Produce FundingInfo::Contribution variants in ChannelMonitor - #4498

Merged
TheBlueMatt merged 2 commits into
lightningdevkit:mainfrom
wpaulino:channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution
May 11, 2026
Merged

Produce FundingInfo::Contribution variants in ChannelMonitor#4498
TheBlueMatt merged 2 commits into
lightningdevkit:mainfrom
wpaulino:channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution

Conversation

@wpaulino

@wpaulinowpaulino commented Mar 19, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor
Similar to the `ChannelManager`, we expose the contributed inputs and
outputs of a splice via `FundingInfo::Contribution` at the
`ChannelMonitor` level such that we don't lose the context when the
channel closes while a splice is still pending.

@wpaulinowpaulino added this to the 0.3 milestone Mar 19, 2026
@wpaulino
wpaulino requested a review from jkczyzMarch 19, 2026 18:47
@wpaulinowpaulino self-assigned this Mar 19, 2026
@ldk-reviews-bot

ldk-reviews-bot commented Mar 19, 2026•
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown

👋 Thanks for assigning @jkczyz as a reviewer!
I'll wait for their review and will help manage the review process.
Once they submit their review, I'll check if a second reviewer would be helpful.

ldk-claude-review-bot
ldk-claude-review-bot reviewed Mar 19, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs Outdated
ldk-claude-review-bot
ldk-claude-review-bot reviewed Mar 19, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs Outdated
ldk-claude-review-bot
ldk-claude-review-bot reviewed Mar 19, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs Outdated
@ldk-claude-review-bot

ldk-claude-review-bot commented Mar 19, 2026•
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

I've thoroughly reviewed the entire PR diff, reading every file and hunk. I also reviewed my prior comments to avoid duplication.

No new issues found.

Review Summary

After examining all changed files (channelmonitor.rs, events/mod.rs, channel.rs, funding.rs, interactivetxs.rs, splicing_tests.rs, ser.rs), I verified:

  1. Serialization: The new TLV fields (tag 7 on RenegotiatedFunding, tag 13 on FundingScope, tag 41 on top-level monitor) are all option, making them backward-compatible. Older LDK skips unknown tags; newer LDK reading old data gets None, falling back to FundingInfo::OutPoint.

  2. queue_discard_funding_event logic: Correctly differentiates between contribution: Some(...) (emits Contribution with unique inputs/outputs) and contribution: None (emits OutPoint fallback). The into_unique_contributions call properly filters against self.funding's contributed inputs/outputs.

  3. into_unique_contributions refactor: Changed from operating on pre-flattened (Vec<OutPoint>, Vec<TxOut>) to destructuring FundingContribution fields directly, handling change_output separately. The filtering logic is equivalent, and Vec::retain preserves deterministic ordering (no HashSet nondeterminism concern).

  4. promote_funding path: Correctly swaps new funding in, removes all pending_funding from outputs_to_watch, then filters out the previous (already-locked) funding before calling queue_discard_funding_event.

  5. FundingSpendConfirmation path: All pending fundings are discarded (no no_further_updates_allowed filter needed since the funding is spent). Events correctly use Contribution or OutPoint based on availability of contribution data.

  6. Type change Vec<TxOut> → Vec<ScriptBuf>: Consistently applied across all contributed_outputs() methods, FundingInfo::Contribution, SpliceFundingFailed, QuiescentError, and test assertions.

  7. Test coverage: Tests properly validate the new FundingInfo::Contribution events from the monitor (nodes[0] gets Contribution, nodes[1] non-contributor gets OutPoint), and all SpendableOutputs events are now explicitly asserted rather than ignored.

Prior review items (still applicable)

The issues flagged in my previous review pass remain relevant:

  • None vs Some(vec![]) semantics for FundingScope.contribution (defensive normalization suggestion)
  • The FundingInfo::Contribution serialization format change is breaking but acceptable since splicing is experimental

@jkczyzjkczyz mentioned this pull request Mar 19, 2026
Open
50 tasks
@codecov

codecovBot commented Mar 19, 2026•
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 95.83333% with 4 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 86.11%. Comparing base (c766417) to head (7e806f9).
⚠️ Report is 17 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing linesPatch %Lines
lightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs91.83%0 Missing and 4 partials ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@ Coverage Diff @@## main #4498 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 86.11% 86.11% -0.01% 
==========================================
Files 157 157 Lines 108851 108845 -6 Branches 108851 108845 -6 ==========================================
- Hits 93735 93727 -8 + Misses 12503 12497 -6 - Partials 2613 2621 +8
FlagCoverage Δ
tests86.11% <95.83%> (-0.01%)⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@ldk-reviews-bot

ldk-reviews-bot commented Mar 23, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🔔 1st Reminder

Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.
Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.

@ldk-reviews-bot

ldk-reviews-bot commented Mar 25, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🔔 2nd Reminder

Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.
Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.

@ldk-reviews-bot

ldk-reviews-bot commented Mar 28, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🔔 3rd Reminder

Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.
Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.

@ldk-reviews-bot

ldk-reviews-bot commented Mar 30, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🔔 4th Reminder

Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.
Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.

@ldk-reviews-bot

ldk-reviews-bot commented Apr 1, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🔔 5th Reminder

Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.
Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.

@ldk-reviews-bot

ldk-reviews-bot commented Apr 4, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🔔 6th Reminder

Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.
Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.

@ldk-reviews-bot

ldk-reviews-bot commented Apr 6, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🔔 7th Reminder

Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.
Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.

@ldk-reviews-bot

ldk-reviews-bot commented Apr 8, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🔔 8th Reminder

Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.
Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.

@jkczyzjkczyz mentioned this pull request Apr 9, 2026
Merged
@ldk-reviews-bot

ldk-reviews-bot commented Apr 11, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🔔 9th Reminder

Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.
Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.

@ldk-reviews-bot

ldk-reviews-bot commented Apr 13, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🔔 10th Reminder

Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.
Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.

@ldk-reviews-bot

ldk-reviews-bot commented Apr 15, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🔔 11th Reminder

Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.
Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.

@ldk-reviews-bot

ldk-reviews-bot commented Apr 18, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🔔 12th Reminder

Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.
Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.

@ldk-reviews-bot

ldk-reviews-bot commented Apr 20, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🔔 13th Reminder

Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.
Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.

@ldk-reviews-bot

ldk-reviews-bot commented Apr 22, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🔔 14th Reminder

Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.
Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.

@ldk-reviews-bot

ldk-reviews-bot commented Apr 25, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🔔 15th Reminder

Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.
Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.

@ldk-reviews-bot

ldk-reviews-bot commented Apr 27, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🔔 16th Reminder

Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.
Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.

@wpaulino
wpaulinoforce-pushed the channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution branch from ca819d9 to e07c154CompareApril 27, 2026 17:23
ldk-claude-review-bot
ldk-claude-review-bot reviewed Apr 27, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/ln/channel.rs Outdated
Comment on lines +8321 to +8326
let signing_session = self
.context
.interactive_tx_signing_session
.as_ref()
.map(|signing_session| !signing_session.has_received_tx_signatures())
.unwrap_or(false));
.expect("Signing session must exist for negotiated pending splice");
debug_assert!(!signing_session.has_received_tx_signatures());

@ldk-claude-review-botldk-claude-review-botApr 27, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nit: This changes from a debug_assert (no-op in release builds) to expect (panics in release builds). The old code combined the existence check and state check into a single debug assertion; now existence is enforced unconditionally while the state check remains debug-only.

This is arguably safer (fail-fast instead of silent invariant violation), but since signing_session isn't used beyond the debug_assert on the next line, consider whether returning a ChannelError would be more robust than panicking — consistent with how this function handles other missing state (e.g., the commitment_point error path at line 8340).

jkczyz
jkczyz reviewed Apr 27, 2026
View reviewed changes

@jkczyzjkczyz left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

At least much of the first commit will conflict with #4514. Which should we merge first?

Comment threadlightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs Outdated
TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt reviewed May 7, 2026
View reviewed changes

@TheBlueMattTheBlueMatt left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Needs rebase now.

wpaulino added 2 commits May 7, 2026 15:32
@wpaulino
Change FundingInfo::Contribution to expose contributed output scripts
b9d0eb7
Exposing the amounts for each output isn't very helpful because it's
possible that they vary across over multiple splice candidates due to
RBF. This commit changes `FundingInfo::Contribution` and several of the
helpers used to derive it to be based on output scripts instead.
@wpaulino
Produce FundingInfo::Contribution variants in ChannelMonitor
7e806f9
Similar to the `ChannelManager`, we expose the contributed inputs and
outputs of a splice via `FundingInfo::Contribution` at the
`ChannelMonitor` level such that we don't lose the context when the
channel closes while a splice is still pending. This relies on tracking
the `FundingContribution` that was provided to the `ChannelManager`
prior to negotiating the new funding transaction. If no
`FundingContribution` exists, then we continue to emit the
`FundingInfo::OutPoint` variant.
@wpaulino
wpaulinoforce-pushed the channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution branch from e07c154 to 7e806f9CompareMay 7, 2026 22:40
@wpaulino
wpaulino requested review from TheBlueMatt and jkczyzMay 7, 2026 23:05
jkczyz
jkczyz approved these changes May 8, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/ln/funding.rs
self, existing_inputs: impl Iterator<Item = OutPoint>,
existing_outputs: impl Iterator<Item = &'a TxOut>,
) -> Option<(Vec<OutPoint>, Vec<TxOut>)> {
let (mut inputs, mut outputs) = self.into_contributed_inputs_and_outputs();

@jkczyzjkczyzMay 8, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is the only reason we don't continue to use into_contributed_inputs_and_outputs and keep the filtering logic is so we could avoid collect when we'd return None?

@wpaulinowpaulinoMay 11, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Correct

@TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt merged commit f0f8391 into lightningdevkit:mainMay 11, 2026
22 of 24 checks passed
@wpaulino
wpaulino deleted the channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution branch May 11, 2026 19:36
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@TheBlueMattTheBlueMattTheBlueMatt approved these changes
@jkczyzjkczyzjkczyz approved these changes
+1 more reviewer
@ldk-claude-review-botldk-claude-review-botldk-claude-review-bot left review comments
Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

@wpaulinowpaulino

Labels

None yet

Projects

Weekly Goals
Status: Done

Milestone

0.3

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@wpaulino@ldk-reviews-bot@ldk-claude-review-bot@TheBlueMatt@jkczyz
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Add copy buttons to all 
 blocks\n(function() {\n function addCopyButtons() {\n document.querySelectorAll('pre code').forEach(function(codeBlock) {\n if (codeBlock.parentElement.hasAttribute('data-copy-added')) return;\n codeBlock.parentElement.setAttribute('data-copy-added', 'true');\n \n var btn = document.createElement('button');\n btn.textContent = 'Copy';\n btn.style.cssText = 'position:absolute;top:4px;right:4px;padding:2px 8px;font-size:11px;background:#4ecdc4;border:none;border-radius:4px;color:#1a1a2e;cursor:pointer;opacity:0.7;transition:opacity 0.2s;';\n btn.onmouseover = function() { this.style.opacity = '1'; };\n btn.onmouseout = function() { this.style.opacity = '0.7'; };\n btn.onclick = function() {\n navigator.clipboard.writeText(codeBlock.textContent).then(function() {\n btn.textContent = 'Copied!';\n setTimeout(function() { btn.textContent = 'Copy'; }, 1500);\n });\n };\n codeBlock.parentElement.style.position = 'relative';\n codeBlock.parentElement.appendChild(btn);\n });\n }\n \n addCopyButtons();\n \n // Re-run on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(addCopyButtons);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "github.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "github\\.com" + '

Skip to content
Produce FundingInfo::Contribution variants in ChannelMonitor - #4498
Merged
TheBlueMatt merged 2 commits into
lightningdevkit:mainfrom 
wpaulino:channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution
May 11, 2026
Merged
Produce FundingInfo::Contribution variants in ChannelMonitor#4498
TheBlueMatt merged 2 commits into
lightningdevkit:mainfrom 
wpaulino:channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution
Conversation
@wpaulino
@wpaulinowpaulino
commented
Mar 19, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Similar to the `ChannelManager`, we expose the contributed inputs and
outputs of a splice via `FundingInfo::Contribution` at the
`ChannelMonitor` level such that we don't lose the context when the
channel closes while a splice is still pending.

@wpaulinowpaulino
added this to the 0.3 milestone
Mar 19, 2026
@wpaulino
wpaulino
requested a review
from jkczyzMarch 19, 2026 18:47
@wpaulinowpaulino
self-assigned this
Mar 19, 2026
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Mar 19, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

👋 Thanks for assigning @jkczyz as a reviewer!

I'll wait for their review and will help manage the review process.

Once they submit their review, I'll check if a second reviewer would be helpful.
ldk-claude-review-bot
ldk-claude-review-bot
reviewed
Mar 19, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs
Outdated

ldk-claude-review-bot
ldk-claude-review-bot
reviewed
Mar 19, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs
Outdated

ldk-claude-review-bot
ldk-claude-review-bot
reviewed
Mar 19, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs
Outdated

@ldk-claude-review-bot
ldk-claude-review-bot
commented
Mar 19, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
I've thoroughly reviewed the entire PR diff, reading every file and hunk. I also reviewed my prior comments to avoid duplication.
No new issues found.
Review Summary
After examining all changed files (channelmonitor.rs, events/mod.rs, channel.rs, funding.rs, interactivetxs.rs, splicing_tests.rs, ser.rs), I verified:
  1. Serialization: The new TLV fields (tag 7 on RenegotiatedFunding, tag 13 on FundingScope, tag 41 on top-level monitor) are all option, making them backward-compatible. Older LDK skips unknown tags; newer LDK reading old data gets None, falling back to FundingInfo::OutPoint.
  2. queue_discard_funding_event logic: Correctly differentiates between contribution: Some(...) (emits Contribution with unique inputs/outputs) and contribution: None (emits OutPoint fallback). The into_unique_contributions call properly filters against self.funding's contributed inputs/outputs.
  3. into_unique_contributions refactor: Changed from operating on pre-flattened (Vec<OutPoint>, Vec<TxOut>) to destructuring FundingContribution fields directly, handling change_output separately. The filtering logic is equivalent, and Vec::retain preserves deterministic ordering (no HashSet nondeterminism concern).
  4. promote_funding path: Correctly swaps new funding in, removes all pending_funding from outputs_to_watch, then filters out the previous (already-locked) funding before calling queue_discard_funding_event.
  5. FundingSpendConfirmation path: All pending fundings are discarded (no no_further_updates_allowed filter needed since the funding is spent). Events correctly use Contribution or OutPoint based on availability of contribution data.
  6. Type change Vec<TxOut> → Vec<ScriptBuf>: Consistently applied across all contributed_outputs() methods, FundingInfo::Contribution, SpliceFundingFailed, QuiescentError, and test assertions.
  7. Test coverage: Tests properly validate the new FundingInfo::Contribution events from the monitor (nodes[0] gets Contribution, nodes[1] non-contributor gets OutPoint), and all SpendableOutputs events are now explicitly asserted rather than ignored.
Prior review items (still applicable)
The issues flagged in my previous review pass remain relevant:
  • None vs Some(vec![]) semantics for FundingScope.contribution (defensive normalization suggestion)
  • The FundingInfo::Contribution serialization format change is breaking but acceptable since splicing is experimental
@jkczyzjkczyz
mentioned this pull request
Mar 19, 2026

Open

50 tasks
@codecov
codecovBot
commented
Mar 19, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Codecov Report
❌ Patch coverage is 95.83333% with 4 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

✅ Project coverage is 86.11%. Comparing base (c766417) to head (7e806f9).
⚠️ Report is 17 commits behind head on main.
Files with missing linesPatch %Lines
lightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs91.83%0 Missing and 4 partials ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@ Coverage Diff @@## main #4498 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 86.11% 86.11% -0.01% 
==========================================
Files 157 157 Lines 108851 108845 -6 Branches 108851 108845 -6 ==========================================
- Hits 93735 93727 -8 + Misses 12503 12497 -6 - Partials 2613 2621 +8 
FlagCoverage Δ
tests86.11% <95.83%> (-0.01%)⬇️
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.

📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.
 🚀 New features to boost your workflow: 
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Mar 23, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 1st Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Mar 25, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 2nd Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Mar 28, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 3rd Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Mar 30, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 4th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 1, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 5th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 4, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 6th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 6, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 7th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 8, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 8th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@jkczyzjkczyz
mentioned this pull request
Apr 9, 2026
 Merged

@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 11, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 9th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 13, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 10th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 15, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 11th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 18, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 12th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 20, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 13th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 22, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 14th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 25, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 15th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 27, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 16th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@wpaulino
wpaulinoforce-pushed
the
channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution
branch
from
ca819d9 to
e07c154CompareApril 27, 2026 17:23
ldk-claude-review-bot
ldk-claude-review-bot
reviewed
Apr 27, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/ln/channel.rs
Outdated


Comment on lines

+8321
 to 
+8326

let signing_session = self
 .context
 .interactive_tx_signing_session
 .as_ref()
 .map(|signing_session| !signing_session.has_received_tx_signatures())
	.unwrap_or(false));
 .expect("Signing session must exist for negotiated pending splice");
debug_assert!(!signing_session.has_received_tx_signatures());
@ldk-claude-review-botldk-claude-review-botApr 27, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nit: This changes from a debug_assert (no-op in release builds) to expect (panics in release builds). The old code combined the existence check and state check into a single debug assertion; now existence is enforced unconditionally while the state check remains debug-only.
This is arguably safer (fail-fast instead of silent invariant violation), but since signing_session isn't used beyond the debug_assert on the next line, consider whether returning a ChannelError would be more robust than panicking — consistent with how this function handles other missing state (e.g., the commitment_point error path at line 8340).
jkczyz
jkczyz
reviewed
Apr 27, 2026
View reviewed changes
@jkczyzjkczyz
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

At least much of the first commit will conflict with #4514. Which should we merge first?
Comment threadlightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs
Outdated

TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
reviewed
May 7, 2026
View reviewed changes
@TheBlueMattTheBlueMatt
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Needs rebase now.
wpaulino
added 2 commits
May 7, 2026 15:32
@wpaulino
Change FundingInfo::Contribution to expose contributed output scripts
b9d0eb7
Exposing the amounts for each output isn't very helpful because it's
possible that they vary across over multiple splice candidates due to
RBF. This commit changes `FundingInfo::Contribution` and several of the
helpers used to derive it to be based on output scripts instead.
@wpaulino
Produce FundingInfo::Contribution variants in ChannelMonitor
7e806f9
Similar to the `ChannelManager`, we expose the contributed inputs and
outputs of a splice via `FundingInfo::Contribution` at the
`ChannelMonitor` level such that we don't lose the context when the
channel closes while a splice is still pending. This relies on tracking
the `FundingContribution` that was provided to the `ChannelManager`
prior to negotiating the new funding transaction. If no
`FundingContribution` exists, then we continue to emit the
`FundingInfo::OutPoint` variant.
@wpaulino
wpaulinoforce-pushed
the
channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution
branch
from
e07c154 to
7e806f9CompareMay 7, 2026 22:40
@wpaulino
wpaulino
requested review from
TheBlueMatt and jkczyzMay 7, 2026 23:05
jkczyz
jkczyz
approved these changes
May 8, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/ln/funding.rs
 self, existing_inputs: impl Iterator<Item = OutPoint>,
 existing_outputs: impl Iterator<Item = &'a TxOut>,
	) -> Option<(Vec<OutPoint>, Vec<TxOut>)> {
 let (mut inputs, mut outputs) = self.into_contributed_inputs_and_outputs();
@jkczyzjkczyzMay 8, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is the only reason we don't continue to use into_contributed_inputs_and_outputs and keep the filtering logic is so we could avoid collect when we'd return None?
@wpaulinowpaulinoMay 11, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Correct
@TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
merged commit f0f8391
into
lightningdevkit:mainMay 11, 2026

22 of 24 checks passed

@wpaulino
wpaulino
deleted the

channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution

branch
May 11, 2026 19:36
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@TheBlueMattTheBlueMattTheBlueMatt approved these changes
@jkczyzjkczyzjkczyz approved these changes

+1 more reviewer

@ldk-claude-review-botldk-claude-review-botldk-claude-review-bot left review comments
Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

@wpaulinowpaulino

Labels


None yet


Projects

Weekly Goals

Status: Done


Milestone

0.3

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@wpaulino@ldk-reviews-bot@ldk-claude-review-bot@TheBlueMatt@jkczyz

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Force GitHub README to respect dark mode\n(function() {\n var style = document.createElement('style');\n style.textContent = '\n .markdown-body {\n color-scheme: dark light;\n }\n .markdown-body pre { background: #161b22 !important; }\n .markdown-body code { background: rgba(110, 118, 129, 0.4) !important; }\n .markdown-body table th, .markdown-body table td { border-color: #30363d !important; }\n .markdown-body img { background: #0d1117; }\n .markdown-body blockquote { border-left-color: #8b949e; }\n .markdown-body hr { border-color: #30363d; }\n ';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n})();", "GitHub Dark Mode README Fix");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:GitHub Dark Mode README Fix]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '

Skip to content
Produce FundingInfo::Contribution variants in ChannelMonitor - #4498
Merged
TheBlueMatt merged 2 commits into
lightningdevkit:mainfrom 
wpaulino:channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution
May 11, 2026
Merged
Produce FundingInfo::Contribution variants in ChannelMonitor#4498
TheBlueMatt merged 2 commits into
lightningdevkit:mainfrom 
wpaulino:channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution
Conversation
@wpaulino
@wpaulinowpaulino
commented
Mar 19, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Similar to the `ChannelManager`, we expose the contributed inputs and
outputs of a splice via `FundingInfo::Contribution` at the
`ChannelMonitor` level such that we don't lose the context when the
channel closes while a splice is still pending.

@wpaulinowpaulino
added this to the 0.3 milestone
Mar 19, 2026
@wpaulino
wpaulino
requested a review
from jkczyzMarch 19, 2026 18:47
@wpaulinowpaulino
self-assigned this
Mar 19, 2026
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Mar 19, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

👋 Thanks for assigning @jkczyz as a reviewer!

I'll wait for their review and will help manage the review process.

Once they submit their review, I'll check if a second reviewer would be helpful.
ldk-claude-review-bot
ldk-claude-review-bot
reviewed
Mar 19, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs
Outdated

ldk-claude-review-bot
ldk-claude-review-bot
reviewed
Mar 19, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs
Outdated

ldk-claude-review-bot
ldk-claude-review-bot
reviewed
Mar 19, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs
Outdated

@ldk-claude-review-bot
ldk-claude-review-bot
commented
Mar 19, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
I've thoroughly reviewed the entire PR diff, reading every file and hunk. I also reviewed my prior comments to avoid duplication.
No new issues found.
Review Summary
After examining all changed files (channelmonitor.rs, events/mod.rs, channel.rs, funding.rs, interactivetxs.rs, splicing_tests.rs, ser.rs), I verified:
  1. Serialization: The new TLV fields (tag 7 on RenegotiatedFunding, tag 13 on FundingScope, tag 41 on top-level monitor) are all option, making them backward-compatible. Older LDK skips unknown tags; newer LDK reading old data gets None, falling back to FundingInfo::OutPoint.
  2. queue_discard_funding_event logic: Correctly differentiates between contribution: Some(...) (emits Contribution with unique inputs/outputs) and contribution: None (emits OutPoint fallback). The into_unique_contributions call properly filters against self.funding's contributed inputs/outputs.
  3. into_unique_contributions refactor: Changed from operating on pre-flattened (Vec<OutPoint>, Vec<TxOut>) to destructuring FundingContribution fields directly, handling change_output separately. The filtering logic is equivalent, and Vec::retain preserves deterministic ordering (no HashSet nondeterminism concern).
  4. promote_funding path: Correctly swaps new funding in, removes all pending_funding from outputs_to_watch, then filters out the previous (already-locked) funding before calling queue_discard_funding_event.
  5. FundingSpendConfirmation path: All pending fundings are discarded (no no_further_updates_allowed filter needed since the funding is spent). Events correctly use Contribution or OutPoint based on availability of contribution data.
  6. Type change Vec<TxOut> → Vec<ScriptBuf>: Consistently applied across all contributed_outputs() methods, FundingInfo::Contribution, SpliceFundingFailed, QuiescentError, and test assertions.
  7. Test coverage: Tests properly validate the new FundingInfo::Contribution events from the monitor (nodes[0] gets Contribution, nodes[1] non-contributor gets OutPoint), and all SpendableOutputs events are now explicitly asserted rather than ignored.
Prior review items (still applicable)
The issues flagged in my previous review pass remain relevant:
  • None vs Some(vec![]) semantics for FundingScope.contribution (defensive normalization suggestion)
  • The FundingInfo::Contribution serialization format change is breaking but acceptable since splicing is experimental
@jkczyzjkczyz
mentioned this pull request
Mar 19, 2026

Open

50 tasks
@codecov
codecovBot
commented
Mar 19, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Codecov Report
❌ Patch coverage is 95.83333% with 4 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

✅ Project coverage is 86.11%. Comparing base (c766417) to head (7e806f9).
⚠️ Report is 17 commits behind head on main.
Files with missing linesPatch %Lines
lightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs91.83%0 Missing and 4 partials ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@ Coverage Diff @@## main #4498 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 86.11% 86.11% -0.01% 
==========================================
Files 157 157 Lines 108851 108845 -6 Branches 108851 108845 -6 ==========================================
- Hits 93735 93727 -8 + Misses 12503 12497 -6 - Partials 2613 2621 +8 
FlagCoverage Δ
tests86.11% <95.83%> (-0.01%)⬇️
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.

📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.
 🚀 New features to boost your workflow: 
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Mar 23, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 1st Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Mar 25, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 2nd Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Mar 28, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 3rd Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Mar 30, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 4th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 1, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 5th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 4, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 6th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 6, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 7th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 8, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 8th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@jkczyzjkczyz
mentioned this pull request
Apr 9, 2026
 Merged

@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 11, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 9th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 13, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 10th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 15, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 11th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 18, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 12th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 20, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 13th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 22, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 14th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 25, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 15th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 27, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 16th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@wpaulino
wpaulinoforce-pushed
the
channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution
branch
from
ca819d9 to
e07c154CompareApril 27, 2026 17:23
ldk-claude-review-bot
ldk-claude-review-bot
reviewed
Apr 27, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/ln/channel.rs
Outdated


Comment on lines

+8321
 to 
+8326

let signing_session = self
 .context
 .interactive_tx_signing_session
 .as_ref()
 .map(|signing_session| !signing_session.has_received_tx_signatures())
	.unwrap_or(false));
 .expect("Signing session must exist for negotiated pending splice");
debug_assert!(!signing_session.has_received_tx_signatures());
@ldk-claude-review-botldk-claude-review-botApr 27, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nit: This changes from a debug_assert (no-op in release builds) to expect (panics in release builds). The old code combined the existence check and state check into a single debug assertion; now existence is enforced unconditionally while the state check remains debug-only.
This is arguably safer (fail-fast instead of silent invariant violation), but since signing_session isn't used beyond the debug_assert on the next line, consider whether returning a ChannelError would be more robust than panicking — consistent with how this function handles other missing state (e.g., the commitment_point error path at line 8340).
jkczyz
jkczyz
reviewed
Apr 27, 2026
View reviewed changes
@jkczyzjkczyz
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

At least much of the first commit will conflict with #4514. Which should we merge first?
Comment threadlightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs
Outdated

TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
reviewed
May 7, 2026
View reviewed changes
@TheBlueMattTheBlueMatt
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Needs rebase now.
wpaulino
added 2 commits
May 7, 2026 15:32
@wpaulino
Change FundingInfo::Contribution to expose contributed output scripts
b9d0eb7
Exposing the amounts for each output isn't very helpful because it's
possible that they vary across over multiple splice candidates due to
RBF. This commit changes `FundingInfo::Contribution` and several of the
helpers used to derive it to be based on output scripts instead.
@wpaulino
Produce FundingInfo::Contribution variants in ChannelMonitor
7e806f9
Similar to the `ChannelManager`, we expose the contributed inputs and
outputs of a splice via `FundingInfo::Contribution` at the
`ChannelMonitor` level such that we don't lose the context when the
channel closes while a splice is still pending. This relies on tracking
the `FundingContribution` that was provided to the `ChannelManager`
prior to negotiating the new funding transaction. If no
`FundingContribution` exists, then we continue to emit the
`FundingInfo::OutPoint` variant.
@wpaulino
wpaulinoforce-pushed
the
channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution
branch
from
e07c154 to
7e806f9CompareMay 7, 2026 22:40
@wpaulino
wpaulino
requested review from
TheBlueMatt and jkczyzMay 7, 2026 23:05
jkczyz
jkczyz
approved these changes
May 8, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/ln/funding.rs
 self, existing_inputs: impl Iterator<Item = OutPoint>,
 existing_outputs: impl Iterator<Item = &'a TxOut>,
	) -> Option<(Vec<OutPoint>, Vec<TxOut>)> {
 let (mut inputs, mut outputs) = self.into_contributed_inputs_and_outputs();
@jkczyzjkczyzMay 8, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is the only reason we don't continue to use into_contributed_inputs_and_outputs and keep the filtering logic is so we could avoid collect when we'd return None?
@wpaulinowpaulinoMay 11, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Correct
@TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
merged commit f0f8391
into
lightningdevkit:mainMay 11, 2026

22 of 24 checks passed

@wpaulino
wpaulino
deleted the

channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution

branch
May 11, 2026 19:36
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@TheBlueMattTheBlueMattTheBlueMatt approved these changes
@jkczyzjkczyzjkczyz approved these changes

+1 more reviewer

@ldk-claude-review-botldk-claude-review-botldk-claude-review-bot left review comments
Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

@wpaulinowpaulino

Labels


None yet


Projects

Weekly Goals

Status: Done


Milestone

0.3

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@wpaulino@ldk-reviews-bot@ldk-claude-review-bot@TheBlueMatt@jkczyz

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Highlight search terms from Google/DuckDuckGo/Bing referrer\n(function() {\n var ref = document.referrer;\n var terms = [];\n \n if (ref.includes('google.com') || ref.includes('duckduckgo.com') || ref.includes('bing.com')) {\n var url = new URL(ref);\n var q = url.searchParams.get('q') || url.searchParams.get('p');\n if (q) {\n terms = q.split(/\\s+/).filter(function(t) { return t.length > 2; });\n }\n }\n \n if (terms.length === 0) return;\n \n var style = document.createElement('style');\n style.textContent = '.userscript-highlight { background: #fbbf24; color: #1a1a2e; padding: 1px 3px; border-radius: 2px; }';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n \n function highlight(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 3) { // text node\n var text = node.textContent;\n var found = false;\n terms.forEach(function(term) {\n var regex = new RegExp('(' + term.replace(/[.*+?^${}()|[\\]\\\\]/g, '\\\\') + ')', 'gi');\n if (regex.test(text)) {\n found = true;\n var frag = document.createDocumentFragment();\n var parts = text.split(regex);\n parts.forEach(function(part, i) {\n if (i % 2 === 0) {\n frag.appendChild(document.createTextNode(part));\n } else {\n var span = document.createElement('span');\n span.className = 'userscript-highlight';\n span.textContent = part;\n frag.appendChild(span);\n }\n });\n node.parentNode.replaceChild(frag, node);\n }\n });\n } else if (node.nodeType === 1 && node.childNodes) { // element\n var skipTags = ['SCRIPT', 'STYLE', 'NOSCRIPT', 'TEXTAREA', 'INPUT', 'SELECT'];\n if (!skipTags.includes(node.tagName)) {\n Array.from(node.childNodes).forEach(highlight);\n }\n }\n }\n \n highlight(document.body);\n \n // Re-highlight on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n mutations.forEach(function(m) {\n m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 1 || node.nodeType === 3) highlight(node);\n });\n });\n });\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Highlight Search Terms");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Highlight Search Terms]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '

Skip to content
Produce FundingInfo::Contribution variants in ChannelMonitor - #4498
Merged
TheBlueMatt merged 2 commits into
lightningdevkit:mainfrom 
wpaulino:channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution
May 11, 2026
Merged
Produce FundingInfo::Contribution variants in ChannelMonitor#4498
TheBlueMatt merged 2 commits into
lightningdevkit:mainfrom 
wpaulino:channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution
Conversation
@wpaulino
@wpaulinowpaulino
commented
Mar 19, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Similar to the `ChannelManager`, we expose the contributed inputs and
outputs of a splice via `FundingInfo::Contribution` at the
`ChannelMonitor` level such that we don't lose the context when the
channel closes while a splice is still pending.

@wpaulinowpaulino
added this to the 0.3 milestone
Mar 19, 2026
@wpaulino
wpaulino
requested a review
from jkczyzMarch 19, 2026 18:47
@wpaulinowpaulino
self-assigned this
Mar 19, 2026
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Mar 19, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

👋 Thanks for assigning @jkczyz as a reviewer!

I'll wait for their review and will help manage the review process.

Once they submit their review, I'll check if a second reviewer would be helpful.
ldk-claude-review-bot
ldk-claude-review-bot
reviewed
Mar 19, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs
Outdated

ldk-claude-review-bot
ldk-claude-review-bot
reviewed
Mar 19, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs
Outdated

ldk-claude-review-bot
ldk-claude-review-bot
reviewed
Mar 19, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs
Outdated

@ldk-claude-review-bot
ldk-claude-review-bot
commented
Mar 19, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
I've thoroughly reviewed the entire PR diff, reading every file and hunk. I also reviewed my prior comments to avoid duplication.
No new issues found.
Review Summary
After examining all changed files (channelmonitor.rs, events/mod.rs, channel.rs, funding.rs, interactivetxs.rs, splicing_tests.rs, ser.rs), I verified:
  1. Serialization: The new TLV fields (tag 7 on RenegotiatedFunding, tag 13 on FundingScope, tag 41 on top-level monitor) are all option, making them backward-compatible. Older LDK skips unknown tags; newer LDK reading old data gets None, falling back to FundingInfo::OutPoint.
  2. queue_discard_funding_event logic: Correctly differentiates between contribution: Some(...) (emits Contribution with unique inputs/outputs) and contribution: None (emits OutPoint fallback). The into_unique_contributions call properly filters against self.funding's contributed inputs/outputs.
  3. into_unique_contributions refactor: Changed from operating on pre-flattened (Vec<OutPoint>, Vec<TxOut>) to destructuring FundingContribution fields directly, handling change_output separately. The filtering logic is equivalent, and Vec::retain preserves deterministic ordering (no HashSet nondeterminism concern).
  4. promote_funding path: Correctly swaps new funding in, removes all pending_funding from outputs_to_watch, then filters out the previous (already-locked) funding before calling queue_discard_funding_event.
  5. FundingSpendConfirmation path: All pending fundings are discarded (no no_further_updates_allowed filter needed since the funding is spent). Events correctly use Contribution or OutPoint based on availability of contribution data.
  6. Type change Vec<TxOut> → Vec<ScriptBuf>: Consistently applied across all contributed_outputs() methods, FundingInfo::Contribution, SpliceFundingFailed, QuiescentError, and test assertions.
  7. Test coverage: Tests properly validate the new FundingInfo::Contribution events from the monitor (nodes[0] gets Contribution, nodes[1] non-contributor gets OutPoint), and all SpendableOutputs events are now explicitly asserted rather than ignored.
Prior review items (still applicable)
The issues flagged in my previous review pass remain relevant:
  • None vs Some(vec![]) semantics for FundingScope.contribution (defensive normalization suggestion)
  • The FundingInfo::Contribution serialization format change is breaking but acceptable since splicing is experimental
@jkczyzjkczyz
mentioned this pull request
Mar 19, 2026

Open

50 tasks
@codecov
codecovBot
commented
Mar 19, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Codecov Report
❌ Patch coverage is 95.83333% with 4 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

✅ Project coverage is 86.11%. Comparing base (c766417) to head (7e806f9).
⚠️ Report is 17 commits behind head on main.
Files with missing linesPatch %Lines
lightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs91.83%0 Missing and 4 partials ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@ Coverage Diff @@## main #4498 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 86.11% 86.11% -0.01% 
==========================================
Files 157 157 Lines 108851 108845 -6 Branches 108851 108845 -6 ==========================================
- Hits 93735 93727 -8 + Misses 12503 12497 -6 - Partials 2613 2621 +8 
FlagCoverage Δ
tests86.11% <95.83%> (-0.01%)⬇️
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.

📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.
 🚀 New features to boost your workflow: 
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Mar 23, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 1st Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Mar 25, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 2nd Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Mar 28, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 3rd Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Mar 30, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 4th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 1, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 5th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 4, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 6th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 6, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 7th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 8, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 8th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@jkczyzjkczyz
mentioned this pull request
Apr 9, 2026
 Merged

@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 11, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 9th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 13, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 10th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 15, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 11th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 18, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 12th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 20, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 13th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 22, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 14th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 25, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 15th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 27, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 16th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@wpaulino
wpaulinoforce-pushed
the
channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution
branch
from
ca819d9 to
e07c154CompareApril 27, 2026 17:23
ldk-claude-review-bot
ldk-claude-review-bot
reviewed
Apr 27, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/ln/channel.rs
Outdated


Comment on lines

+8321
 to 
+8326

let signing_session = self
 .context
 .interactive_tx_signing_session
 .as_ref()
 .map(|signing_session| !signing_session.has_received_tx_signatures())
	.unwrap_or(false));
 .expect("Signing session must exist for negotiated pending splice");
debug_assert!(!signing_session.has_received_tx_signatures());
@ldk-claude-review-botldk-claude-review-botApr 27, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nit: This changes from a debug_assert (no-op in release builds) to expect (panics in release builds). The old code combined the existence check and state check into a single debug assertion; now existence is enforced unconditionally while the state check remains debug-only.
This is arguably safer (fail-fast instead of silent invariant violation), but since signing_session isn't used beyond the debug_assert on the next line, consider whether returning a ChannelError would be more robust than panicking — consistent with how this function handles other missing state (e.g., the commitment_point error path at line 8340).
jkczyz
jkczyz
reviewed
Apr 27, 2026
View reviewed changes
@jkczyzjkczyz
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

At least much of the first commit will conflict with #4514. Which should we merge first?
Comment threadlightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs
Outdated

TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
reviewed
May 7, 2026
View reviewed changes
@TheBlueMattTheBlueMatt
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Needs rebase now.
wpaulino
added 2 commits
May 7, 2026 15:32
@wpaulino
Change FundingInfo::Contribution to expose contributed output scripts
b9d0eb7
Exposing the amounts for each output isn't very helpful because it's
possible that they vary across over multiple splice candidates due to
RBF. This commit changes `FundingInfo::Contribution` and several of the
helpers used to derive it to be based on output scripts instead.
@wpaulino
Produce FundingInfo::Contribution variants in ChannelMonitor
7e806f9
Similar to the `ChannelManager`, we expose the contributed inputs and
outputs of a splice via `FundingInfo::Contribution` at the
`ChannelMonitor` level such that we don't lose the context when the
channel closes while a splice is still pending. This relies on tracking
the `FundingContribution` that was provided to the `ChannelManager`
prior to negotiating the new funding transaction. If no
`FundingContribution` exists, then we continue to emit the
`FundingInfo::OutPoint` variant.
@wpaulino
wpaulinoforce-pushed
the
channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution
branch
from
e07c154 to
7e806f9CompareMay 7, 2026 22:40
@wpaulino
wpaulino
requested review from
TheBlueMatt and jkczyzMay 7, 2026 23:05
jkczyz
jkczyz
approved these changes
May 8, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/ln/funding.rs
 self, existing_inputs: impl Iterator<Item = OutPoint>,
 existing_outputs: impl Iterator<Item = &'a TxOut>,
	) -> Option<(Vec<OutPoint>, Vec<TxOut>)> {
 let (mut inputs, mut outputs) = self.into_contributed_inputs_and_outputs();
@jkczyzjkczyzMay 8, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is the only reason we don't continue to use into_contributed_inputs_and_outputs and keep the filtering logic is so we could avoid collect when we'd return None?
@wpaulinowpaulinoMay 11, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Correct
@TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
merged commit f0f8391
into
lightningdevkit:mainMay 11, 2026

22 of 24 checks passed

@wpaulino
wpaulino
deleted the

channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution

branch
May 11, 2026 19:36
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@TheBlueMattTheBlueMattTheBlueMatt approved these changes
@jkczyzjkczyzjkczyz approved these changes

+1 more reviewer

@ldk-claude-review-botldk-claude-review-botldk-claude-review-bot left review comments
Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

@wpaulinowpaulino

Labels


None yet


Projects

Weekly Goals

Status: Done


Milestone

0.3

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@wpaulino@ldk-reviews-bot@ldk-claude-review-bot@TheBlueMatt@jkczyz

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Strip utm_, fbclid, gclid, etc. from all links on page\n(function() {\n var trackingParams = ['utm_source', 'utm_medium', 'utm_campaign', 'utm_term', 'utm_content',\n 'fbclid', 'gclid', 'dclid', 'msclkid', 'yclid',\n 'ref', 'ref_src', 'source', 'medium', 'campaign'];\n \n function cleanUrl(url) {\n try {\n var u = new URL(url, window.location.origin);\n var changed = false;\n trackingParams.forEach(function(p) {\n if (u.searchParams.has(p)) {\n u.searchParams.delete(p);\n changed = true;\n }\n });\n return changed ? u.toString() : url;\n } catch (e) {\n return url;\n }\n }\n \n function cleanLinks() {\n document.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {\n var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);\n if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;\n });\n }\n \n cleanLinks();\n \n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n mutations.forEach(function(m) {\n m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 1) {\n if (node.tagName === 'A') cleanLinks();\n node.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {\n var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);\n if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;\n });\n }\n });\n });\n });\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Remove Tracking Parameters from Links");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Remove Tracking Parameters from Links]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "youtube.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "youtube\\.com" + '

Skip to content
Produce FundingInfo::Contribution variants in ChannelMonitor - #4498
Merged
TheBlueMatt merged 2 commits into
lightningdevkit:mainfrom 
wpaulino:channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution
May 11, 2026
Merged
Produce FundingInfo::Contribution variants in ChannelMonitor#4498
TheBlueMatt merged 2 commits into
lightningdevkit:mainfrom 
wpaulino:channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution
Conversation
@wpaulino
@wpaulinowpaulino
commented
Mar 19, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Similar to the `ChannelManager`, we expose the contributed inputs and
outputs of a splice via `FundingInfo::Contribution` at the
`ChannelMonitor` level such that we don't lose the context when the
channel closes while a splice is still pending.

@wpaulinowpaulino
added this to the 0.3 milestone
Mar 19, 2026
@wpaulino
wpaulino
requested a review
from jkczyzMarch 19, 2026 18:47
@wpaulinowpaulino
self-assigned this
Mar 19, 2026
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Mar 19, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

👋 Thanks for assigning @jkczyz as a reviewer!

I'll wait for their review and will help manage the review process.

Once they submit their review, I'll check if a second reviewer would be helpful.
ldk-claude-review-bot
ldk-claude-review-bot
reviewed
Mar 19, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs
Outdated

ldk-claude-review-bot
ldk-claude-review-bot
reviewed
Mar 19, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs
Outdated

ldk-claude-review-bot
ldk-claude-review-bot
reviewed
Mar 19, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs
Outdated

@ldk-claude-review-bot
ldk-claude-review-bot
commented
Mar 19, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
I've thoroughly reviewed the entire PR diff, reading every file and hunk. I also reviewed my prior comments to avoid duplication.
No new issues found.
Review Summary
After examining all changed files (channelmonitor.rs, events/mod.rs, channel.rs, funding.rs, interactivetxs.rs, splicing_tests.rs, ser.rs), I verified:
  1. Serialization: The new TLV fields (tag 7 on RenegotiatedFunding, tag 13 on FundingScope, tag 41 on top-level monitor) are all option, making them backward-compatible. Older LDK skips unknown tags; newer LDK reading old data gets None, falling back to FundingInfo::OutPoint.
  2. queue_discard_funding_event logic: Correctly differentiates between contribution: Some(...) (emits Contribution with unique inputs/outputs) and contribution: None (emits OutPoint fallback). The into_unique_contributions call properly filters against self.funding's contributed inputs/outputs.
  3. into_unique_contributions refactor: Changed from operating on pre-flattened (Vec<OutPoint>, Vec<TxOut>) to destructuring FundingContribution fields directly, handling change_output separately. The filtering logic is equivalent, and Vec::retain preserves deterministic ordering (no HashSet nondeterminism concern).
  4. promote_funding path: Correctly swaps new funding in, removes all pending_funding from outputs_to_watch, then filters out the previous (already-locked) funding before calling queue_discard_funding_event.
  5. FundingSpendConfirmation path: All pending fundings are discarded (no no_further_updates_allowed filter needed since the funding is spent). Events correctly use Contribution or OutPoint based on availability of contribution data.
  6. Type change Vec<TxOut> → Vec<ScriptBuf>: Consistently applied across all contributed_outputs() methods, FundingInfo::Contribution, SpliceFundingFailed, QuiescentError, and test assertions.
  7. Test coverage: Tests properly validate the new FundingInfo::Contribution events from the monitor (nodes[0] gets Contribution, nodes[1] non-contributor gets OutPoint), and all SpendableOutputs events are now explicitly asserted rather than ignored.
Prior review items (still applicable)
The issues flagged in my previous review pass remain relevant:
  • None vs Some(vec![]) semantics for FundingScope.contribution (defensive normalization suggestion)
  • The FundingInfo::Contribution serialization format change is breaking but acceptable since splicing is experimental
@jkczyzjkczyz
mentioned this pull request
Mar 19, 2026

Open

50 tasks
@codecov
codecovBot
commented
Mar 19, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Codecov Report
❌ Patch coverage is 95.83333% with 4 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

✅ Project coverage is 86.11%. Comparing base (c766417) to head (7e806f9).
⚠️ Report is 17 commits behind head on main.
Files with missing linesPatch %Lines
lightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs91.83%0 Missing and 4 partials ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@ Coverage Diff @@## main #4498 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 86.11% 86.11% -0.01% 
==========================================
Files 157 157 Lines 108851 108845 -6 Branches 108851 108845 -6 ==========================================
- Hits 93735 93727 -8 + Misses 12503 12497 -6 - Partials 2613 2621 +8 
FlagCoverage Δ
tests86.11% <95.83%> (-0.01%)⬇️
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.

📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.
 🚀 New features to boost your workflow: 
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Mar 23, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 1st Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Mar 25, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 2nd Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Mar 28, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 3rd Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Mar 30, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 4th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 1, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 5th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 4, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 6th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 6, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 7th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 8, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 8th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@jkczyzjkczyz
mentioned this pull request
Apr 9, 2026
 Merged

@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 11, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 9th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 13, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 10th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 15, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 11th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 18, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 12th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 20, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 13th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 22, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 14th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 25, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 15th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 27, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 16th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@wpaulino
wpaulinoforce-pushed
the
channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution
branch
from
ca819d9 to
e07c154CompareApril 27, 2026 17:23
ldk-claude-review-bot
ldk-claude-review-bot
reviewed
Apr 27, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/ln/channel.rs
Outdated


Comment on lines

+8321
 to 
+8326

let signing_session = self
 .context
 .interactive_tx_signing_session
 .as_ref()
 .map(|signing_session| !signing_session.has_received_tx_signatures())
	.unwrap_or(false));
 .expect("Signing session must exist for negotiated pending splice");
debug_assert!(!signing_session.has_received_tx_signatures());
@ldk-claude-review-botldk-claude-review-botApr 27, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nit: This changes from a debug_assert (no-op in release builds) to expect (panics in release builds). The old code combined the existence check and state check into a single debug assertion; now existence is enforced unconditionally while the state check remains debug-only.
This is arguably safer (fail-fast instead of silent invariant violation), but since signing_session isn't used beyond the debug_assert on the next line, consider whether returning a ChannelError would be more robust than panicking — consistent with how this function handles other missing state (e.g., the commitment_point error path at line 8340).
jkczyz
jkczyz
reviewed
Apr 27, 2026
View reviewed changes
@jkczyzjkczyz
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

At least much of the first commit will conflict with #4514. Which should we merge first?
Comment threadlightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs
Outdated

TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
reviewed
May 7, 2026
View reviewed changes
@TheBlueMattTheBlueMatt
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Needs rebase now.
wpaulino
added 2 commits
May 7, 2026 15:32
@wpaulino
Change FundingInfo::Contribution to expose contributed output scripts
b9d0eb7
Exposing the amounts for each output isn't very helpful because it's
possible that they vary across over multiple splice candidates due to
RBF. This commit changes `FundingInfo::Contribution` and several of the
helpers used to derive it to be based on output scripts instead.
@wpaulino
Produce FundingInfo::Contribution variants in ChannelMonitor
7e806f9
Similar to the `ChannelManager`, we expose the contributed inputs and
outputs of a splice via `FundingInfo::Contribution` at the
`ChannelMonitor` level such that we don't lose the context when the
channel closes while a splice is still pending. This relies on tracking
the `FundingContribution` that was provided to the `ChannelManager`
prior to negotiating the new funding transaction. If no
`FundingContribution` exists, then we continue to emit the
`FundingInfo::OutPoint` variant.
@wpaulino
wpaulinoforce-pushed
the
channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution
branch
from
e07c154 to
7e806f9CompareMay 7, 2026 22:40
@wpaulino
wpaulino
requested review from
TheBlueMatt and jkczyzMay 7, 2026 23:05
jkczyz
jkczyz
approved these changes
May 8, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/ln/funding.rs
 self, existing_inputs: impl Iterator<Item = OutPoint>,
 existing_outputs: impl Iterator<Item = &'a TxOut>,
	) -> Option<(Vec<OutPoint>, Vec<TxOut>)> {
 let (mut inputs, mut outputs) = self.into_contributed_inputs_and_outputs();
@jkczyzjkczyzMay 8, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is the only reason we don't continue to use into_contributed_inputs_and_outputs and keep the filtering logic is so we could avoid collect when we'd return None?
@wpaulinowpaulinoMay 11, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Correct
@TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
merged commit f0f8391
into
lightningdevkit:mainMay 11, 2026

22 of 24 checks passed

@wpaulino
wpaulino
deleted the

channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution

branch
May 11, 2026 19:36
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@TheBlueMattTheBlueMattTheBlueMatt approved these changes
@jkczyzjkczyzjkczyz approved these changes

+1 more reviewer

@ldk-claude-review-botldk-claude-review-botldk-claude-review-bot left review comments
Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

@wpaulinowpaulino

Labels


None yet


Projects

Weekly Goals

Status: Done


Milestone

0.3

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@wpaulino@ldk-reviews-bot@ldk-claude-review-bot@TheBlueMatt@jkczyz

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Auto-enable theater mode on YouTube\n(function() {\n function tryTheater() {\n var btn = document.querySelector('button[aria-label=\"Theater mode\"], ytd-player #player button[title=\"Theater mode\"]');\n if (btn && !btn.classList.contains('activated')) {\n btn.click();\n }\n }\n \n // Try immediately\n tryTheater();\n \n // Try after navigation (SPA)\n var lastUrl = location.href;\n setInterval(function() {\n if (location.href !== lastUrl) {\n lastUrl = location.href;\n setTimeout(tryTheater, 500);\n }\n }, 1000);\n \n // Also try on player load\n var observer = new MutationObserver(tryTheater);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "YouTube Theater Mode Default");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:YouTube Theater Mode Default]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '

Skip to content
Produce FundingInfo::Contribution variants in ChannelMonitor - #4498
Merged
TheBlueMatt merged 2 commits into
lightningdevkit:mainfrom 
wpaulino:channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution
May 11, 2026
Merged
Produce FundingInfo::Contribution variants in ChannelMonitor#4498
TheBlueMatt merged 2 commits into
lightningdevkit:mainfrom 
wpaulino:channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution
Conversation
@wpaulino
@wpaulinowpaulino
commented
Mar 19, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Similar to the `ChannelManager`, we expose the contributed inputs and
outputs of a splice via `FundingInfo::Contribution` at the
`ChannelMonitor` level such that we don't lose the context when the
channel closes while a splice is still pending.

@wpaulinowpaulino
added this to the 0.3 milestone
Mar 19, 2026
@wpaulino
wpaulino
requested a review
from jkczyzMarch 19, 2026 18:47
@wpaulinowpaulino
self-assigned this
Mar 19, 2026
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Mar 19, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

👋 Thanks for assigning @jkczyz as a reviewer!

I'll wait for their review and will help manage the review process.

Once they submit their review, I'll check if a second reviewer would be helpful.
ldk-claude-review-bot
ldk-claude-review-bot
reviewed
Mar 19, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs
Outdated

ldk-claude-review-bot
ldk-claude-review-bot
reviewed
Mar 19, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs
Outdated

ldk-claude-review-bot
ldk-claude-review-bot
reviewed
Mar 19, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs
Outdated

@ldk-claude-review-bot
ldk-claude-review-bot
commented
Mar 19, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
I've thoroughly reviewed the entire PR diff, reading every file and hunk. I also reviewed my prior comments to avoid duplication.
No new issues found.
Review Summary
After examining all changed files (channelmonitor.rs, events/mod.rs, channel.rs, funding.rs, interactivetxs.rs, splicing_tests.rs, ser.rs), I verified:
  1. Serialization: The new TLV fields (tag 7 on RenegotiatedFunding, tag 13 on FundingScope, tag 41 on top-level monitor) are all option, making them backward-compatible. Older LDK skips unknown tags; newer LDK reading old data gets None, falling back to FundingInfo::OutPoint.
  2. queue_discard_funding_event logic: Correctly differentiates between contribution: Some(...) (emits Contribution with unique inputs/outputs) and contribution: None (emits OutPoint fallback). The into_unique_contributions call properly filters against self.funding's contributed inputs/outputs.
  3. into_unique_contributions refactor: Changed from operating on pre-flattened (Vec<OutPoint>, Vec<TxOut>) to destructuring FundingContribution fields directly, handling change_output separately. The filtering logic is equivalent, and Vec::retain preserves deterministic ordering (no HashSet nondeterminism concern).
  4. promote_funding path: Correctly swaps new funding in, removes all pending_funding from outputs_to_watch, then filters out the previous (already-locked) funding before calling queue_discard_funding_event.
  5. FundingSpendConfirmation path: All pending fundings are discarded (no no_further_updates_allowed filter needed since the funding is spent). Events correctly use Contribution or OutPoint based on availability of contribution data.
  6. Type change Vec<TxOut> → Vec<ScriptBuf>: Consistently applied across all contributed_outputs() methods, FundingInfo::Contribution, SpliceFundingFailed, QuiescentError, and test assertions.
  7. Test coverage: Tests properly validate the new FundingInfo::Contribution events from the monitor (nodes[0] gets Contribution, nodes[1] non-contributor gets OutPoint), and all SpendableOutputs events are now explicitly asserted rather than ignored.
Prior review items (still applicable)
The issues flagged in my previous review pass remain relevant:
  • None vs Some(vec![]) semantics for FundingScope.contribution (defensive normalization suggestion)
  • The FundingInfo::Contribution serialization format change is breaking but acceptable since splicing is experimental
@jkczyzjkczyz
mentioned this pull request
Mar 19, 2026

Open

50 tasks
@codecov
codecovBot
commented
Mar 19, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Codecov Report
❌ Patch coverage is 95.83333% with 4 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

✅ Project coverage is 86.11%. Comparing base (c766417) to head (7e806f9).
⚠️ Report is 17 commits behind head on main.
Files with missing linesPatch %Lines
lightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs91.83%0 Missing and 4 partials ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@ Coverage Diff @@## main #4498 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 86.11% 86.11% -0.01% 
==========================================
Files 157 157 Lines 108851 108845 -6 Branches 108851 108845 -6 ==========================================
- Hits 93735 93727 -8 + Misses 12503 12497 -6 - Partials 2613 2621 +8 
FlagCoverage Δ
tests86.11% <95.83%> (-0.01%)⬇️
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.

📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.
 🚀 New features to boost your workflow: 
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Mar 23, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 1st Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Mar 25, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 2nd Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Mar 28, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 3rd Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Mar 30, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 4th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 1, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 5th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 4, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 6th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 6, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 7th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 8, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 8th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@jkczyzjkczyz
mentioned this pull request
Apr 9, 2026
 Merged

@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 11, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 9th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 13, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 10th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 15, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 11th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 18, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 12th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 20, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 13th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 22, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 14th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 25, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 15th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 27, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 16th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@wpaulino
wpaulinoforce-pushed
the
channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution
branch
from
ca819d9 to
e07c154CompareApril 27, 2026 17:23
ldk-claude-review-bot
ldk-claude-review-bot
reviewed
Apr 27, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/ln/channel.rs
Outdated


Comment on lines

+8321
 to 
+8326

let signing_session = self
 .context
 .interactive_tx_signing_session
 .as_ref()
 .map(|signing_session| !signing_session.has_received_tx_signatures())
	.unwrap_or(false));
 .expect("Signing session must exist for negotiated pending splice");
debug_assert!(!signing_session.has_received_tx_signatures());
@ldk-claude-review-botldk-claude-review-botApr 27, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nit: This changes from a debug_assert (no-op in release builds) to expect (panics in release builds). The old code combined the existence check and state check into a single debug assertion; now existence is enforced unconditionally while the state check remains debug-only.
This is arguably safer (fail-fast instead of silent invariant violation), but since signing_session isn't used beyond the debug_assert on the next line, consider whether returning a ChannelError would be more robust than panicking — consistent with how this function handles other missing state (e.g., the commitment_point error path at line 8340).
jkczyz
jkczyz
reviewed
Apr 27, 2026
View reviewed changes
@jkczyzjkczyz
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

At least much of the first commit will conflict with #4514. Which should we merge first?
Comment threadlightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs
Outdated

TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
reviewed
May 7, 2026
View reviewed changes
@TheBlueMattTheBlueMatt
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Needs rebase now.
wpaulino
added 2 commits
May 7, 2026 15:32
@wpaulino
Change FundingInfo::Contribution to expose contributed output scripts
b9d0eb7
Exposing the amounts for each output isn't very helpful because it's
possible that they vary across over multiple splice candidates due to
RBF. This commit changes `FundingInfo::Contribution` and several of the
helpers used to derive it to be based on output scripts instead.
@wpaulino
Produce FundingInfo::Contribution variants in ChannelMonitor
7e806f9
Similar to the `ChannelManager`, we expose the contributed inputs and
outputs of a splice via `FundingInfo::Contribution` at the
`ChannelMonitor` level such that we don't lose the context when the
channel closes while a splice is still pending. This relies on tracking
the `FundingContribution` that was provided to the `ChannelManager`
prior to negotiating the new funding transaction. If no
`FundingContribution` exists, then we continue to emit the
`FundingInfo::OutPoint` variant.
@wpaulino
wpaulinoforce-pushed
the
channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution
branch
from
e07c154 to
7e806f9CompareMay 7, 2026 22:40
@wpaulino
wpaulino
requested review from
TheBlueMatt and jkczyzMay 7, 2026 23:05
jkczyz
jkczyz
approved these changes
May 8, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/ln/funding.rs
 self, existing_inputs: impl Iterator<Item = OutPoint>,
 existing_outputs: impl Iterator<Item = &'a TxOut>,
	) -> Option<(Vec<OutPoint>, Vec<TxOut>)> {
 let (mut inputs, mut outputs) = self.into_contributed_inputs_and_outputs();
@jkczyzjkczyzMay 8, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is the only reason we don't continue to use into_contributed_inputs_and_outputs and keep the filtering logic is so we could avoid collect when we'd return None?
@wpaulinowpaulinoMay 11, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Correct
@TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
merged commit f0f8391
into
lightningdevkit:mainMay 11, 2026

22 of 24 checks passed

@wpaulino
wpaulino
deleted the

channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution

branch
May 11, 2026 19:36
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@TheBlueMattTheBlueMattTheBlueMatt approved these changes
@jkczyzjkczyzjkczyz approved these changes

+1 more reviewer

@ldk-claude-review-botldk-claude-review-botldk-claude-review-bot left review comments
Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

@wpaulinowpaulino

Labels


None yet


Projects

Weekly Goals

Status: Done


Milestone

0.3

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@wpaulino@ldk-reviews-bot@ldk-claude-review-bot@TheBlueMatt@jkczyz

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Remove or un-stick sticky/fixed headers that block content\n(function() {\n function unstick() {\n document.querySelectorAll('header, nav, [role=\"banner\"], .header, .navbar, .sticky, .fixed-top, [style*=\"position: fixed\"], [style*=\"position:sticky\"]').forEach(function(el) {\n if (el.style.position === 'fixed' || el.style.position === 'sticky' || \n getComputedStyle(el).position === 'fixed' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'sticky') {\n el.style.position = 'static';\n el.style.top = 'auto';\n el.style.zIndex = 'auto';\n }\n });\n }\n \n unstick();\n \n var observer = new MutationObserver(unstick);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true, attributes: true, attributeFilter: ['style', 'class'] });\n})();", "Kill Sticky Headers");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Kill Sticky Headers]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '

Skip to content
Produce FundingInfo::Contribution variants in ChannelMonitor - #4498
Merged
TheBlueMatt merged 2 commits into
lightningdevkit:mainfrom 
wpaulino:channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution
May 11, 2026
Merged
Produce FundingInfo::Contribution variants in ChannelMonitor#4498
TheBlueMatt merged 2 commits into
lightningdevkit:mainfrom 
wpaulino:channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution
Conversation
@wpaulino
@wpaulinowpaulino
commented
Mar 19, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Similar to the `ChannelManager`, we expose the contributed inputs and
outputs of a splice via `FundingInfo::Contribution` at the
`ChannelMonitor` level such that we don't lose the context when the
channel closes while a splice is still pending.

@wpaulinowpaulino
added this to the 0.3 milestone
Mar 19, 2026
@wpaulino
wpaulino
requested a review
from jkczyzMarch 19, 2026 18:47
@wpaulinowpaulino
self-assigned this
Mar 19, 2026
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Mar 19, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

👋 Thanks for assigning @jkczyz as a reviewer!

I'll wait for their review and will help manage the review process.

Once they submit their review, I'll check if a second reviewer would be helpful.
ldk-claude-review-bot
ldk-claude-review-bot
reviewed
Mar 19, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs
Outdated

ldk-claude-review-bot
ldk-claude-review-bot
reviewed
Mar 19, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs
Outdated

ldk-claude-review-bot
ldk-claude-review-bot
reviewed
Mar 19, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs
Outdated

@ldk-claude-review-bot
ldk-claude-review-bot
commented
Mar 19, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
I've thoroughly reviewed the entire PR diff, reading every file and hunk. I also reviewed my prior comments to avoid duplication.
No new issues found.
Review Summary
After examining all changed files (channelmonitor.rs, events/mod.rs, channel.rs, funding.rs, interactivetxs.rs, splicing_tests.rs, ser.rs), I verified:
  1. Serialization: The new TLV fields (tag 7 on RenegotiatedFunding, tag 13 on FundingScope, tag 41 on top-level monitor) are all option, making them backward-compatible. Older LDK skips unknown tags; newer LDK reading old data gets None, falling back to FundingInfo::OutPoint.
  2. queue_discard_funding_event logic: Correctly differentiates between contribution: Some(...) (emits Contribution with unique inputs/outputs) and contribution: None (emits OutPoint fallback). The into_unique_contributions call properly filters against self.funding's contributed inputs/outputs.
  3. into_unique_contributions refactor: Changed from operating on pre-flattened (Vec<OutPoint>, Vec<TxOut>) to destructuring FundingContribution fields directly, handling change_output separately. The filtering logic is equivalent, and Vec::retain preserves deterministic ordering (no HashSet nondeterminism concern).
  4. promote_funding path: Correctly swaps new funding in, removes all pending_funding from outputs_to_watch, then filters out the previous (already-locked) funding before calling queue_discard_funding_event.
  5. FundingSpendConfirmation path: All pending fundings are discarded (no no_further_updates_allowed filter needed since the funding is spent). Events correctly use Contribution or OutPoint based on availability of contribution data.
  6. Type change Vec<TxOut> → Vec<ScriptBuf>: Consistently applied across all contributed_outputs() methods, FundingInfo::Contribution, SpliceFundingFailed, QuiescentError, and test assertions.
  7. Test coverage: Tests properly validate the new FundingInfo::Contribution events from the monitor (nodes[0] gets Contribution, nodes[1] non-contributor gets OutPoint), and all SpendableOutputs events are now explicitly asserted rather than ignored.
Prior review items (still applicable)
The issues flagged in my previous review pass remain relevant:
  • None vs Some(vec![]) semantics for FundingScope.contribution (defensive normalization suggestion)
  • The FundingInfo::Contribution serialization format change is breaking but acceptable since splicing is experimental
@jkczyzjkczyz
mentioned this pull request
Mar 19, 2026

Open

50 tasks
@codecov
codecovBot
commented
Mar 19, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Codecov Report
❌ Patch coverage is 95.83333% with 4 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

✅ Project coverage is 86.11%. Comparing base (c766417) to head (7e806f9).
⚠️ Report is 17 commits behind head on main.
Files with missing linesPatch %Lines
lightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs91.83%0 Missing and 4 partials ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@ Coverage Diff @@## main #4498 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 86.11% 86.11% -0.01% 
==========================================
Files 157 157 Lines 108851 108845 -6 Branches 108851 108845 -6 ==========================================
- Hits 93735 93727 -8 + Misses 12503 12497 -6 - Partials 2613 2621 +8 
FlagCoverage Δ
tests86.11% <95.83%> (-0.01%)⬇️
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.

📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.
 🚀 New features to boost your workflow: 
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Mar 23, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 1st Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Mar 25, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 2nd Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Mar 28, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 3rd Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Mar 30, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 4th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 1, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 5th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 4, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 6th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 6, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 7th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 8, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 8th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@jkczyzjkczyz
mentioned this pull request
Apr 9, 2026
 Merged

@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 11, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 9th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 13, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 10th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 15, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 11th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 18, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 12th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 20, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 13th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 22, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 14th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 25, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 15th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 27, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 16th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@wpaulino
wpaulinoforce-pushed
the
channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution
branch
from
ca819d9 to
e07c154CompareApril 27, 2026 17:23
ldk-claude-review-bot
ldk-claude-review-bot
reviewed
Apr 27, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/ln/channel.rs
Outdated


Comment on lines

+8321
 to 
+8326

let signing_session = self
 .context
 .interactive_tx_signing_session
 .as_ref()
 .map(|signing_session| !signing_session.has_received_tx_signatures())
	.unwrap_or(false));
 .expect("Signing session must exist for negotiated pending splice");
debug_assert!(!signing_session.has_received_tx_signatures());
@ldk-claude-review-botldk-claude-review-botApr 27, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nit: This changes from a debug_assert (no-op in release builds) to expect (panics in release builds). The old code combined the existence check and state check into a single debug assertion; now existence is enforced unconditionally while the state check remains debug-only.
This is arguably safer (fail-fast instead of silent invariant violation), but since signing_session isn't used beyond the debug_assert on the next line, consider whether returning a ChannelError would be more robust than panicking — consistent with how this function handles other missing state (e.g., the commitment_point error path at line 8340).
jkczyz
jkczyz
reviewed
Apr 27, 2026
View reviewed changes
@jkczyzjkczyz
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

At least much of the first commit will conflict with #4514. Which should we merge first?
Comment threadlightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs
Outdated

TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
reviewed
May 7, 2026
View reviewed changes
@TheBlueMattTheBlueMatt
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Needs rebase now.
wpaulino
added 2 commits
May 7, 2026 15:32
@wpaulino
Change FundingInfo::Contribution to expose contributed output scripts
b9d0eb7
Exposing the amounts for each output isn't very helpful because it's
possible that they vary across over multiple splice candidates due to
RBF. This commit changes `FundingInfo::Contribution` and several of the
helpers used to derive it to be based on output scripts instead.
@wpaulino
Produce FundingInfo::Contribution variants in ChannelMonitor
7e806f9
Similar to the `ChannelManager`, we expose the contributed inputs and
outputs of a splice via `FundingInfo::Contribution` at the
`ChannelMonitor` level such that we don't lose the context when the
channel closes while a splice is still pending. This relies on tracking
the `FundingContribution` that was provided to the `ChannelManager`
prior to negotiating the new funding transaction. If no
`FundingContribution` exists, then we continue to emit the
`FundingInfo::OutPoint` variant.
@wpaulino
wpaulinoforce-pushed
the
channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution
branch
from
e07c154 to
7e806f9CompareMay 7, 2026 22:40
@wpaulino
wpaulino
requested review from
TheBlueMatt and jkczyzMay 7, 2026 23:05
jkczyz
jkczyz
approved these changes
May 8, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/ln/funding.rs
 self, existing_inputs: impl Iterator<Item = OutPoint>,
 existing_outputs: impl Iterator<Item = &'a TxOut>,
	) -> Option<(Vec<OutPoint>, Vec<TxOut>)> {
 let (mut inputs, mut outputs) = self.into_contributed_inputs_and_outputs();
@jkczyzjkczyzMay 8, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is the only reason we don't continue to use into_contributed_inputs_and_outputs and keep the filtering logic is so we could avoid collect when we'd return None?
@wpaulinowpaulinoMay 11, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Correct
@TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
merged commit f0f8391
into
lightningdevkit:mainMay 11, 2026

22 of 24 checks passed

@wpaulino
wpaulino
deleted the

channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution

branch
May 11, 2026 19:36
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@TheBlueMattTheBlueMattTheBlueMatt approved these changes
@jkczyzjkczyzjkczyz approved these changes

+1 more reviewer

@ldk-claude-review-botldk-claude-review-botldk-claude-review-bot left review comments
Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

@wpaulinowpaulino

Labels


None yet


Projects

Weekly Goals

Status: Done


Milestone

0.3

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@wpaulino@ldk-reviews-bot@ldk-claude-review-bot@TheBlueMatt@jkczyz

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Universal Dark Mode - works on any site\n(function() {\n var enabled = true;\n \n function applyDarkMode() {\n if (!enabled) return;\n \n // Create style element if it doesn't exist\n var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');\n if (!style) {\n style = document.createElement('style');\n style.id = 'universal-dark-mode-style';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n }\n \n // Dark mode CSS - inverts colors but preserves images/video\n style.textContent = '\n /* Invert everything except media */\n html {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n background: #1a1a2e !important;\n }\n \n /* Restore images, videos, iframes, canvas */\n img, video, iframe, canvas, svg, picture, [style*=\"background-image\"] {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n }\n \n /* Preserve specific elements that should not be inverted */\n .no-dark-mode, .no-dark-mode *,\n [data-theme=\"light\"], [data-theme=\"light\"],\n .ace_editor, .ace_editor *,\n .CodeMirror, .CodeMirror *,\n .monaco-editor, .monaco-editor *,\n .markdown-body pre, .markdown-body pre *,\n .highlight, .highlight *,\n pre code, pre code * {\n filter: none !important;\n }\n \n /* Fix common UI elements */\n .modal, .popup, .dropdown-menu, .tooltip, .popover {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n background: #2d2d44 !important;\n border-color: #444 !important;\n }\n \n /* Scrollbars */\n ::-webkit-scrollbar { background: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb { background: #444 !important; }\n ::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb:hover { background: #555 !important; }\n \n /* Selection */\n ::selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ::-moz-selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ';\n }\n \n function removeDarkMode() {\n var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');\n if (style) style.remove();\n }\n \n // Toggle with Alt+Shift+D\n document.addEventListener('keydown', function(e) {\n if (e.altKey && e.shiftKey && e.key === 'D') {\n e.preventDefault();\n enabled = !enabled;\n if (enabled) {\n applyDarkMode();\n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Enabled');\n } else {\n removeDarkMode();\n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Disabled');\n }\n }\n });\n \n // Apply on load\n applyDarkMode();\n \n // Re-apply on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n if (enabled && !document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style')) {\n applyDarkMode();\n }\n });\n observer.observe(document.head, { childList: true });\n \n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Loaded - Press Alt+Shift+D to toggle');\n})();", "Universal Dark Mode");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Universal Dark Mode]', __e); }
})();
})();

Skip to content
Produce FundingInfo::Contribution variants in ChannelMonitor - #4498
Merged
TheBlueMatt merged 2 commits into
lightningdevkit:mainfrom 
wpaulino:channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution
May 11, 2026
Merged
Produce FundingInfo::Contribution variants in ChannelMonitor#4498
TheBlueMatt merged 2 commits into
lightningdevkit:mainfrom 
wpaulino:channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution
Conversation
@wpaulino
@wpaulinowpaulino
commented
Mar 19, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Similar to the `ChannelManager`, we expose the contributed inputs and
outputs of a splice via `FundingInfo::Contribution` at the
`ChannelMonitor` level such that we don't lose the context when the
channel closes while a splice is still pending.

@wpaulinowpaulino
added this to the 0.3 milestone
Mar 19, 2026
@wpaulino
wpaulino
requested a review
from jkczyzMarch 19, 2026 18:47
@wpaulinowpaulino
self-assigned this
Mar 19, 2026
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Mar 19, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

👋 Thanks for assigning @jkczyz as a reviewer!

I'll wait for their review and will help manage the review process.

Once they submit their review, I'll check if a second reviewer would be helpful.
ldk-claude-review-bot
ldk-claude-review-bot
reviewed
Mar 19, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs
Outdated

ldk-claude-review-bot
ldk-claude-review-bot
reviewed
Mar 19, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs
Outdated

ldk-claude-review-bot
ldk-claude-review-bot
reviewed
Mar 19, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs
Outdated

@ldk-claude-review-bot
ldk-claude-review-bot
commented
Mar 19, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
I've thoroughly reviewed the entire PR diff, reading every file and hunk. I also reviewed my prior comments to avoid duplication.
No new issues found.
Review Summary
After examining all changed files (channelmonitor.rs, events/mod.rs, channel.rs, funding.rs, interactivetxs.rs, splicing_tests.rs, ser.rs), I verified:
  1. Serialization: The new TLV fields (tag 7 on RenegotiatedFunding, tag 13 on FundingScope, tag 41 on top-level monitor) are all option, making them backward-compatible. Older LDK skips unknown tags; newer LDK reading old data gets None, falling back to FundingInfo::OutPoint.
  2. queue_discard_funding_event logic: Correctly differentiates between contribution: Some(...) (emits Contribution with unique inputs/outputs) and contribution: None (emits OutPoint fallback). The into_unique_contributions call properly filters against self.funding's contributed inputs/outputs.
  3. into_unique_contributions refactor: Changed from operating on pre-flattened (Vec<OutPoint>, Vec<TxOut>) to destructuring FundingContribution fields directly, handling change_output separately. The filtering logic is equivalent, and Vec::retain preserves deterministic ordering (no HashSet nondeterminism concern).
  4. promote_funding path: Correctly swaps new funding in, removes all pending_funding from outputs_to_watch, then filters out the previous (already-locked) funding before calling queue_discard_funding_event.
  5. FundingSpendConfirmation path: All pending fundings are discarded (no no_further_updates_allowed filter needed since the funding is spent). Events correctly use Contribution or OutPoint based on availability of contribution data.
  6. Type change Vec<TxOut> → Vec<ScriptBuf>: Consistently applied across all contributed_outputs() methods, FundingInfo::Contribution, SpliceFundingFailed, QuiescentError, and test assertions.
  7. Test coverage: Tests properly validate the new FundingInfo::Contribution events from the monitor (nodes[0] gets Contribution, nodes[1] non-contributor gets OutPoint), and all SpendableOutputs events are now explicitly asserted rather than ignored.
Prior review items (still applicable)
The issues flagged in my previous review pass remain relevant:
  • None vs Some(vec![]) semantics for FundingScope.contribution (defensive normalization suggestion)
  • The FundingInfo::Contribution serialization format change is breaking but acceptable since splicing is experimental
@jkczyzjkczyz
mentioned this pull request
Mar 19, 2026

Open

50 tasks
@codecov
codecovBot
commented
Mar 19, 2026•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Codecov Report
❌ Patch coverage is 95.83333% with 4 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

✅ Project coverage is 86.11%. Comparing base (c766417) to head (7e806f9).
⚠️ Report is 17 commits behind head on main.
Files with missing linesPatch %Lines
lightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs91.83%0 Missing and 4 partials ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@ Coverage Diff @@## main #4498 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 86.11% 86.11% -0.01% 
==========================================
Files 157 157 Lines 108851 108845 -6 Branches 108851 108845 -6 ==========================================
- Hits 93735 93727 -8 + Misses 12503 12497 -6 - Partials 2613 2621 +8 
FlagCoverage Δ
tests86.11% <95.83%> (-0.01%)⬇️
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.

📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.
 🚀 New features to boost your workflow: 
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Mar 23, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 1st Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Mar 25, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 2nd Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Mar 28, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 3rd Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Mar 30, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 4th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 1, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 5th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 4, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 6th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 6, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 7th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 8, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 8th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@jkczyzjkczyz
mentioned this pull request
Apr 9, 2026
 Merged

@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 11, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 9th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 13, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 10th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 15, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 11th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 18, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 12th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 20, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 13th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 22, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 14th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 25, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 15th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@ldk-reviews-bot
ldk-reviews-bot
commented
Apr 27, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

🔔 16th Reminder
Hey @jkczyz! This PR has been waiting for your review.

Please take a look when you have a chance. If you're unable to review, please let us know so we can find another reviewer.
@wpaulino
wpaulinoforce-pushed
the
channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution
branch
from
ca819d9 to
e07c154CompareApril 27, 2026 17:23
ldk-claude-review-bot
ldk-claude-review-bot
reviewed
Apr 27, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/ln/channel.rs
Outdated


Comment on lines

+8321
 to 
+8326

let signing_session = self
 .context
 .interactive_tx_signing_session
 .as_ref()
 .map(|signing_session| !signing_session.has_received_tx_signatures())
	.unwrap_or(false));
 .expect("Signing session must exist for negotiated pending splice");
debug_assert!(!signing_session.has_received_tx_signatures());
@ldk-claude-review-botldk-claude-review-botApr 27, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nit: This changes from a debug_assert (no-op in release builds) to expect (panics in release builds). The old code combined the existence check and state check into a single debug assertion; now existence is enforced unconditionally while the state check remains debug-only.
This is arguably safer (fail-fast instead of silent invariant violation), but since signing_session isn't used beyond the debug_assert on the next line, consider whether returning a ChannelError would be more robust than panicking — consistent with how this function handles other missing state (e.g., the commitment_point error path at line 8340).
jkczyz
jkczyz
reviewed
Apr 27, 2026
View reviewed changes
@jkczyzjkczyz
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

At least much of the first commit will conflict with #4514. Which should we merge first?
Comment threadlightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs
Outdated

TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
reviewed
May 7, 2026
View reviewed changes
@TheBlueMattTheBlueMatt
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Needs rebase now.
wpaulino
added 2 commits
May 7, 2026 15:32
@wpaulino
Change FundingInfo::Contribution to expose contributed output scripts
b9d0eb7
Exposing the amounts for each output isn't very helpful because it's
possible that they vary across over multiple splice candidates due to
RBF. This commit changes `FundingInfo::Contribution` and several of the
helpers used to derive it to be based on output scripts instead.
@wpaulino
Produce FundingInfo::Contribution variants in ChannelMonitor
7e806f9
Similar to the `ChannelManager`, we expose the contributed inputs and
outputs of a splice via `FundingInfo::Contribution` at the
`ChannelMonitor` level such that we don't lose the context when the
channel closes while a splice is still pending. This relies on tracking
the `FundingContribution` that was provided to the `ChannelManager`
prior to negotiating the new funding transaction. If no
`FundingContribution` exists, then we continue to emit the
`FundingInfo::OutPoint` variant.
@wpaulino
wpaulinoforce-pushed
the
channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution
branch
from
e07c154 to
7e806f9CompareMay 7, 2026 22:40
@wpaulino
wpaulino
requested review from
TheBlueMatt and jkczyzMay 7, 2026 23:05
jkczyz
jkczyz
approved these changes
May 8, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlightning/src/ln/funding.rs
 self, existing_inputs: impl Iterator<Item = OutPoint>,
 existing_outputs: impl Iterator<Item = &'a TxOut>,
	) -> Option<(Vec<OutPoint>, Vec<TxOut>)> {
 let (mut inputs, mut outputs) = self.into_contributed_inputs_and_outputs();
@jkczyzjkczyzMay 8, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is the only reason we don't continue to use into_contributed_inputs_and_outputs and keep the filtering logic is so we could avoid collect when we'd return None?
@wpaulinowpaulinoMay 11, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Correct
@TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
merged commit f0f8391
into
lightningdevkit:mainMay 11, 2026

22 of 24 checks passed

@wpaulino
wpaulino
deleted the

channel-monitor-discard-funding-contribution

branch
May 11, 2026 19:36
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@TheBlueMattTheBlueMattTheBlueMatt approved these changes
@jkczyzjkczyzjkczyz approved these changes

+1 more reviewer

@ldk-claude-review-botldk-claude-review-botldk-claude-review-bot left review comments
Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

@wpaulinowpaulino

Labels


None yet


Projects

Weekly Goals

Status: Done


Milestone

0.3

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@wpaulino@ldk-reviews-bot@ldk-claude-review-bot@TheBlueMatt@jkczyz