PR or upgrade to it yourself)
- `@dependabot ignore this minor version` will close this PR and stop Dependabot creating any more for this minor version (unless you reopen the PR or upgrade to it yourself)
- `@dependabot ignore this dependency` will close this PR and stop Dependabot creating any more for this dependency (unless you reopen the PR or upgrade to it yourself)
</details>
Erik Grinaker
Aleksandr Bezobchuk
Marko
Anton Kaliaev
Sergey
Callum Waters
odidev
Jack Yeh
Tess Rinearson
dependabot[bot]