Replace `opt_anchors` with `ChannelTypeFeatures` by arik-so · Pull Request #2361 · lightningdevkit/rust-lightning

arik-so · 2023-06-16T10:47:33Z

This is meant to replace #2321.

Fixes#1971.

TheBlueMatt · 2023-06-16T17:28:36Z

If we want to do this it has to happen in 116. Its by no means blocking 116, but tagging it as 116 so that we don't forget it just by accident. Will take a look when its non-draft/CI passes.

codecov-commenter · 2023-06-16T22:08:12Z

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 95.02% and project coverage change: +0.82 🎉

Comparison is base (c5214c2) 90.28% compared to head (4b1f6ca) 91.11%.

❗ Your organization is not using the GitHub App Integration. As a result you may experience degraded service beginning May 15th. Please install the Github App Integration for your organization. Read more.

Additional details and impacted files

@@ Coverage Diff @@## main #2361 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 90.28% 91.11% +0.82% 
==========================================
Files 106 106 Lines 54323 63856 +9533 Branches 54323 63856 +9533 ==========================================
+ Hits 49047 58180 +9133 - Misses 5276 5676 +400

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
lightning/src/ln/functional_test_utils.rs	`89.29% <0.00%> (+2.00%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/chain/package.rs	`91.43% <88.99%> (+0.39%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs	`94.72% <95.45%> (-0.01%)`	⬇️
lightning/src/ln/chan_utils.rs	`94.51% <95.83%> (-0.34%)`	⬇️
lightning/src/ln/channel.rs	`92.49% <97.26%> (+2.67%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/chain/onchaintx.rs	`92.72% <100.00%> (-0.33%)`	⬇️
lightning/src/events/bump_transaction.rs	`41.55% <100.00%> (+0.76%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/ln/features.rs	`97.09% <100.00%> (+0.79%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/ln/functional_tests.rs	`99.13% <100.00%> (+0.90%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/ln/monitor_tests.rs	`98.05% <100.00%> (-0.23%)`	⬇️
... and 2 more

... and 8 files with indirect coverage changes

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

arik-so · 2023-06-16T22:27:59Z

Hey @devrandom @ksedgwic, tagging you here to let you know that this is the serialization-changing PR I was talking about.

wpaulino

One minor drawback of using ChannelTypeFeatures instead of our own enum of supported channel types is that we'll store the full feature bit vector in all these different places. We're already up to 8 bytes per occurrence and it will only get bigger with new features, but not something we really need to worry about for now.

TheBlueMatt

This really needs to be more than one commit

arik-so · 2023-06-19T16:58:10Z

It's not really super splittable. I could modify the adjusted structs one by one, but the unit test modification onus would still be quite major for each commit, and it would make less sense than modifying all six structs at once.

The only thing that really lends itself to a split is the new feature and the new methods on channel type features.

TheBlueMatt · 2023-06-19T17:06:22Z

You could do some of the new utility functions separately. The biggest issue with it all being in the same commit isn't the raw diff size but more the various different changes across different files in the same commit. A commit that is super repetitive and just making the same change over and over again in a ton of places is fine, but limiting the number of different changes is good.

arik-so · 2023-06-19T19:37:17Z

I will squash the last two commits into the others later. Just wanna run cloud CI first before messing up too much at once.

TheBlueMatt · 2023-06-19T22:48:47Z

Needs rebase now that anchors handling bits landed.

arik-so · 2023-06-19T22:51:04Z

Yeah I can see that

TheBlueMatt · 2023-06-20T18:00:20Z

Fixes #1971

TheBlueMatt

You still have a commit which isn't word-wrapped at 60 chars.

Specifically, introduce a new constructor for an anchors- supporting feature set, as well as methods that will maintain forwards-compatible deserialization in older versions.

wpaulino · 2023-06-22T23:05:10Z

-	(10, built, required),
-	(12, htlcs, vec_type),
-	(14, opt_anchors, option),
-	(16, opt_non_zero_fee_anchors, option),


Won't we break VLS if they're setting this and storing them?

they did say they weren't, but we should confirm @devrandom @ksedgwic

This change modifies six structs that were keeping track of anchors features with an `opt_anchors` field, as well as another field keeping track of nonzero-fee- anchor-support.

arik-so · 2023-06-16T10:47:33Z

This is meant to replace #2321.

Fixes#1971.

TheBlueMatt · 2023-06-16T17:28:36Z

If we want to do this it has to happen in 116. Its by no means blocking 116, but tagging it as 116 so that we don't forget it just by accident. Will take a look when its non-draft/CI passes.

codecov-commenter · 2023-06-16T22:08:12Z

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 95.02% and project coverage change: +0.82 🎉

Comparison is base (c5214c2) 90.28% compared to head (4b1f6ca) 91.11%.

❗ Your organization is not using the GitHub App Integration. As a result you may experience degraded service beginning May 15th. Please install the Github App Integration for your organization. Read more.

Additional details and impacted files

@@ Coverage Diff @@## main #2361 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 90.28% 91.11% +0.82% 
==========================================
Files 106 106 Lines 54323 63856 +9533 Branches 54323 63856 +9533 ==========================================
+ Hits 49047 58180 +9133 - Misses 5276 5676 +400

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
lightning/src/ln/functional_test_utils.rs	`89.29% <0.00%> (+2.00%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/chain/package.rs	`91.43% <88.99%> (+0.39%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs	`94.72% <95.45%> (-0.01%)`	⬇️
lightning/src/ln/chan_utils.rs	`94.51% <95.83%> (-0.34%)`	⬇️
lightning/src/ln/channel.rs	`92.49% <97.26%> (+2.67%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/chain/onchaintx.rs	`92.72% <100.00%> (-0.33%)`	⬇️
lightning/src/events/bump_transaction.rs	`41.55% <100.00%> (+0.76%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/ln/features.rs	`97.09% <100.00%> (+0.79%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/ln/functional_tests.rs	`99.13% <100.00%> (+0.90%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/ln/monitor_tests.rs	`98.05% <100.00%> (-0.23%)`	⬇️
... and 2 more

... and 8 files with indirect coverage changes

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

arik-so · 2023-06-16T22:27:59Z

Hey @devrandom @ksedgwic, tagging you here to let you know that this is the serialization-changing PR I was talking about.

wpaulino

One minor drawback of using ChannelTypeFeatures instead of our own enum of supported channel types is that we'll store the full feature bit vector in all these different places. We're already up to 8 bytes per occurrence and it will only get bigger with new features, but not something we really need to worry about for now.

TheBlueMatt

This really needs to be more than one commit

arik-so · 2023-06-19T16:58:10Z

It's not really super splittable. I could modify the adjusted structs one by one, but the unit test modification onus would still be quite major for each commit, and it would make less sense than modifying all six structs at once.

The only thing that really lends itself to a split is the new feature and the new methods on channel type features.

TheBlueMatt · 2023-06-19T17:06:22Z

You could do some of the new utility functions separately. The biggest issue with it all being in the same commit isn't the raw diff size but more the various different changes across different files in the same commit. A commit that is super repetitive and just making the same change over and over again in a ton of places is fine, but limiting the number of different changes is good.

arik-so · 2023-06-19T19:37:17Z

I will squash the last two commits into the others later. Just wanna run cloud CI first before messing up too much at once.

TheBlueMatt · 2023-06-19T22:48:47Z

Needs rebase now that anchors handling bits landed.

arik-so · 2023-06-19T22:51:04Z

Yeah I can see that

TheBlueMatt · 2023-06-20T18:00:20Z

Fixes #1971

TheBlueMatt

You still have a commit which isn't word-wrapped at 60 chars.

Specifically, introduce a new constructor for an anchors- supporting feature set, as well as methods that will maintain forwards-compatible deserialization in older versions.

wpaulino · 2023-06-22T23:05:10Z

-	(10, built, required),
-	(12, htlcs, vec_type),
-	(14, opt_anchors, option),
-	(16, opt_non_zero_fee_anchors, option),


Won't we break VLS if they're setting this and storing them?

they did say they weren't, but we should confirm @devrandom @ksedgwic

This change modifies six structs that were keeping track of anchors features with an `opt_anchors` field, as well as another field keeping track of nonzero-fee- anchor-support.

arik-so · 2023-06-16T10:47:33Z

This is meant to replace #2321.

Fixes#1971.

TheBlueMatt · 2023-06-16T17:28:36Z

If we want to do this it has to happen in 116. Its by no means blocking 116, but tagging it as 116 so that we don't forget it just by accident. Will take a look when its non-draft/CI passes.

codecov-commenter · 2023-06-16T22:08:12Z

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 95.02% and project coverage change: +0.82 🎉

Comparison is base (c5214c2) 90.28% compared to head (4b1f6ca) 91.11%.

❗ Your organization is not using the GitHub App Integration. As a result you may experience degraded service beginning May 15th. Please install the Github App Integration for your organization. Read more.

Additional details and impacted files

@@ Coverage Diff @@## main #2361 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 90.28% 91.11% +0.82% 
==========================================
Files 106 106 Lines 54323 63856 +9533 Branches 54323 63856 +9533 ==========================================
+ Hits 49047 58180 +9133 - Misses 5276 5676 +400

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
lightning/src/ln/functional_test_utils.rs	`89.29% <0.00%> (+2.00%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/chain/package.rs	`91.43% <88.99%> (+0.39%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs	`94.72% <95.45%> (-0.01%)`	⬇️
lightning/src/ln/chan_utils.rs	`94.51% <95.83%> (-0.34%)`	⬇️
lightning/src/ln/channel.rs	`92.49% <97.26%> (+2.67%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/chain/onchaintx.rs	`92.72% <100.00%> (-0.33%)`	⬇️
lightning/src/events/bump_transaction.rs	`41.55% <100.00%> (+0.76%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/ln/features.rs	`97.09% <100.00%> (+0.79%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/ln/functional_tests.rs	`99.13% <100.00%> (+0.90%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/ln/monitor_tests.rs	`98.05% <100.00%> (-0.23%)`	⬇️
... and 2 more

... and 8 files with indirect coverage changes

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

arik-so · 2023-06-16T22:27:59Z

Hey @devrandom @ksedgwic, tagging you here to let you know that this is the serialization-changing PR I was talking about.

wpaulino

One minor drawback of using ChannelTypeFeatures instead of our own enum of supported channel types is that we'll store the full feature bit vector in all these different places. We're already up to 8 bytes per occurrence and it will only get bigger with new features, but not something we really need to worry about for now.

TheBlueMatt

This really needs to be more than one commit

arik-so · 2023-06-19T16:58:10Z

It's not really super splittable. I could modify the adjusted structs one by one, but the unit test modification onus would still be quite major for each commit, and it would make less sense than modifying all six structs at once.

The only thing that really lends itself to a split is the new feature and the new methods on channel type features.

TheBlueMatt · 2023-06-19T17:06:22Z

You could do some of the new utility functions separately. The biggest issue with it all being in the same commit isn't the raw diff size but more the various different changes across different files in the same commit. A commit that is super repetitive and just making the same change over and over again in a ton of places is fine, but limiting the number of different changes is good.

arik-so · 2023-06-19T19:37:17Z

I will squash the last two commits into the others later. Just wanna run cloud CI first before messing up too much at once.

TheBlueMatt · 2023-06-19T22:48:47Z

Needs rebase now that anchors handling bits landed.

arik-so · 2023-06-19T22:51:04Z

Yeah I can see that

TheBlueMatt · 2023-06-20T18:00:20Z

Fixes #1971

TheBlueMatt

You still have a commit which isn't word-wrapped at 60 chars.

Specifically, introduce a new constructor for an anchors- supporting feature set, as well as methods that will maintain forwards-compatible deserialization in older versions.

wpaulino · 2023-06-22T23:05:10Z

-	(10, built, required),
-	(12, htlcs, vec_type),
-	(14, opt_anchors, option),
-	(16, opt_non_zero_fee_anchors, option),


Won't we break VLS if they're setting this and storing them?

they did say they weren't, but we should confirm @devrandom @ksedgwic

This change modifies six structs that were keeping track of anchors features with an `opt_anchors` field, as well as another field keeping track of nonzero-fee- anchor-support.

arik-so · 2023-06-16T10:47:33Z

This is meant to replace #2321.

Fixes#1971.

TheBlueMatt · 2023-06-16T17:28:36Z

If we want to do this it has to happen in 116. Its by no means blocking 116, but tagging it as 116 so that we don't forget it just by accident. Will take a look when its non-draft/CI passes.

codecov-commenter · 2023-06-16T22:08:12Z

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 95.02% and project coverage change: +0.82 🎉

Comparison is base (c5214c2) 90.28% compared to head (4b1f6ca) 91.11%.

❗ Your organization is not using the GitHub App Integration. As a result you may experience degraded service beginning May 15th. Please install the Github App Integration for your organization. Read more.

Additional details and impacted files

@@ Coverage Diff @@## main #2361 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 90.28% 91.11% +0.82% 
==========================================
Files 106 106 Lines 54323 63856 +9533 Branches 54323 63856 +9533 ==========================================
+ Hits 49047 58180 +9133 - Misses 5276 5676 +400

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
lightning/src/ln/functional_test_utils.rs	`89.29% <0.00%> (+2.00%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/chain/package.rs	`91.43% <88.99%> (+0.39%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs	`94.72% <95.45%> (-0.01%)`	⬇️
lightning/src/ln/chan_utils.rs	`94.51% <95.83%> (-0.34%)`	⬇️
lightning/src/ln/channel.rs	`92.49% <97.26%> (+2.67%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/chain/onchaintx.rs	`92.72% <100.00%> (-0.33%)`	⬇️
lightning/src/events/bump_transaction.rs	`41.55% <100.00%> (+0.76%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/ln/features.rs	`97.09% <100.00%> (+0.79%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/ln/functional_tests.rs	`99.13% <100.00%> (+0.90%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/ln/monitor_tests.rs	`98.05% <100.00%> (-0.23%)`	⬇️
... and 2 more

... and 8 files with indirect coverage changes

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

arik-so · 2023-06-16T22:27:59Z

Hey @devrandom @ksedgwic, tagging you here to let you know that this is the serialization-changing PR I was talking about.

wpaulino

One minor drawback of using ChannelTypeFeatures instead of our own enum of supported channel types is that we'll store the full feature bit vector in all these different places. We're already up to 8 bytes per occurrence and it will only get bigger with new features, but not something we really need to worry about for now.

TheBlueMatt

This really needs to be more than one commit

arik-so · 2023-06-19T16:58:10Z

It's not really super splittable. I could modify the adjusted structs one by one, but the unit test modification onus would still be quite major for each commit, and it would make less sense than modifying all six structs at once.

The only thing that really lends itself to a split is the new feature and the new methods on channel type features.

TheBlueMatt · 2023-06-19T17:06:22Z

You could do some of the new utility functions separately. The biggest issue with it all being in the same commit isn't the raw diff size but more the various different changes across different files in the same commit. A commit that is super repetitive and just making the same change over and over again in a ton of places is fine, but limiting the number of different changes is good.

arik-so · 2023-06-19T19:37:17Z

I will squash the last two commits into the others later. Just wanna run cloud CI first before messing up too much at once.

TheBlueMatt · 2023-06-19T22:48:47Z

Needs rebase now that anchors handling bits landed.

arik-so · 2023-06-19T22:51:04Z

Yeah I can see that

TheBlueMatt · 2023-06-20T18:00:20Z

Fixes #1971

TheBlueMatt

You still have a commit which isn't word-wrapped at 60 chars.

Specifically, introduce a new constructor for an anchors- supporting feature set, as well as methods that will maintain forwards-compatible deserialization in older versions.

wpaulino · 2023-06-22T23:05:10Z

-	(10, built, required),
-	(12, htlcs, vec_type),
-	(14, opt_anchors, option),
-	(16, opt_non_zero_fee_anchors, option),


Won't we break VLS if they're setting this and storing them?

they did say they weren't, but we should confirm @devrandom @ksedgwic

This change modifies six structs that were keeping track of anchors features with an `opt_anchors` field, as well as another field keeping track of nonzero-fee- anchor-support.

arik-so · 2023-06-16T10:47:33Z

This is meant to replace #2321.

Fixes#1971.

TheBlueMatt · 2023-06-16T17:28:36Z

If we want to do this it has to happen in 116. Its by no means blocking 116, but tagging it as 116 so that we don't forget it just by accident. Will take a look when its non-draft/CI passes.

codecov-commenter · 2023-06-16T22:08:12Z

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 95.02% and project coverage change: +0.82 🎉

Comparison is base (c5214c2) 90.28% compared to head (4b1f6ca) 91.11%.

❗ Your organization is not using the GitHub App Integration. As a result you may experience degraded service beginning May 15th. Please install the Github App Integration for your organization. Read more.

Additional details and impacted files

@@ Coverage Diff @@## main #2361 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 90.28% 91.11% +0.82% 
==========================================
Files 106 106 Lines 54323 63856 +9533 Branches 54323 63856 +9533 ==========================================
+ Hits 49047 58180 +9133 - Misses 5276 5676 +400

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
lightning/src/ln/functional_test_utils.rs	`89.29% <0.00%> (+2.00%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/chain/package.rs	`91.43% <88.99%> (+0.39%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs	`94.72% <95.45%> (-0.01%)`	⬇️
lightning/src/ln/chan_utils.rs	`94.51% <95.83%> (-0.34%)`	⬇️
lightning/src/ln/channel.rs	`92.49% <97.26%> (+2.67%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/chain/onchaintx.rs	`92.72% <100.00%> (-0.33%)`	⬇️
lightning/src/events/bump_transaction.rs	`41.55% <100.00%> (+0.76%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/ln/features.rs	`97.09% <100.00%> (+0.79%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/ln/functional_tests.rs	`99.13% <100.00%> (+0.90%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/ln/monitor_tests.rs	`98.05% <100.00%> (-0.23%)`	⬇️
... and 2 more

... and 8 files with indirect coverage changes

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

arik-so · 2023-06-16T22:27:59Z

Hey @devrandom @ksedgwic, tagging you here to let you know that this is the serialization-changing PR I was talking about.

wpaulino

One minor drawback of using ChannelTypeFeatures instead of our own enum of supported channel types is that we'll store the full feature bit vector in all these different places. We're already up to 8 bytes per occurrence and it will only get bigger with new features, but not something we really need to worry about for now.

TheBlueMatt

This really needs to be more than one commit

arik-so · 2023-06-19T16:58:10Z

It's not really super splittable. I could modify the adjusted structs one by one, but the unit test modification onus would still be quite major for each commit, and it would make less sense than modifying all six structs at once.

The only thing that really lends itself to a split is the new feature and the new methods on channel type features.

TheBlueMatt · 2023-06-19T17:06:22Z

You could do some of the new utility functions separately. The biggest issue with it all being in the same commit isn't the raw diff size but more the various different changes across different files in the same commit. A commit that is super repetitive and just making the same change over and over again in a ton of places is fine, but limiting the number of different changes is good.

arik-so · 2023-06-19T19:37:17Z

I will squash the last two commits into the others later. Just wanna run cloud CI first before messing up too much at once.

TheBlueMatt · 2023-06-19T22:48:47Z

Needs rebase now that anchors handling bits landed.

arik-so · 2023-06-19T22:51:04Z

Yeah I can see that

TheBlueMatt · 2023-06-20T18:00:20Z

Fixes #1971

TheBlueMatt

You still have a commit which isn't word-wrapped at 60 chars.

Specifically, introduce a new constructor for an anchors- supporting feature set, as well as methods that will maintain forwards-compatible deserialization in older versions.

wpaulino · 2023-06-22T23:05:10Z

-	(10, built, required),
-	(12, htlcs, vec_type),
-	(14, opt_anchors, option),
-	(16, opt_non_zero_fee_anchors, option),


Won't we break VLS if they're setting this and storing them?

they did say they weren't, but we should confirm @devrandom @ksedgwic

This change modifies six structs that were keeping track of anchors features with an `opt_anchors` field, as well as another field keeping track of nonzero-fee- anchor-support.

arik-so · 2023-06-16T10:47:33Z

This is meant to replace #2321.

Fixes#1971.

TheBlueMatt · 2023-06-16T17:28:36Z

If we want to do this it has to happen in 116. Its by no means blocking 116, but tagging it as 116 so that we don't forget it just by accident. Will take a look when its non-draft/CI passes.

codecov-commenter · 2023-06-16T22:08:12Z

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 95.02% and project coverage change: +0.82 🎉

Comparison is base (c5214c2) 90.28% compared to head (4b1f6ca) 91.11%.

❗ Your organization is not using the GitHub App Integration. As a result you may experience degraded service beginning May 15th. Please install the Github App Integration for your organization. Read more.

Additional details and impacted files

@@ Coverage Diff @@## main #2361 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 90.28% 91.11% +0.82% 
==========================================
Files 106 106 Lines 54323 63856 +9533 Branches 54323 63856 +9533 ==========================================
+ Hits 49047 58180 +9133 - Misses 5276 5676 +400

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
lightning/src/ln/functional_test_utils.rs	`89.29% <0.00%> (+2.00%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/chain/package.rs	`91.43% <88.99%> (+0.39%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs	`94.72% <95.45%> (-0.01%)`	⬇️
lightning/src/ln/chan_utils.rs	`94.51% <95.83%> (-0.34%)`	⬇️
lightning/src/ln/channel.rs	`92.49% <97.26%> (+2.67%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/chain/onchaintx.rs	`92.72% <100.00%> (-0.33%)`	⬇️
lightning/src/events/bump_transaction.rs	`41.55% <100.00%> (+0.76%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/ln/features.rs	`97.09% <100.00%> (+0.79%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/ln/functional_tests.rs	`99.13% <100.00%> (+0.90%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/ln/monitor_tests.rs	`98.05% <100.00%> (-0.23%)`	⬇️
... and 2 more

... and 8 files with indirect coverage changes

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

arik-so · 2023-06-16T22:27:59Z

Hey @devrandom @ksedgwic, tagging you here to let you know that this is the serialization-changing PR I was talking about.

wpaulino

One minor drawback of using ChannelTypeFeatures instead of our own enum of supported channel types is that we'll store the full feature bit vector in all these different places. We're already up to 8 bytes per occurrence and it will only get bigger with new features, but not something we really need to worry about for now.

TheBlueMatt

This really needs to be more than one commit

arik-so · 2023-06-19T16:58:10Z

It's not really super splittable. I could modify the adjusted structs one by one, but the unit test modification onus would still be quite major for each commit, and it would make less sense than modifying all six structs at once.

The only thing that really lends itself to a split is the new feature and the new methods on channel type features.

TheBlueMatt · 2023-06-19T17:06:22Z

You could do some of the new utility functions separately. The biggest issue with it all being in the same commit isn't the raw diff size but more the various different changes across different files in the same commit. A commit that is super repetitive and just making the same change over and over again in a ton of places is fine, but limiting the number of different changes is good.

arik-so · 2023-06-19T19:37:17Z

I will squash the last two commits into the others later. Just wanna run cloud CI first before messing up too much at once.

TheBlueMatt · 2023-06-19T22:48:47Z

Needs rebase now that anchors handling bits landed.

arik-so · 2023-06-19T22:51:04Z

Yeah I can see that

TheBlueMatt · 2023-06-20T18:00:20Z

Fixes #1971

TheBlueMatt

You still have a commit which isn't word-wrapped at 60 chars.

Specifically, introduce a new constructor for an anchors- supporting feature set, as well as methods that will maintain forwards-compatible deserialization in older versions.

wpaulino · 2023-06-22T23:05:10Z

-	(10, built, required),
-	(12, htlcs, vec_type),
-	(14, opt_anchors, option),
-	(16, opt_non_zero_fee_anchors, option),


Won't we break VLS if they're setting this and storing them?

they did say they weren't, but we should confirm @devrandom @ksedgwic

This change modifies six structs that were keeping track of anchors features with an `opt_anchors` field, as well as another field keeping track of nonzero-fee- anchor-support.

arik-so · 2023-06-16T10:47:33Z

This is meant to replace #2321.

Fixes#1971.

TheBlueMatt · 2023-06-16T17:28:36Z

If we want to do this it has to happen in 116. Its by no means blocking 116, but tagging it as 116 so that we don't forget it just by accident. Will take a look when its non-draft/CI passes.

codecov-commenter · 2023-06-16T22:08:12Z

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 95.02% and project coverage change: +0.82 🎉

Comparison is base (c5214c2) 90.28% compared to head (4b1f6ca) 91.11%.

❗ Your organization is not using the GitHub App Integration. As a result you may experience degraded service beginning May 15th. Please install the Github App Integration for your organization. Read more.

Additional details and impacted files

@@ Coverage Diff @@## main #2361 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 90.28% 91.11% +0.82% 
==========================================
Files 106 106 Lines 54323 63856 +9533 Branches 54323 63856 +9533 ==========================================
+ Hits 49047 58180 +9133 - Misses 5276 5676 +400

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
lightning/src/ln/functional_test_utils.rs	`89.29% <0.00%> (+2.00%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/chain/package.rs	`91.43% <88.99%> (+0.39%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs	`94.72% <95.45%> (-0.01%)`	⬇️
lightning/src/ln/chan_utils.rs	`94.51% <95.83%> (-0.34%)`	⬇️
lightning/src/ln/channel.rs	`92.49% <97.26%> (+2.67%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/chain/onchaintx.rs	`92.72% <100.00%> (-0.33%)`	⬇️
lightning/src/events/bump_transaction.rs	`41.55% <100.00%> (+0.76%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/ln/features.rs	`97.09% <100.00%> (+0.79%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/ln/functional_tests.rs	`99.13% <100.00%> (+0.90%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/ln/monitor_tests.rs	`98.05% <100.00%> (-0.23%)`	⬇️
... and 2 more

... and 8 files with indirect coverage changes

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

arik-so · 2023-06-16T22:27:59Z

Hey @devrandom @ksedgwic, tagging you here to let you know that this is the serialization-changing PR I was talking about.

wpaulino

One minor drawback of using ChannelTypeFeatures instead of our own enum of supported channel types is that we'll store the full feature bit vector in all these different places. We're already up to 8 bytes per occurrence and it will only get bigger with new features, but not something we really need to worry about for now.

TheBlueMatt

This really needs to be more than one commit

arik-so · 2023-06-19T16:58:10Z

It's not really super splittable. I could modify the adjusted structs one by one, but the unit test modification onus would still be quite major for each commit, and it would make less sense than modifying all six structs at once.

The only thing that really lends itself to a split is the new feature and the new methods on channel type features.

TheBlueMatt · 2023-06-19T17:06:22Z

You could do some of the new utility functions separately. The biggest issue with it all being in the same commit isn't the raw diff size but more the various different changes across different files in the same commit. A commit that is super repetitive and just making the same change over and over again in a ton of places is fine, but limiting the number of different changes is good.

arik-so · 2023-06-19T19:37:17Z

I will squash the last two commits into the others later. Just wanna run cloud CI first before messing up too much at once.

TheBlueMatt · 2023-06-19T22:48:47Z

Needs rebase now that anchors handling bits landed.

arik-so · 2023-06-19T22:51:04Z

Yeah I can see that

TheBlueMatt · 2023-06-20T18:00:20Z

Fixes #1971

TheBlueMatt

You still have a commit which isn't word-wrapped at 60 chars.

Specifically, introduce a new constructor for an anchors- supporting feature set, as well as methods that will maintain forwards-compatible deserialization in older versions.

wpaulino · 2023-06-22T23:05:10Z

-	(10, built, required),
-	(12, htlcs, vec_type),
-	(14, opt_anchors, option),
-	(16, opt_non_zero_fee_anchors, option),


Won't we break VLS if they're setting this and storing them?

they did say they weren't, but we should confirm @devrandom @ksedgwic

This change modifies six structs that were keeping track of anchors features with an `opt_anchors` field, as well as another field keeping track of nonzero-fee- anchor-support.

arik-so · 2023-06-16T10:47:33Z

This is meant to replace #2321.

Fixes#1971.

TheBlueMatt · 2023-06-16T17:28:36Z

If we want to do this it has to happen in 116. Its by no means blocking 116, but tagging it as 116 so that we don't forget it just by accident. Will take a look when its non-draft/CI passes.

codecov-commenter · 2023-06-16T22:08:12Z

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 95.02% and project coverage change: +0.82 🎉

Comparison is base (c5214c2) 90.28% compared to head (4b1f6ca) 91.11%.

❗ Your organization is not using the GitHub App Integration. As a result you may experience degraded service beginning May 15th. Please install the Github App Integration for your organization. Read more.

Additional details and impacted files

@@ Coverage Diff @@## main #2361 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 90.28% 91.11% +0.82% 
==========================================
Files 106 106 Lines 54323 63856 +9533 Branches 54323 63856 +9533 ==========================================
+ Hits 49047 58180 +9133 - Misses 5276 5676 +400

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
lightning/src/ln/functional_test_utils.rs	`89.29% <0.00%> (+2.00%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/chain/package.rs	`91.43% <88.99%> (+0.39%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs	`94.72% <95.45%> (-0.01%)`	⬇️
lightning/src/ln/chan_utils.rs	`94.51% <95.83%> (-0.34%)`	⬇️
lightning/src/ln/channel.rs	`92.49% <97.26%> (+2.67%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/chain/onchaintx.rs	`92.72% <100.00%> (-0.33%)`	⬇️
lightning/src/events/bump_transaction.rs	`41.55% <100.00%> (+0.76%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/ln/features.rs	`97.09% <100.00%> (+0.79%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/ln/functional_tests.rs	`99.13% <100.00%> (+0.90%)`	⬆️
lightning/src/ln/monitor_tests.rs	`98.05% <100.00%> (-0.23%)`	⬇️
... and 2 more

... and 8 files with indirect coverage changes

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

arik-so · 2023-06-16T22:27:59Z

Hey @devrandom @ksedgwic, tagging you here to let you know that this is the serialization-changing PR I was talking about.

wpaulino

One minor drawback of using ChannelTypeFeatures instead of our own enum of supported channel types is that we'll store the full feature bit vector in all these different places. We're already up to 8 bytes per occurrence and it will only get bigger with new features, but not something we really need to worry about for now.

TheBlueMatt

This really needs to be more than one commit

arik-so · 2023-06-19T16:58:10Z

It's not really super splittable. I could modify the adjusted structs one by one, but the unit test modification onus would still be quite major for each commit, and it would make less sense than modifying all six structs at once.

The only thing that really lends itself to a split is the new feature and the new methods on channel type features.

TheBlueMatt · 2023-06-19T17:06:22Z

You could do some of the new utility functions separately. The biggest issue with it all being in the same commit isn't the raw diff size but more the various different changes across different files in the same commit. A commit that is super repetitive and just making the same change over and over again in a ton of places is fine, but limiting the number of different changes is good.

arik-so · 2023-06-19T19:37:17Z

I will squash the last two commits into the others later. Just wanna run cloud CI first before messing up too much at once.

TheBlueMatt · 2023-06-19T22:48:47Z

Needs rebase now that anchors handling bits landed.

arik-so · 2023-06-19T22:51:04Z

Yeah I can see that

TheBlueMatt · 2023-06-20T18:00:20Z

Fixes #1971

TheBlueMatt

You still have a commit which isn't word-wrapped at 60 chars.

Specifically, introduce a new constructor for an anchors- supporting feature set, as well as methods that will maintain forwards-compatible deserialization in older versions.

wpaulino · 2023-06-22T23:05:10Z

-	(10, built, required),
-	(12, htlcs, vec_type),
-	(14, opt_anchors, option),
-	(16, opt_non_zero_fee_anchors, option),


Won't we break VLS if they're setting this and storing them?

they did say they weren't, but we should confirm @devrandom @ksedgwic

This change modifies six structs that were keeping track of anchors features with an `opt_anchors` field, as well as another field keeping track of nonzero-fee- anchor-support.

TheBlueMatt added this to the 0.0.116 milestone Jun 16, 2023

arik-so force-pushed the 2023-06-anchor-channel-type-features branch 6 times, most recently from bf40449 to 51be419Compare June 16, 2023 19:56

arik-so force-pushed the 2023-06-anchor-channel-type-features branch from d3e1130 to 0821c74Compare June 16, 2023 22:27

arik-so marked this pull request as ready for review June 16, 2023 22:27

arik-so requested review from TheBlueMatt and wpaulino June 16, 2023 22:27

wpaulino reviewed Jun 16, 2023
View reviewed changes

Comment threadlightning/src/ln/features.rs Outdated
Comment threadlightning/src/ln/features.rs Outdated
Comment threadlightning/src/sign/mod.rs Outdated
Comment threadlightning/src/chain/package.rs Outdated

arik-so force-pushed the 2023-06-anchor-channel-type-features branch from 52c6e24 to d4b6b8bCompare June 17, 2023 02:54

TheBlueMatt reviewed Jun 19, 2023
View reviewed changes

Comment threadlightning/src/ln/features.rs Outdated
Comment threadlightning/src/ln/features.rs Outdated
Comment threadlightning/src/ln/features.rs Outdated
Comment threadlightning/src/ln/features.rs Outdated
Comment threadlightning/src/ln/features.rs Outdated

arik-so force-pushed the 2023-06-anchor-channel-type-features branch 2 times, most recently from a65221d to a602822Compare June 19, 2023 19:15

arik-so force-pushed the 2023-06-anchor-channel-type-features branch from 869f240 to 4655816Compare June 19, 2023 21:35

arik-so force-pushed the 2023-06-anchor-channel-type-features branch from 4655816 to c5b915eCompare June 19, 2023 22:55

TheBlueMatt reviewed Jun 20, 2023
View reviewed changes

Comment threadlightning/src/chain/package.rs Outdated

This was referenced Jun 20, 2023
Remove anchors config flag #2367
Merged
Require inbound channels with anchor outputs to be accepted manually #2368
Merged

arik-so force-pushed the 2023-06-anchor-channel-type-features branch 2 times, most recently from 80ec785 to d7064c7Compare June 22, 2023 00:32

TheBlueMatt reviewed Jun 22, 2023
View reviewed changes

Introduce nonzero fee anchors feature.
7d406d9

arik-so force-pushed the 2023-06-anchor-channel-type-features branch from d7064c7 to a271abcCompare June 22, 2023 21:54

jkczyz reviewed Jun 22, 2023
View reviewed changes

Comment threadlightning/src/ln/features.rs

arik-so added 4 commits June 22, 2023 15:23

Document nonzero anchors in features module.
38a2186

Reference-rhs bitwise operations for features.
bf22182

Define ChannelTypeFeatures methods for anchors logic.
06a720f
Specifically, introduce a new constructor for an anchors- supporting feature set, as well as methods that will maintain forwards-compatible deserialization in older versions.

Method for ChannelTypeFeatures serialization compatibility.
970b174

arik-so force-pushed the 2023-06-anchor-channel-type-features branch from a271abc to 9abdd4cCompare June 22, 2023 22:24

TheBlueMatt reviewed Jun 22, 2023
View reviewed changes

Comment threadlightning/src/ln/chan_utils.rs Outdated

wpaulino reviewed Jun 22, 2023
View reviewed changes

TheBlueMatt reviewed Jun 22, 2023
View reviewed changes

Comment threadlightning/src/ln/chan_utils.rs Outdated

arik-so force-pushed the 2023-06-anchor-channel-type-features branch 2 times, most recently from fff7da5 to 4b1f6caCompare June 23, 2023 04:06

TheBlueMatt reviewed Jun 23, 2023
View reviewed changes

Comment threadlightning/src/ln/chan_utils.rs Outdated

TheBlueMatt reviewed Jun 23, 2023
View reviewed changes

Comment threadlightning/src/ln/channel.rs Outdated

TheBlueMatt reviewed Jun 23, 2023
View reviewed changes

Comment threadlightning/src/sign/mod.rs Outdated

arik-so added 3 commits June 23, 2023 10:37

Replace opt_anchors with ChannelTypeFeatures
1d9a709
This change modifies six structs that were keeping track of anchors features with an `opt_anchors` field, as well as another field keeping track of nonzero-fee- anchor-support.

Verify channel type features for decoding.
ed5f9f6

Sync ChannelTransactionParameters features to ChannelContext.
82b5359

arik-so force-pushed the 2023-06-anchor-channel-type-features branch from 4b1f6ca to 82b5359Compare June 23, 2023 17:37

TheBlueMatt approved these changes Jun 23, 2023
View reviewed changes

wpaulino approved these changes Jun 23, 2023
View reviewed changes

TheBlueMatt merged commit 3973865 into lightningdevkit:mainJun 23, 2023

TheBlueMatt modified the milestones: 0.0.116alpha, 0.0.116 Jun 24, 2023

arik-so mentioned this pull request Jun 26, 2023
Introduce a ChannelType enum in lieu of opt_anchors#2321
Closed

jkczyz mentioned this pull request Mar 31, 2025
Remove redundant ChannelContext::channel_type#3678
Merged