It is easy for users to have a bug where they drop a
`BackgroundProcessor` immediately, causing it to start and then
immediately stop. Instead, add a `#[must_use]` tag to provide a
compiler warning for such instances.
This is one of the riskiest parts of our API from the perspective
of accidental force-closes - if users delay persisting the
ChannelManager much at all after a ChannelMonitor we may hit a
force-close after restart.
The fact that we don't log at all when this happens is criminal.
This allows TLV serialization macros to read non-Option-wrapped
types but allow them to be missing, filling them in with the
provided default value as needed.
While we should never reach `ClaimFundsFromHop::DuplicateClaim` in
most cases, if we do, it likely indicates the HTLC was timed out
some time ago and is no longer available to be claimed. Thus, it
does not make sense to imply that we `claimed_any_htlcs`.
It is useful for accounting and informational reasons for users to
be informed when a payment has been successfully forwarded. Thus,
when an HTLC which represents a forwarded leg is claimed, we
generate a new `PaymentForwarded` event.
This requires some additional plumbing to return HTLC values from
`OnchainEvent`s. Further, when we have to go on-chain to claim the
inbound side of the payment, we do not inform the user of the fee
reward, as we cannot calculate it until we see what is confirmed
on-chain.
Substantial code structure rewrites by:
Valentine Wallace <vwallace@protonmail.com>
If we first see a local commitment transaction, and then a reorg
causes the confirmed channel close transaction to instead be a
remote commitment transaction, we would fail a spurious `if else`
check, resulting in us not generating the correct `SpendableOutput`
event for the to_remote output now confirmed on chain.
This resolves the incorrect logic and adds a regression test.
std::io::ErrorKind is a `#[non_exhaustive]` enum as more specific
error types are to be added in the future. It was unclear in the
docs until very recently, however, that this is to be done by
re-defining `ErrorKind::Other` errors to new enum variants. Thus,
our tests which check explicitly for `ErrorKind::Other` as a
result of trying to access a directory as a file were incorrect.
Sadly, these generated no meaningful feedback from rustc at all,
except that they're suddenly failing in rustc beta!
After some back-and-forth, it seems rustc is moving forward
breaking existing code in future versions, so we move to the
"correct" check here, which is to check the raw IO error.
See rust-lang/rust#86442 and rust-lang/rust#85746 for more info.
The previous commit wraps the background thread's JoinHandle in an
Option. Providing a dedicated method to join hides this implementation
detail from users.
test_onchain_to_onchain_claim was connecting additional blocks in
order to reach HTLC timeout and broadcast an HTLC-Timeout
transaction, resulting in it not testing whether HTLC preimages are
learned instantly in response to HTLC-Success transactions.
This should provide some additional future extensibility, allowing
for new informational events which can be safely ignored to be
ignored by older versions.
The wait_threshold_conf!() macro in check_spend_holder_transaction
was only used once, making it a good candidate for inlining at the
callsite. Further, it incorrectly always logged that we were
failing HTLCs from the "latest" commitment transaction, when it is
sometimes actually failing HTLCs from the previous commitment
transaction.
Previously, we could fail to generate a new commitment transaction
but it simply indicated we had gone to doule-claim an HTLC. Now
that double-claims are returned instead as Ok(None), we should
handle the error case and fail the channel, as the only way to hit
the error case is if key derivation failed or the user refused to
sign the new commitment transaction.
This also resolves an issue where we wouldn't inform our
ChannelMonitor of the new payment preimage in case we failed to
fetch a signature for the new commitment transaction.
When receiving an update_fulfill_htlc message, we immediately
forward the claim backwards along the payment path before waiting
for a full commitment_signed dance. This is great, but can cause
duplicative claims if a node sends an update_fulfill_htlc message,
disconnects, reconnects, and then has to re-send its
update_fulfill_htlc message again.
While there was code to handle this, it treated it as a channel
error on the inbound channel, which is incorrect - this is an
expected, albeit incredibly rare, condition. Instead, we handle
these double-claims correctly, simply ignoring them.
With debug_assertions enabled, we also check that the previous
close of the same HTLC was a fulfill, and that we are not moving
from a HTLC failure to an HTLC claim after its too late.
A test is also added, which hits all three failure cases in
`Channel::get_update_fulfill_htlc`.
Found by the chanmon_consistency fuzzer.
