Getblocktemplate broken in v 0.1.10 #123

laakie · 2023-04-20T21:07:18Z

./BGL-cli getblocktemplate '{"rules": ["segwit"]}'
error code: -1
error message:
basic_string::_M_construct null not valid

Compiled from source ( After fixing some configure errors.... )

naftalimurgor · 2023-04-21T03:16:21Z

What Os version are you on? I'd like to:

Reproduce this
Debug
Submit bug fix and a corresponding unit test

naftalimurgor · 2023-06-30T13:27:55Z

still experiencing this issue?

Got it building on Ubuntu 22.04 (gcc 11.3.0)

laakie · 2023-06-30T13:46:37Z

Not able to build most if the versions from source.
They all have a ton of errors.
Running 0.1.8, it's the only version that I managed to compile after a few tweaks

naftalimurgor · 2023-06-30T14:37:35Z

It would be great to provide:

clang or gcc?
What versions?
OS version?
Thanks

laakie · 2023-06-30T14:42:54Z

All other versions then 0.1.8
Ubuntu 20.04, and 22.04
Gcc 9,10,11

janus · 2023-06-30T19:49:40Z

All other versions then 0.1.8 Ubuntu 20.04, and 22.04 Gcc 9,10,11

I look into this issue. Just give me some time.

naftalimurgor · 2023-06-30T19:56:01Z

All other versions then 0.1.8
Ubuntu 20.04, and 22.04
Gcc 9,10,11

I'll check with those versions and give you feedback soon.

janus · 2023-07-08T09:53:46Z

Not able to build most if the versions from source. They all have a ton of errors. Running 0.1.8, it's the only version that I managed to compile after a few tweaks

They all have a ton of errors.
Please what is the configuration that you used? I would like to fix the errors.

gitcoindev · 2023-08-01T15:01:50Z

Hi @janus , @naftalimurgor , @van-orton I am able to reproduce this bug.

I finally discovered build errors as well - 0.1.10 tag is broken and the build was fixed at later commit in release-0.1.10 branch.

Master branch getblocktemplate works fine, both gcc and clang:

'{"rules": ["segwit"]}'
{
  "capabilities": [
    "proposal"
  ],
  "version": 536870912,
  "rules": [
    "csv",
    "!segwit",
    "taproot"
  ],
  "vbavailable": {
  },
  "vbrequired": 0,
  "previousblockhash": "2e14eaec9745ec9690602feddf650eb6e436d32a3ae8453cf6a90ef1d53a6c42",
  "transactions": [
  ],
  "coinbaseaux": {
  },
  "coinbasevalue": 20000000000,
  "longpollid": "2e14eaec9745ec9690602feddf650eb6e436d32a3ae8453cf6a90ef1d53a6c422",
  "target": "dfff000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000",
  "mintime": 1585958401,
  "mutable": [
    "time",
    "transactions",
    "prevblock"
  ],
  "noncerange": "00000000ffffffff",
  "sigoplimit": 80000,
  "sizelimit": 400000,
  "weightlimit": 400000,
  "curtime": 1690895708,
  "bits": "2100dfff",
  "height": 1,
  "default_witness_commitment": "6a24aa21a9ede2f61c3f71d1defd3fa999dfa36953755c690689799962b48bebd836974e8cf9"
}

whereas 0.1.10 release build returns the following error:

error code: -1
error message:
basic_string::_M_construct null not valid

I went through a quite entertaining debugging session with GDB and was able to find the root cause and the commit that introduced the change. VersionBitsDeploymentInfo contains null value for the taproot.

Thread 22 "b-httpworker.3" hit Breakpoint 6, gbt_vb_name (pos=Consensus::DEPLOYMENT_TAPROOT) at rpc/mining.cpp:495
495	    const struct VBDeploymentInfo& vbinfo = VersionBitsDeploymentInfo[pos];
(gdb) p VersionBitsDeploymentInfo
$9 = {{name = 0x55656fc0a2ac "testdummy", gbt_force = true}, {name = 0x55656fc0a2b6 "taproot", gbt_force = true}, {name = 0x0, gbt_force = false}}
(gdb)

I already have a fix that works for me locally, I will submit a PR asap.

Fixes BitgesellOfficial#123

gitcoindev · 2023-08-01T15:11:58Z

PR with the fix opened #128

janus · 2023-08-01T21:25:40Z

Hi @janus , @naftalimurgor , @van-orton I am able to reproduce this bug.

I finally discovered build errors as well - 0.1.10 tag is broken and the build was fixed at later commit in release-0.1.10 branch.

Master branch getblocktemplate works fine, both gcc and clang:
'{"rules": ["segwit"]}'
{
  "capabilities": [
    "proposal"
  ],
  "version": 536870912,
  "rules": [
    "csv",
    "!segwit",
    "taproot"
  ],
  "vbavailable": {
  },
  "vbrequired": 0,
  "previousblockhash": "2e14eaec9745ec9690602feddf650eb6e436d32a3ae8453cf6a90ef1d53a6c42",
  "transactions": [
  ],
  "coinbaseaux": {
  },
  "coinbasevalue": 20000000000,
  "longpollid": "2e14eaec9745ec9690602feddf650eb6e436d32a3ae8453cf6a90ef1d53a6c422",
  "target": "dfff000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000",
  "mintime": 1585958401,
  "mutable": [
    "time",
    "transactions",
    "prevblock"
  ],
  "noncerange": "00000000ffffffff",
  "sigoplimit": 80000,
  "sizelimit": 400000,
  "weightlimit": 400000,
  "curtime": 1690895708,
  "bits": "2100dfff",
  "height": 1,
  "default_witness_commitment": "6a24aa21a9ede2f61c3f71d1defd3fa999dfa36953755c690689799962b48bebd836974e8cf9"
}
whereas 0.1.10 release build returns the following error:
error code: -1
error message:
basic_string::_M_construct null not valid
I went through a quite entertaining debugging session with GDB and was able to find the root cause and the commit that introduced the change. VersionBitsDeploymentInfo contains null value for the taproot.
Thread 22 "b-httpworker.3" hit Breakpoint 6, gbt_vb_name (pos=Consensus::DEPLOYMENT_TAPROOT) at rpc/mining.cpp:495
495	    const struct VBDeploymentInfo& vbinfo = VersionBitsDeploymentInfo[pos];
(gdb) p VersionBitsDeploymentInfo
$9 = {{name = 0x55656fc0a2ac "testdummy", gbt_force = true}, {name = 0x55656fc0a2b6 "taproot", gbt_force = true}, {name = 0x0, gbt_force = false}}
(gdb) 
I already have a fix that works for me locally, I will submit a PR asap.

Great job!

gitcoindev · 2023-08-14T07:37:35Z

Hi! I see my five pull requests have stalled for the last weeks. I still have some resources to help solve any issue that you think would be helpful to push the project forward. Is there anything to work on or would you like me to rework anything @janus @naftalimurgor @van-orton @wu-emma ?

wu-emma · 2023-08-14T08:19:55Z

@gitcoindev thank you for the participation! Personally I think we can check BIPs that are not implemented in BTC and check if we can add ideas to BGL that we find interesting.
@janus @van-orton guys, could you please check if we can merge PRs and other ideas for activity? Thanks!

janus · 2023-08-14T20:36:05Z

@gitcoindev thank you for the participation! Personally I think we can check BIPs that are not implemented in BTC and check if we can add ideas to BGL that we find interesting. @janus @van-orton guys, could you please check if we can merge PRs and other ideas for activity? Thanks!

@wu-emma I will merge the PRs. I will also cherry-pick Bitcoin repo to July 31st. I would be discussing with @van-orton.

janus · 2023-08-15T12:30:14Z

Hi! I see my five pull requests have stalled for the last weeks. I still have some resources to help solve any issue that you think would be helpful to push the project forward. Is there anything to work on or would you like me to rework anything @janus @naftalimurgor @van-orton @wu-emma ?

Your last RP is great. It opened by eyes to the issue however the root of the issue is index out of range. I noticed that there was some left over codes that caused that. I have updated https://github.com/BitgesellOfficial/bitgesell/tree/release-0.1.10. I commented in one of your PRs, however, you have yet to respond. I will go through the rest of the PRs.

@laakie Please use this source, https://github.com/BitgesellOfficial/bitgesell/tree/release-0.1.10. And let me know the outcome.

gitcoindev · 2023-08-16T05:53:07Z

Hi @janus yes the root of the issue was index out of range. If you meant your comment in #127 we can close the pr now after the recent update, I guess you will fix it altogether when syncing to July 31st.

janus · 2023-08-16T10:26:34Z

Hi @janus yes the root of the issue was index out of range. If you meant your comment in #127 we can close the pr now after the recent update, I guess you will fix it altogether when syncing to July 31st.

@gitcoindev Who have not responded to review comments.

gitcoindev · 2023-08-17T14:01:13Z

Hi @janus yes the root of the issue was index out of range. If you meant your comment in #127 we can close the pr now after the recent update, I guess you will fix it altogether when syncing to July 31st.

@gitcoindev Who have not responded to review comments.

hi @janus I must have missed that one but cannot find it, is it possible for you to paste the link to that review comment?

laakie · 2024-03-22T08:47:29Z

Same problem occurs in v0.1.11
Reverting back to v0.1.8 for mining
https://github.com/BitgesellOfficial/bitgesell/releases/tag/0.1.11

./BGL-cli getblocktemplate '{"rules": ["segwit"]}'
error code: -1
error message:
basic_string::_M_construct null not valid

janus · 2024-03-24T05:30:21Z

Same problem occurs in v0.1.11 Reverting back to v0.1.8 for mining https://github.com/BitgesellOfficial/bitgesell/releases/tag/0.1.11

./BGL-cli getblocktemplate '{"rules": ["segwit"]}' error code: -1 error message: basic_string::_M_construct null not valid

I will get back to you.

janus · 2024-03-28T09:53:51Z

@laakie
I got the below using branch bitcoinsync31July2023 which should be same as the https://github.com/BitgesellOfficial/bitgesell/releases/tag/0.1.11. I use both BGL-cli and BGLd from the branch. I will compile v0.1.11 and try same.

{
  "capabilities": [
    "proposal"
  ],
  "version": 536870912,
  "rules": [
    "csv",
    "!segwit",
    "taproot_discarded",
    "taproot"
  ],
  "vbavailable": {
  },
  "vbrequired": 0,
  "previousblockhash": "000000000000068812b074c0f9a17296305f2fdd842f3e6afd6e2a157f9c6185",
  "transactions": [
  ],
  "coinbaseaux": {
  },
  "coinbasevalue": 2500000000,
  "longpollid": "000000000000068812b074c0f9a17296305f2fdd842f3e6afd6e2a157f9c618582817",
  "target": "00000000000007eb160000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000",
  "mintime": 1711617892,
  "mutable": [
    "time",
    "transactions",
    "prevblock"
  ],
  "noncerange": "00000000ffffffff",
  "sigoplimit": 80000,
  "sizelimit": 400000,
  "weightlimit": 400000,
  "curtime": 1711619238,
  "bits": "1a07eb16",
  "height": 205608,
  "default_witness_commitment": "6a24aa21a9ede2f61c3f71d1defd3fa999dfa36953755c690689799962b48bebd836974e8cf9"
}```

wu-emma · 2024-04-08T09:15:39Z

@janus @laakie @naftalimurgor
@van-orton has reuploaded 0.1.11 builds from master branch and they should have the issue with getblocktemplate fixed. Please try the build and report if all is working properly. It was related to taproot version bit that was overwritten.

laakie · 2024-04-08T17:54:42Z

I've compiled from the new master and can confirm the changes are working as expected.
Thanks for all the hard work and effort put into updating the code.

naftalimurgor · 2024-04-09T08:09:26Z

This is indeed great. I'll update my affected repos as well.

gitcoindev added a commit to gitcoindev/bitgesell that referenced this issue Aug 1, 2023

src/deploymentstatus: Add missing taproot_old deployment.

24532e8

Fixes BitgesellOfficial#123

gitcoindev added a commit to gitcoindev/bitgesell that referenced this issue Aug 1, 2023

src/deploymentstatus: Add missing taproot_old deployment.

0ccf8de

Fixes BitgesellOfficial#123

gitcoindev added a commit to gitcoindev/bitgesell that referenced this issue Aug 1, 2023

src/deploymentstatus: Add missing taproot_old deployment.

6ba6b56

Fixes BitgesellOfficial#123

gitcoindev mentioned this issue Aug 1, 2023

src/deploymentstatus: Add missing taproot_old deployment. #128

Merged

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Getblocktemplate broken in v 0.1.10 #123

Getblocktemplate broken in v 0.1.10 #123

laakie commented Apr 20, 2023

naftalimurgor commented Apr 21, 2023

naftalimurgor commented Jun 30, 2023

laakie commented Jun 30, 2023

naftalimurgor commented Jun 30, 2023

laakie commented Jun 30, 2023

janus commented Jun 30, 2023

naftalimurgor commented Jun 30, 2023

janus commented Jul 8, 2023

gitcoindev commented Aug 1, 2023

gitcoindev commented Aug 1, 2023

janus commented Aug 1, 2023

gitcoindev commented Aug 14, 2023

wu-emma commented Aug 14, 2023

janus commented Aug 14, 2023

janus commented Aug 15, 2023

gitcoindev commented Aug 16, 2023 •

edited

Loading

janus commented Aug 16, 2023

gitcoindev commented Aug 17, 2023

laakie commented Mar 22, 2024 •

edited

Loading

janus commented Mar 24, 2024

janus commented Mar 28, 2024

wu-emma commented Apr 8, 2024

laakie commented Apr 8, 2024

naftalimurgor commented Apr 9, 2024

Getblocktemplate broken in v 0.1.10 #123

Getblocktemplate broken in v 0.1.10 #123

Comments

laakie commented Apr 20, 2023

naftalimurgor commented Apr 21, 2023

naftalimurgor commented Jun 30, 2023

laakie commented Jun 30, 2023

naftalimurgor commented Jun 30, 2023

laakie commented Jun 30, 2023

janus commented Jun 30, 2023

naftalimurgor commented Jun 30, 2023

janus commented Jul 8, 2023

gitcoindev commented Aug 1, 2023

gitcoindev commented Aug 1, 2023

janus commented Aug 1, 2023

gitcoindev commented Aug 14, 2023

wu-emma commented Aug 14, 2023

janus commented Aug 14, 2023

janus commented Aug 15, 2023

gitcoindev commented Aug 16, 2023 • edited Loading

janus commented Aug 16, 2023

gitcoindev commented Aug 17, 2023

laakie commented Mar 22, 2024 • edited Loading

janus commented Mar 24, 2024

janus commented Mar 28, 2024

wu-emma commented Apr 8, 2024

laakie commented Apr 8, 2024

naftalimurgor commented Apr 9, 2024

gitcoindev commented Aug 16, 2023 •

edited

Loading

laakie commented Mar 22, 2024 •

edited

Loading