1. htlc->fail has been changed to a u8 *.
2. wallet_get_newindex saves to the db.
3. peer->next_htlc_id is saved to the db in peer_save_commitsig_sent() below.
4. We do store commit in peer_save_commitsig_received(peer, commitnum),
and the fixme below talks about HTLC sigs.
5. We do commit shachain and next_per_commit_point in wallet_shachain_add_hash
and update_per_commit_point respectively.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
All other users of json_get_params(...) check the return value:
```
lightningd/chaintopology.c: if (!json_get_params(buffer, params,
lightningd/chaintopology.c: if (!json_get_params(buffer, params,
lightningd/dev_ping.c: if (!json_get_params(buffer, params,
lightningd/gossip_control.c: if (!json_get_params(buffer, params,
lightningd/invoice.c: if (!json_get_params(buffer, params,
lightningd/invoice.c: if (!json_get_params(buffer, params,
lightningd/invoice.c: if (!json_get_params(buffer, params,
lightningd/invoice.c: if (!json_get_params(buffer, params,
lightningd/invoice.c: if (!json_get_params(buffer, params, "label", &labeltok, NULL)) {
lightningd/invoice.c: if (!json_get_params(buffer, params,
lightningd/jsonrpc.c: if (!json_get_params(buffer, params,
lightningd/pay.c: if (!json_get_params(buffer, params,
lightningd/pay.c: if (!json_get_params(buffer, params,
lightningd/peer_control.c: if (!json_get_params(buffer, params,
lightningd/peer_control.c: if (!json_get_params(buffer, params,
lightningd/peer_control.c: if (!json_get_params(buffer, params,
lightningd/peer_control.c: if (!json_get_params(buffer, params,
lightningd/peer_control.c: if (!json_get_params(buffer, params,
lightningd/peer_control.c: if (!json_get_params(buffer, params,
wallet/walletrpc.c: if (!json_get_params(buffer, params,
wallet/walletrpc.c: if (!json_get_params(buffer, params, "tx", &txtok, NULL)) {
```
I've only seen this under travis, so I can't verify that this fixes it,
but it's certainly a bug which could cause that issue.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
This is necessary to grad the their_unilateral/to-us outputs since
they aren't being harvested by `onchaind`
Signed-off-by: Christian Decker <decker.christian@gmail.com>
This is the scriptpubkey that onchaind spends all funds to, except for
the their_unilateral/to-us case, so we better recognize that address.
Signed-off-by: Christian Decker <decker.christian@gmail.com>
This is the only case in which we don't respend to a simple keyindex'd
pubkey, so we need to handle this for future spends.
Signed-off-by: Christian Decker <decker.christian@gmail.com>
We always arm the funding_lockin_cb, even if we don't need to. If we
have an short_channel_id already from the db, this was replacing it
and leaking the old one.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Since we panic when we see our root reorg out, even if we're not doing
anything yet, restoring the 100 block margin is the simplest fix.
Unfortunately this means adding a 100-block spacer in the tests, so things
don't get confused.
Fixes: #511
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
This is surprisingly simple. We set up the watches for funding tx
depth and the funding output, then if it's not onchain we ask gossipd
to reconnect.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Load the first block we're possibly interested in, then load the peers so
we can restore the tx watches, then finally replay to the current tip.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Eventually we want to save blockchain in db to avoid this scan, but
for the moment, we need to reload as far back as we may be interested in.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
This gives us a lower bound on where funding tx could be.
In theory, it could be lower than this if we get a reorganization, but
in practice this is already a 1-block buffer (since we can't get into
current block, only the next one).
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
In the normal (peer-to-peer) path, the HTLC state prevents us fulfilling
twice, but this goes out the window with onchain HTLCs.
The actual assert which caught it was lightningd/pay.c:70 (payment_succeeded)
in the test_htlc_in_timeout test, after the next commit.
So add an assert earlier (in fulfill_our_htlc_out) and check in the
one caller where it can be true.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
