-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1k
connectd: swallow channel-scoped error instead of queuing it #9436
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
vincenzopalazzo
wants to merge
2
commits into
ElementsProject:master
Choose a base branch
from
vincenzopalazzo:connectd-forward-channel-error
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+114
−0
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
tests/test_closing.pyhas three pre-existing tests (test_onchain_reestablish_replyat line 4632, and two more around lines 4661 and 4753) that reconnect a peer to an already-closed channel and then calldaemon.wait_for_log("peer_in WIRE_ERROR"). That log line is produced bypeer_read()in common/peer_io.c at lines 18-27 viastatus_peer_io(), which only runs inside thesubd(channeld/closingd), when it reads the message off its own socketpair to connectd. But with this fix,connectd/multiplex.cnew block runs beforefind_subd()and returns immediately - the message is never written tosubd->outq, so the subdpeer_read()never sees it, and "peer_in WIRE_ERROR" is never logged again for a channel-scoped error. The new connectd branch also doesnt callstatus_peer_io()itself, so this specific log line disappears entirely, not just for one path. these three tests use that log line as their synchronization point before asserting the channel state. If the line never appears,wait_for_logwill time out and the tests will fail. Maybe we need to run these three tests against this branch to confirm. If they do fail, either add an equivalent debug log call in the new connectd branch (status_peer_io(LOG_IO_IN, &peer->id, decrypted)) before forwarding, so the same observability is kept, and update the tests to match the new log source, or drop the log-based wait in these tests in favor of the state check that already follows it?