12017-07-14T00:15:23 *** juscamarena has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
22017-07-14T00:15:47 *** juscamarena is now known as Guest98158
32017-07-14T00:16:20 *** juscamarena_ has quit IRC
42017-07-14T00:18:18 *** PaulCapestany has quit IRC
52017-07-14T00:19:42 *** PaulCape_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
62017-07-14T00:25:04 *** juscamarena_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
72017-07-14T00:25:44 *** chjj has quit IRC
82017-07-14T00:26:28 *** Guest98158 has quit IRC
92017-07-14T00:40:17 *** wasi has quit IRC
102017-07-14T00:50:25 *** Murch has quit IRC
112017-07-14T00:54:38 *** wasi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
122017-07-14T01:03:29 *** wumpus has quit IRC
132017-07-14T01:05:07 *** wumpus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
142017-07-14T01:26:49 *** chjj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
152017-07-14T01:42:06 *** corebob has quit IRC
162017-07-14T01:49:01 *** str4d has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
172017-07-14T01:56:17 *** str4d has quit IRC
182017-07-14T01:56:41 *** PaulCape_ has quit IRC
192017-07-14T01:58:56 *** PaulCapestany has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
202017-07-14T02:01:25 *** BashCo has quit IRC
212017-07-14T02:02:20 *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
222017-07-14T02:02:36 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
232017-07-14T02:15:59 *** sanada` has quit IRC
242017-07-14T02:21:06 *** Victor_sueca has quit IRC
252017-07-14T02:22:09 *** wasi has quit IRC
262017-07-14T02:22:15 *** Victor_sueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
272017-07-14T02:23:03 *** wasi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
282017-07-14T02:30:18 *** dabura667 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
292017-07-14T02:33:35 *** rhavar has quit IRC
302017-07-14T02:51:52 *** arowser has quit IRC
312017-07-14T02:57:01 <luke-jr> wumpus: poke, can you build v0.14.2-uasfsegwit1.0?
322017-07-14T02:58:01 *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
332017-07-14T02:58:53 *** dabura667 has quit IRC
342017-07-14T03:19:29 *** chjj has quit IRC
352017-07-14T03:20:50 *** jamesob has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
362017-07-14T03:31:25 *** alan_baker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
372017-07-14T03:39:17 *** Victor_sueca is now known as VIctorsueca
382017-07-14T03:39:54 *** CubicEarth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
392017-07-14T03:40:34 *** Squidicuz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
402017-07-14T03:40:42 *** NewLiberty has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
412017-07-14T03:41:15 *** alan_baker has quit IRC
422017-07-14T03:50:42 <phantomcircuit> there's functional tests that seem to randomly fail
432017-07-14T03:51:35 <kanzure> is there a trick to getting the test framework to let node[3].generate(10) actually cause additions to listunspent output
442017-07-14T03:52:45 <sipa> kanzure: maturity is a bitch
452017-07-14T03:52:54 <sipa> you need mine 100 more blocks first
462017-07-14T03:54:23 *** sanada has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
472017-07-14T03:56:48 <kanzure> but 105 didn't work either.
482017-07-14T03:58:00 <kanzure> oh.
492017-07-14T04:01:01 *** Squidicc has quit IRC
502017-07-14T04:01:22 *** Squidicc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
512017-07-14T04:08:17 *** wasi has quit IRC
522017-07-14T04:09:47 *** Ylbam has quit IRC
532017-07-14T04:11:54 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] ReneNyffenegger closed pull request #10768: Build System: Prevent warning about "maybe uninitialized variable" nStart in init.cpp (master...init-nStart) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10768
542017-07-14T04:22:01 *** wasi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
552017-07-14T05:05:52 *** NewLiberty has quit IRC
562017-07-14T05:07:51 *** juscamarena has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
572017-07-14T05:07:56 *** juscamarena_ has quit IRC
582017-07-14T05:08:15 *** juscamarena is now known as Guest38607
592017-07-14T05:08:51 *** VIctorsueca is now known as Victorsueca
602017-07-14T05:17:59 *** CubicEarth has quit IRC
612017-07-14T05:23:28 *** arowser has quit IRC
622017-07-14T05:29:40 *** instagibbs has quit IRC
632017-07-14T05:29:40 *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
642017-07-14T05:37:49 *** instagibbs has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
652017-07-14T05:40:49 <jtimon> what is src/wallet.backup ? and what is making my unittests fail?
662017-07-14T05:43:56 *** ula has quit IRC
672017-07-14T05:49:05 *** hjkghujk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
682017-07-14T06:01:29 *** hjkghujk has quit IRC
692017-07-14T06:02:21 *** BashCo has quit IRC
702017-07-14T06:02:57 *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
712017-07-14T06:13:05 *** wasi has quit IRC
722017-07-14T06:22:42 <wumpus> luke-jr: sure
732017-07-14T06:23:46 <gmaxwell> I'd seen an shorter version of this presentation before (and I think linked it here), on failures in fault tolerant systems... some good nightmare fuel (it's on HN right now) https://c3.nasa.gov/dashlink/static/media/other/ObservedFailures1.html
742017-07-14T06:26:03 *** wasi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
752017-07-14T06:29:42 <wumpus> wtf is up with https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10805
762017-07-14T06:30:27 <luke-jr> wumpus: he's saying we should make manpages and ONLY document in those
772017-07-14T06:30:45 <luke-jr> ie, get rid of the --help details and RPC help stuff
782017-07-14T06:30:59 <gmaxwell> why wouldn't we just improve the --help and improve the autogen
792017-07-14T06:31:19 <luke-jr> he seems to think documentation simply belongs in manpages
802017-07-14T06:31:45 <luke-jr> I don't necessarily agree (nor disagree).
812017-07-14T06:34:13 <gmaxwell> documentation in the system is very helpful, from a pratical perspective.
822017-07-14T06:34:30 <gmaxwell> and much easier to keep updated, and acts as source code documentation too
832017-07-14T06:35:29 <wumpus> no one is going to maintain external manpages, the generation is useful imo
842017-07-14T06:36:09 <wumpus> I agree that creates an overlap between --help output and the man page, but I don't see it as a problem
852017-07-14T06:37:25 <luke-jr> the only ways I see to improve on how we do it now are 1) we lost a manpage for bitcoin.conf, and 2) they ideally would be auto-generated during the build
862017-07-14T06:38:10 <wumpus> and moving the manpages from doc/man to src makes no sense either, that directory is already cluttered enough
872017-07-14T06:42:44 *** alan_baker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
882017-07-14T06:44:14 *** alan_baker has quit IRC
892017-07-14T06:44:40 *** alan_baker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
902017-07-14T06:46:35 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] sipa opened pull request #10821: Add SSE 4.2 optimized SHA256 (master...20170713_shasse) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10821
912017-07-14T06:56:41 *** NewLiberty has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
922017-07-14T07:24:52 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/7666250ffb4e...db825d293be8
932017-07-14T07:24:52 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master d34d77a Cory Fields: build: verify that the assembler can handle crc32 functions...
942017-07-14T07:24:52 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master db825d2 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #10806: build: verify that the assembler can handle crc32 functions...
952017-07-14T07:25:25 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #10806: build: verify that the assembler can handle crc32 functions (master...configure-check-asm) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10806
962017-07-14T07:34:02 *** coredump_ has quit IRC
972017-07-14T07:35:19 *** Dyaheon has quit IRC
982017-07-14T07:38:35 *** Dyaheon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
992017-07-14T07:43:27 *** arowser has quit IRC
1002017-07-14T07:43:57 *** SopaXorzTaker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1012017-07-14T07:44:04 *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1022017-07-14T07:49:57 *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1032017-07-14T08:00:05 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jtimon opened pull request #10822: TOTEST: Also server txo from gettxout (not just utxo and mempool) (master...b15-rpc-txo) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10822
1042017-07-14T08:04:58 <jonasschnelli> Is there no RPC call (chain) to get a rawtx if I know height and txid?
1052017-07-14T08:05:52 <wumpus> jonasschnelli: #10275?
1062017-07-14T08:05:54 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10275 | [rpc] Allow fetching tx directly from specified block in getrawtransaction by kallewoof · Pull Request #10275 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
1072017-07-14T08:06:24 <jonasschnelli> Oh! Nice... I missed that
1082017-07-14T08:06:36 <jonasschnelli> I even commented... :/
1092017-07-14T08:07:00 <jonasschnelli> Would allowing a range of blocks (defined by height) make sense as addition?
1102017-07-14T08:07:57 <wumpus> not sure...
1112017-07-14T08:08:03 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1122017-07-14T08:08:19 <wumpus> when does that use case happen? you know a transaction is in a certain block range?
1132017-07-14T08:09:02 <jonasschnelli> Use case, I know a txid but don't know if it is confirmed or not... maybe you can say "check the last X blocks for txid Y"
1142017-07-14T08:09:20 <jonasschnelli> But yeah.. meh.
1152017-07-14T08:09:24 <jonasschnelli> 10275 is really nice
1162017-07-14T08:13:13 *** henrik_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1172017-07-14T08:15:55 *** henrik_ has quit IRC
1182017-07-14T08:25:15 <sipa> wumpus: i actually said to gmaxwell earlier today about
1192017-07-14T08:26:44 <sipa> wumpus: i actually said to gmaxwell earlier today about 10820 "in about 3 years someone will try to compile with OpenBSD, and notice that it doesn't work... and then we'll add some #ifdefs around it"
1202017-07-14T08:28:55 *** alan_baker has quit IRC
1212017-07-14T08:39:11 *** vicenteH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1222017-07-14T08:39:15 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1232017-07-14T08:39:39 *** promag has quit IRC
1242017-07-14T08:47:09 <jonasschnelli> I tried to compile Core on a openBSD VM. But I could not even install python3. The package manager idled endless at the point of decompression...
1252017-07-14T08:52:34 *** PaulCapestany has quit IRC
1262017-07-14T08:53:08 *** PaulCapestany has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1272017-07-14T08:56:23 *** PaulCapestany has quit IRC
1282017-07-14T08:58:17 <wumpus> sipa: hah, no need to wait for that, I compile bitcoin core on openbsd quite a lot
1292017-07-14T08:58:33 *** PaulCape_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1302017-07-14T08:58:38 <wumpus> jonasschnelli: strange
1312017-07-14T09:04:01 *** goatpig has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1322017-07-14T09:07:47 *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1332017-07-14T09:17:18 *** treebeardd has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1342017-07-14T09:22:33 *** Guyver2_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1352017-07-14T09:23:37 *** treebeardd has quit IRC
1362017-07-14T09:26:00 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1372017-07-14T09:26:53 *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
1382017-07-14T09:26:59 *** Guyver2_ is now known as Guyver2
1392017-07-14T09:33:51 *** rafalcpp has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1402017-07-14T09:44:49 *** jtimon has quit IRC
1412017-07-14T10:03:48 *** mmgen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1422017-07-14T10:04:41 *** BashCo has quit IRC
1432017-07-14T10:05:19 *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1442017-07-14T10:07:24 <mmgen> signrawtransaction is adding the redeem script but not the witness data to transaction. Can anyone help?
1452017-07-14T10:07:27 *** riemann has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1462017-07-14T10:08:17 <mmgen> (I'm adding segwit support to my wallet)
1472017-07-14T10:12:18 <mmgen> And the "signed" transaction with no witness relays OK on testnet and is included in mined block. Strange.
1482017-07-14T10:14:47 <mmgen> What am I missing?
1492017-07-14T10:23:01 *** mmgen has quit IRC
1502017-07-14T10:30:42 *** mmgen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1512017-07-14T10:33:11 <jonasschnelli> mmgen: can you maken an example and file an issue on github?
1522017-07-14T10:33:20 <jonasschnelli> Ideally show your process and in-/output
1532017-07-14T10:35:25 <mmgen> I don't think this warrants an issue. I'm clearly doing something wrong. signrawtransaction can sign segwit ps2h TXs if you supply the redeem script and keys, right?
1542017-07-14T10:36:59 <mmgen> The sign operation returns OK. TX broadcasts OK. TX is mined. But there's no signature.
1552017-07-14T10:42:30 *** ProfMac has quit IRC
1562017-07-14T10:51:37 *** promag has quit IRC
1572017-07-14T10:53:03 <mmgen> jonasschnelli: testnet tx d207ffb90c4ceee2ce242990f69b91f67639f25a7b2be76c13b853a0a376b1b5
1582017-07-14T10:54:06 *** Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1592017-07-14T10:57:18 <mmgen> jonasschnelli: just mined
1602017-07-14T10:58:41 <mmgen> jonasschnelli: but has no signature
1612017-07-14T11:11:33 <arubi> mmgen, you're redeeming a p2sh of 0x17 0x160014b7bddbc682c9d41dda1e40c9e5bffcfca385af78
1622017-07-14T11:12:34 <arubi> you want to redeem a p2sh of "0x00 0x14 0xb7bddbc682c9d41dda1e40c9e5bffcfca385af78" where the length of that script is 0x16
1632017-07-14T11:16:05 <mmgen> arubi: ok
1642017-07-14T11:16:19 <mmgen> arubi: thanks, will check it out
1652017-07-14T11:17:39 <arubi> np mmgen, at least it looks like it. I don't know what you signed
1662017-07-14T11:18:59 <mmgen> arubi: Busy now, I'll get back to you in about 30 min
1672017-07-14T11:20:28 *** arowser has quit IRC
1682017-07-14T11:20:54 <arubi> ok, anyway the hash160 is of 160014B7BDDBC682C9D41DDA1E40C9E5BFFCFCA385AF78 instead of 0014B7BDDBC682C9D41DDA1E40C9E5BFFCFCA385AF78
1692017-07-14T11:22:02 <mmgen> arubi: I just need to remove the leading 0x16 i think
1702017-07-14T11:23:05 <mmgen> thought the 0x16 was needed for data push
1712017-07-14T11:23:45 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1722017-07-14T11:26:36 *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1732017-07-14T11:28:52 <mmgen> arubi: I was creating the redeem script like this: '160014' + hash160(pubhex)
1742017-07-14T11:32:46 <mmgen> Strange that signrawtransaction didn't complain though
1752017-07-14T11:33:12 <mmgen> despite my malformed script
1762017-07-14T11:33:55 <arubi> it's just redeeming a p2sh of a single push of what you hash160'ed
1772017-07-14T11:34:00 <arubi> it's not a segwit scriptpubkey, so no sig is needed
1782017-07-14T11:36:59 <mmgen> but without the key it wouldn't sign for some reason
1792017-07-14T11:40:00 <arubi> try with a different key :)
1802017-07-14T11:41:31 <mmgen> arubi: will try. Thanks much for your help
1812017-07-14T11:53:26 *** promag has quit IRC
1822017-07-14T11:55:16 <mmgen> arubi: so any p2sh script consisting of a single data push is redeemable. OP_EQUAL returns True, the stack is empty, so it's valid.
1832017-07-14T11:55:59 <mmgen> arubi: wonder if some sort of sanity check should be added to prevent goofups like this?
1842017-07-14T11:56:28 <arubi> the stack isn't empty, it has a final 0x01 on it from the TRUE executing
1852017-07-14T11:56:56 <mmgen> ok, True's on the stack, so it's valid
1862017-07-14T11:57:17 <arubi> er, from the EQUAL
1872017-07-14T11:57:59 <mmgen> so now if I spend to that address again, anyone who's seen the script can steal the coins
1882017-07-14T11:58:18 <arubi> anyway, we're getting off topic here :)
1892017-07-14T11:58:24 <arubi> right
1902017-07-14T11:59:10 <mmgen> so maybe the client should reject p2sh scripts consisting of a single data push then?
1912017-07-14T11:59:23 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] janstary closed pull request #10805: have proper manpages for bitcoin*(1) (master...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10805
1922017-07-14T12:00:20 <arubi> reject how? it can't tell what the script is when you fund the address
1932017-07-14T12:00:32 <mmgen> oh, right
1942017-07-14T12:01:22 <mmgen> just when you sign, and by then it's too late
1952017-07-14T12:02:22 <arubi> note you'd still be pushing a single value for redeeming a p2sh(segwit), the segwit spk itself serialized
1962017-07-14T12:02:23 <mmgen> so there's no real point in checking at the signing stage
1972017-07-14T12:04:44 <mmgen> arubi: ok
1982017-07-14T12:33:21 *** wasi has quit IRC
1992017-07-14T12:47:18 *** wasi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2002017-07-14T12:58:22 *** NewLiberty has quit IRC
2012017-07-14T13:06:09 *** marcoagn1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2022017-07-14T13:07:13 *** marcoagner has quit IRC
2032017-07-14T13:09:56 *** harrymm has quit IRC
2042017-07-14T13:22:45 <cfields> sipa: I believe I know the problem with #10821. Testing a fix.
2052017-07-14T13:22:46 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10821 | Add SSE 4.2 optimized SHA256 by sipa · Pull Request #10821 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2062017-07-14T13:25:08 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2072017-07-14T13:29:53 *** wasi has quit IRC
2082017-07-14T13:32:49 *** Squidicc has quit IRC
2092017-07-14T13:36:08 *** SopaXorzTaker has quit IRC
2102017-07-14T13:42:11 *** wasi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2112017-07-14T13:45:50 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2122017-07-14T13:47:12 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] greenaddress opened pull request #10823: Allow all mempool txs to be replaced after a configurable timeout (default 6h) (master...replace-by-fee-old-transactions) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10823
2132017-07-14T13:49:39 *** SopaXorzTaker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2142017-07-14T13:53:58 <cfields> sipa: interesting. clang doesn't enable -fomit-frame-pointer at any optim level
2152017-07-14T13:54:10 <cfields> adding that in fixes compilation
2162017-07-14T13:58:03 <luke-jr> doesn't it break debugging?
2172017-07-14T13:59:18 *** SopaXorzTaker has quit IRC
2182017-07-14T14:02:47 *** BashCo has quit IRC
2192017-07-14T14:03:21 *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2202017-07-14T14:05:29 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] promag opened pull request #10824: Avoid unnecessary work in SetNetworkActive (master...2017-07-set-network-active) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10824
2212017-07-14T14:08:32 <cfields> luke-jr: it's on by default for x86_64
2222017-07-14T14:08:40 <cfields> er, for gcc
2232017-07-14T14:14:24 <mmgen> arubi: now redeem script is correctly formed, signrawtransaction is including the witness data, but txsend fails with 64: non-mandatory-script-verify-flag (Signature must be zero for failed CHECK(MULTI)SIG operation) (code -26)
2242017-07-14T14:17:35 <mmgen> input in question is output 0 of testnet tx dd2117779039b6abd20529c9c9ce67b4c18c0a0223129759ae01deebaa037151
2252017-07-14T14:20:36 <mmgen> wif: cVGLmgcfnq2jvdhNFn9UJQWe6NUCr71GMHePKZC8eXc6fNdJsRuM
2262017-07-14T14:20:37 *** NewLiberty has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2272017-07-14T14:20:47 <mmgen> addr: 2N3wYVH1n51ucjnGR2fjcqb6GPeUmDxQH3h
2282017-07-14T14:25:44 <arubi> mmgen, then your sig is not valid. it's too off topic here. we can move to #bitcoin-dev if you want
2292017-07-14T14:27:39 <mmgen> arubi: agreed, this is offtop, but #bitcoin-dev requires registration doesn't it?
2302017-07-14T14:28:47 <arubi> oh I don't know..
2312017-07-14T14:29:07 <mmgen> think it does. How do I go about that?
2322017-07-14T14:30:05 <arubi> that's something done through nickserv
2332017-07-14T14:32:38 <Chris_Stewart_5> it does
2342017-07-14T14:32:56 <Chris_Stewart_5> and I have no idea why it does :/
2352017-07-14T14:33:52 <arubi> yea it's an overkill
2362017-07-14T14:35:07 <mmgen> yet #bitcoin-core-dev doesn't
2372017-07-14T14:35:26 <mmgen> I'm working on registration now
2382017-07-14T14:39:09 <mmgen> sent the request
2392017-07-14T14:45:40 <morcos> promag: Your question before about the buggy output. That isn't buggy as far as I can tell. What did you not like? The -1's?
2402017-07-14T14:45:53 <promag> nan
2412017-07-14T14:46:32 <morcos> oh i think we covered that before and determined it was fine to divide by 0 (it's only for outputing text) and in this case there are no txs in the denominator
2422017-07-14T14:47:24 <promag> for reference the output is: Fee Calculation: Fee:4520 Bytes:226 Tgt:6 (requested 6) Reason:"Fallback fee" Decay 0.00000: Estimation: (-1 - -1) -nan% 0.0/(0.0 0 mem 0.0 out) Fail: (-1 - -1) -nan% 0.0/(0.0 0 mem 0.0 out)
2432017-07-14T14:48:00 <morcos> yeah so that tells me there were no data points in your fee estimation
2442017-07-14T14:48:52 <promag> right, but in the UI it says: "Warning: Fee estimation is currently not possible"
2452017-07-14T14:49:52 <morcos> promag: yes exactly.. and the debug log is telling you exactly why it is not possible. no data points. it could have also indicated some smaller number of data points, or enough data points but no fee rate high enough that meets the passing threshold for your target
2462017-07-14T14:50:23 <morcos> that debug log output is just for help determining exactly why a particular fee is put on a transaction.
2472017-07-14T14:51:00 <morcos> gmaxwell: speaking of which we'd recently discussed making the fallback fee higher than 20 sat/b. I think we discussed 50 or 75. The thinking at the time is 20 is often not high enough to ever get confirmed.
2482017-07-14T14:51:15 <morcos> But perhaps we were over influenced by a short period of congestion?
2492017-07-14T14:51:35 <promag> ok then morcos, thanks
2502017-07-14T14:51:55 <morcos> In any case, I'd still be ok with 50 or 75 as the default for fallback.. I don't think its so unreasonably high that people would complain if they paid that if fee estimation wasn't working
2512017-07-14T14:52:40 <morcos> The downside is if fees drop substantially over some period of time, lets say BTC goes up 10x, and then paying 75 sat/B is actually kind of a lot. I suppose it's a no win situation for getting the right number here.
2522017-07-14T14:53:03 <morcos> Maybe the answer is to not touch the default but give advice in release notes about setting that number appropriately?
2532017-07-14T14:56:48 *** Dyaheon has quit IRC
2542017-07-14T14:57:00 *** mmoya has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2552017-07-14T14:58:20 *** Dizzle has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2562017-07-14T14:58:42 *** Dyaheon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2572017-07-14T14:59:14 *** riemann has quit IRC
2582017-07-14T15:08:51 *** SopaXorzTaker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2592017-07-14T15:17:44 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fametrano opened pull request #10825: Net set regtest JSON-RPC port to 18443 to avoid conflict with testnet 18332 (master...fametrano-regtestport) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10825
2602017-07-14T15:21:00 *** cheese_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2612017-07-14T15:23:45 *** Cheeseo has quit IRC
2622017-07-14T15:25:43 *** echonaut has quit IRC
2632017-07-14T15:25:51 *** echonaut has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2642017-07-14T15:34:58 *** jamesob has quit IRC
2652017-07-14T15:39:27 *** vicenteH has quit IRC
2662017-07-14T15:40:54 *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2672017-07-14T15:41:53 *** SopaXorzTaker has quit IRC
2682017-07-14T15:46:37 *** Dizzle has quit IRC
2692017-07-14T15:46:57 *** wasi has quit IRC
2702017-07-14T15:47:15 *** To7 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2712017-07-14T15:49:31 *** NewLiberty has quit IRC
2722017-07-14T15:52:12 <To7> Core dev, time to protect Bitcoin differently.
2732017-07-14T15:52:13 <To7> I need help spreading the word on this:Â https://medium.com/bitcoinfoundation/the-foul-smell-of-federal-cryptocurrency-legislation-bd0a58995b60
2742017-07-14T15:52:14 <To7> Instructions are here:Â https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/6n9lah/anyone_knows_how_to_get_hold_of_the_other_cryptos
2752017-07-14T15:54:04 *** SopaXorzTaker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2762017-07-14T15:57:24 *** wasi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2772017-07-14T16:11:22 *** promag has quit IRC
2782017-07-14T16:11:39 *** justan0theruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2792017-07-14T16:12:46 *** justan0theruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2802017-07-14T16:14:04 *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
2812017-07-14T16:14:23 *** mmgen has left #bitcoin-core-dev
2822017-07-14T16:16:03 *** treebeardd has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2832017-07-14T16:24:02 <instagibbs> is there reasoning for sendrawtransaction bypassing free relay limit?
2842017-07-14T16:26:17 *** cluelessperson has left #bitcoin-core-dev
2852017-07-14T16:43:53 *** NewLiberty has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2862017-07-14T16:46:45 *** riemann has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2872017-07-14T16:48:35 *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2882017-07-14T16:50:48 *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
2892017-07-14T16:50:50 *** justan0theruser has quit IRC
2902017-07-14T16:51:09 *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2912017-07-14T17:02:54 *** treebeardd has quit IRC
2922017-07-14T17:34:18 <instagibbs> oh im hallucinating, it doesn't
2932017-07-14T17:34:57 *** riemann has quit IRC
2942017-07-14T17:36:49 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
2952017-07-14T17:37:18 <instagibbs> (anymore)
2962017-07-14T17:38:47 <sipa> cfields: adding -fomit-frame-pointer sounds like it may in general improve performance then...
2972017-07-14T17:39:45 <cfields> sipa: I'm not sure if clang/ld64 add necessary debug sections, though
2982017-07-14T17:40:45 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] Thecave3 opened pull request #10827: fixed grammar error (master...patch-1) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10827
2992017-07-14T17:41:29 <BlueMatt> who uses listsinceblock?
3002017-07-14T17:41:33 <BlueMatt> anyone?
3012017-07-14T17:41:47 <cfields> sipa: i'll experiment
3022017-07-14T17:42:24 <instagibbs> BlueMatt, there exists users... why
3032017-07-14T17:42:31 <BlueMatt> without looking at the code (just the docs), can folks tell me what they think the "target_confirmations" parameter means in listsinceblock?
3042017-07-14T17:42:41 <BlueMatt> "2. target_confirmations: (numeric, optional) The confirmations required, must be 1 or more\n"
3052017-07-14T17:42:44 <BlueMatt> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/wallet/rpcwallet.cpp#L1734
3062017-07-14T17:44:00 <Murch> Is anyone aware of best case practices regarding path derivation of segwit addresses?
3072017-07-14T17:44:12 <instagibbs> BlueMatt, https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10655
3082017-07-14T17:44:33 <Murch> We currently have two paths for receive and change addresses, and we're considering to adding another two paths for segwit receive and change addresses.
3092017-07-14T17:44:48 <instagibbs> Murch, there are none right now AFAIK. BIP49 I think is the only proposed one for Mycelium or something
3102017-07-14T17:44:58 <BlueMatt> instagibbs: ahh, ok, that still leaves me wondering what in the fuck the purpose of that argument is
3112017-07-14T17:45:14 <Murch> instagibbs: Thanks, I'll take a look.
3122017-07-14T17:45:54 <instagibbs> Murch, I'd suggest asking various wallet authors, don't think there's consensus on that at all
3132017-07-14T17:46:27 <Murch> What would be a good way to reach them? Would that perhaps be worth a mail to the bitcoin-dev list?
3142017-07-14T17:46:51 <BlueMatt> instagibbs: care to ack that? I find that astoundingly poor docs, should fix for 15 if possible
3152017-07-14T17:47:03 <instagibbs> BlueMatt, asking the author, I have actually no clue
3162017-07-14T17:47:49 <BlueMatt> the docs on 10655 make it a bit more clear, ie if you care about when things hit 6 confs, you calling listsinceblock with old blocks each time so that you keep getting reminded of things with 6 confs
3172017-07-14T17:47:57 <BlueMatt> and then you filter for txn with 6 confs yourself
3182017-07-14T17:48:03 *** treebeardd has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3192017-07-14T17:48:08 <BlueMatt> still seems a super strange api to me, but i can see why it would be useful
3202017-07-14T17:48:12 <instagibbs> Murch, yeah I think so. Also bug bigger players individually maybe
3212017-07-14T17:48:31 <Murch> instagibbs: Thanks for the consult. ;)
3222017-07-14T17:50:16 *** timothy has quit IRC
3232017-07-14T17:52:51 *** nakaluna has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3242017-07-14T17:57:20 *** treebeardd has quit IRC
3252017-07-14T18:02:58 *** BashCo has quit IRC
3262017-07-14T18:03:34 *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3272017-07-14T18:03:39 *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3282017-07-14T18:04:22 <cfields> sipa: heh, not a good sign: Assertion failed: (consensus.hashGenesisBlock == uint256S("0x000000000933ea01ad0ee984209779baaec3ced90fa3f408719526f8d77f4943")),
3292017-07-14T18:05:02 <cfields> makes for a good backtrace example, though: https://pastebin.com/raw/kA3bavgA
3302017-07-14T18:05:35 <sipa> cfields: bah, i could make it manually save and restore the frame.pointer during the duration of the asm blocm
3312017-07-14T18:05:54 <cfields> sipa: that's with 10821 and -fomit-frame-pointer
3322017-07-14T18:06:24 <cfields> no clue if that's the cause of the failure, or something else busted
3332017-07-14T18:19:16 *** chjj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3342017-07-14T18:19:39 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3352017-07-14T18:28:55 *** ivan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3362017-07-14T18:46:28 *** arowser has quit IRC
3372017-07-14T18:49:02 *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3382017-07-14T18:55:13 *** Guyver2_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3392017-07-14T18:55:21 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] sipa pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/db825d293be8...66270a416edb
3402017-07-14T18:55:21 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 18bacec Alex Morcos: Make check to distinguish between orphan txs and old txs more efficient....
3412017-07-14T18:55:22 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 66270a4 Pieter Wuille: Merge #10557: Make check to distinguish between orphan txs and old txs more efficient....
3422017-07-14T18:55:28 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
3432017-07-14T18:55:43 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] sipa closed pull request #10557: Make check to distinguish between orphan txs and old txs more efficient. (master...dontcheckoutputs) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10557
3442017-07-14T18:57:12 *** arowser has quit IRC
3452017-07-14T18:59:08 *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
3462017-07-14T18:59:08 *** Guyver2_ is now known as Guyver2
3472017-07-14T18:59:29 *** wasi has quit IRC
3482017-07-14T19:00:29 *** marcoagn1 has quit IRC
3492017-07-14T19:00:48 *** marcoagner has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3502017-07-14T19:01:28 *** Dyaheon has quit IRC
3512017-07-14T19:03:13 *** vicenteH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3522017-07-14T19:03:28 *** wasi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3532017-07-14T19:03:38 *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3542017-07-14T19:05:14 *** harrymm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3552017-07-14T19:05:29 *** Dyaheon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3562017-07-14T19:05:30 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] Thecave3 closed pull request #10827: fixed grammar error (master...patch-1) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10827
3572017-07-14T19:09:37 *** wasi has quit IRC
3582017-07-14T19:13:00 *** arowser has quit IRC
3592017-07-14T19:16:44 *** getsko has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3602017-07-14T19:18:31 *** jtimon has quit IRC
3612017-07-14T19:19:17 *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3622017-07-14T19:20:27 <jonasschnelli> hmm.. we should add bench to the gitian build/exported binaries
3632017-07-14T19:24:24 *** getsko has quit IRC
3642017-07-14T19:32:32 *** Dizzle has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3652017-07-14T19:34:31 <sipa> cfields: could you send me a disassembled version of that function?
3662017-07-14T19:36:05 *** arowser has quit IRC
3672017-07-14T19:36:16 *** Gabo_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3682017-07-14T19:39:30 *** Gabo_ has quit IRC
3692017-07-14T19:42:16 *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3702017-07-14T19:47:07 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
3712017-07-14T19:50:57 *** arowser has quit IRC
3722017-07-14T19:55:02 <cfields> sipa: sure, give me just a few min
3732017-07-14T19:55:12 <cfields> i managed to get it working when built from yasm
3742017-07-14T19:57:30 *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3752017-07-14T19:59:21 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] ryanofsky opened pull request #10829: Simple, backwards compatible RPC multiwallet support. (master...pr/multiparam) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10829
3762017-07-14T20:00:27 <sipa> cfields: the code here was an attempt to actually translate it to extended asm, where the compiler still manages the stack and register allocation
3772017-07-14T20:01:03 <sipa> cfields: i can go for the more straightforward way of just making it produce literally the same bytecode as yasm, where the asm is responsible for saving/restoring registers etc
3782017-07-14T20:01:11 <cfields> sipa: understood, i just wanted to get a working asm dump to compare to
3792017-07-14T20:05:16 <cfields> heh, no clue what all this padding is about
3802017-07-14T20:07:30 *** lilmarco has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3812017-07-14T20:07:59 <cfields> sipa: https://pastebin.com/raw/G4nHr9F5
3822017-07-14T20:08:08 <cfields> i snipped the padding
3832017-07-14T20:10:00 <cfields> for comparison, yasm's output: https://pastebin.com/raw/Sk3BfXyW
3842017-07-14T20:11:14 <cfields> note that I had to -DLINUX with yasm, otherwise I'd get the same crash
3852017-07-14T20:12:59 <BlueMatt> sipa: can you mark 10807 as 0.15 (or merge it) since easy bugfix
3862017-07-14T20:14:03 *** Dizzle has quit IRC
3872017-07-14T20:28:35 *** nakaluna has quit IRC
3882017-07-14T20:29:33 *** Giszmo has quit IRC
3892017-07-14T20:30:53 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jnewbery opened pull request #10830: [WIP] [wallet] keypool restore (master...pr10240) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10830
3902017-07-14T20:32:06 <jnewbery> #10830 is #10240 rebased on master. Please mark it as high priority & 0.15
3912017-07-14T20:32:07 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10830 | [WIP] [wallet] keypool restore by jnewbery · Pull Request #10830 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3922017-07-14T20:32:10 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10240 | Add HD wallet auto-restore functionality by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #10240 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3932017-07-14T20:32:16 <cfields> sipa: may also be helpful to know that the resulting hash is: 19cde05babd9831f8c68059b7f520e513af54fa572f36e3c85ae67bb67e6096a
3942017-07-14T20:32:23 <cfields> (initial sha2 state)
3952017-07-14T20:41:30 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3962017-07-14T20:45:52 *** chjj has quit IRC
3972017-07-14T20:47:51 *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3982017-07-14T20:51:08 *** arowser has quit IRC
3992017-07-14T20:57:47 *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4002017-07-14T21:01:49 *** arowser has quit IRC
4012017-07-14T21:01:54 *** nakaluna has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4022017-07-14T21:07:58 *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4032017-07-14T21:14:05 *** arowser has quit IRC
4042017-07-14T21:14:49 *** chjj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4052017-07-14T21:20:13 *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4062017-07-14T21:23:08 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli closed pull request #10240: Add HD wallet auto-restore functionality (master...2017/04/hd_rescan) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10240
4072017-07-14T21:36:20 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4082017-07-14T21:44:03 *** arowser has quit IRC
4092017-07-14T21:49:48 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
4102017-07-14T21:50:35 *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
4112017-07-14T21:54:11 *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4122017-07-14T21:54:30 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] sipa pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/66270a416edb...b7d6623c76e1
4132017-07-14T21:54:31 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 4652791 João Barbosa: Fix uninitialized atomic variables
4142017-07-14T21:54:31 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master b7d6623 Pieter Wuille: Merge #10819: Fix uninitialized atomic variables...
4152017-07-14T21:55:05 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] sipa closed pull request #10819: Fix uninitialized atomic variables (master...2017-07-fix-unitialized-atomic) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10819
4162017-07-14T21:55:27 <sipa> cfields: i can make the code use one less register
4172017-07-14T21:55:44 <cfields> sipa: i've been trying to figure it out :)
4182017-07-14T21:56:06 <cfields> sipa: i think you can shortcut the end address calculation?
4192017-07-14T21:56:16 <sipa> cfields: if you look at the yasm source, NUM_BLOCKS and e use the same register
4202017-07-14T21:56:33 <sipa> one uses it in 32-bit mode (edx) and one in 64-bit mode (rdx)
4212017-07-14T21:56:43 <sipa> which my search/replacing treated as two different things
4222017-07-14T21:57:12 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4232017-07-14T21:57:14 <cfields> ah
4242017-07-14T21:59:05 *** arowser has quit IRC
4252017-07-14T22:02:58 *** Guest38607 has quit IRC
4262017-07-14T22:03:01 <cfields> ok i see, that makes sense. That's the one I was trying to save as well. But so far I'd just managed to piss off the assembler in a bunch of different ways.
4272017-07-14T22:03:29 *** BashCo has quit IRC
4282017-07-14T22:03:53 <sipa> cfields: so s/%7/%k2/
4292017-07-14T22:04:04 *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4302017-07-14T22:04:05 <sipa> %k2 means "the same as %2, but in 32-bit mode"
4312017-07-14T22:04:23 <sipa> and then more shuffling to get rid of the e variable...
4322017-07-14T22:04:31 *** juscamarena_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4332017-07-14T22:05:15 *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4342017-07-14T22:05:24 <cfields> roger
4352017-07-14T22:07:05 <cfields> sipa: i'm confused as to why inp_end can't be pre-calculated and passed as an input, skipping %2 altogether?
4362017-07-14T22:08:44 <sipa> cfields: we could move that out to the C code, yes
4372017-07-14T22:09:22 <sipa> the asm code really uses a begin_ptr and end_ptr
4382017-07-14T22:09:35 <sipa> and the first 3 instructions convert the (begin_ptr, num_blocks) to that
4392017-07-14T22:09:53 *** Dyaheon has quit IRC
4402017-07-14T22:10:13 <cfields> sipa: right ok, thanks. no need to do that rather than your approach ofc, but it helps to know that would've worked
4412017-07-14T22:11:41 *** Dyaheon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4422017-07-14T22:11:59 <gmaxwell> sipa was in the process of changing everything to use explicit registers and then he was going to manually save bp on the stack so he could use it and restore it at the end.
4432017-07-14T22:12:21 <sipa> this approach now should be faster
4442017-07-14T22:12:34 <sipa> as it only saves/restores exactly what is needed
4452017-07-14T22:14:03 <cfields> testing now
4462017-07-14T22:18:08 <sipa> cfields: thanks!
4472017-07-14T22:19:31 *** arowser has quit IRC
4482017-07-14T22:20:15 *** nakaluna has quit IRC
4492017-07-14T22:20:44 <cfields> sipa: builds now, but still produces a busted hash :(
4502017-07-14T22:21:10 <sipa> :'(
4512017-07-14T22:21:29 <sipa> cfields: with or without -fomit-frame-pointer ?
4522017-07-14T22:21:40 <cfields> without now
4532017-07-14T22:22:15 <cfields> i'll try without the stack protector
4542017-07-14T22:23:15 <cfields> same thing
4552017-07-14T22:23:18 <sipa> cfields: i can try force assigning variables to registers, to make the code comparable to the yasm code?
4562017-07-14T22:23:54 <sipa> to make sure the same assignment is used
4572017-07-14T22:24:04 <cfields> sure
4582017-07-14T22:24:54 <cfields> sipa: from what i can see, the input is no longer necessarily 32bit aligned
4592017-07-14T22:25:00 <cfields> is that a possible issue?
4602017-07-14T22:25:17 <sipa> cfields: oh!
4612017-07-14T22:25:30 <sipa> how do you mean?
4622017-07-14T22:25:39 *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4632017-07-14T22:25:55 <cfields> let me double-check, i might've reversed something in testing
4642017-07-14T22:29:45 <cfields> sipa: yea, the ReadBE32 on the chunk guaranteed alignment before, without that, is something else handling it?
4652017-07-14T22:30:53 <sipa> cfields: the asm code can deal with unaligned input data
4662017-07-14T22:31:10 <cfields> ok
4672017-07-14T22:32:18 <sipa> cfields: i think that the xfer array may need stronger alignment than the compiler is giving it
4682017-07-14T22:34:46 *** arowser has quit IRC
4692017-07-14T22:36:42 *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4702017-07-14T22:37:44 <sipa> cfields: care to try again?
4712017-07-14T22:38:22 <cfields> sure, i'll take a break from fighting this thing.
4722017-07-14T22:39:37 *** henrik_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4732017-07-14T22:40:55 <cfields> heh, i was trying the same thing, but i pissed it off trying to make it 32bit aligned
4742017-07-14T22:40:56 <cfields> no go :(
4752017-07-14T22:41:12 <sipa> same error?
4762017-07-14T22:41:21 *** henrik_ has quit IRC
4772017-07-14T22:41:26 <cfields> yea. you just added the attribute, right?
4782017-07-14T22:41:35 <sipa> yes
4792017-07-14T22:42:26 <cfields> btw, that can be alignas(16) with c++11
4802017-07-14T22:45:38 <cfields> generated asm now: https://pastebin.com/raw/SRe0gzUf
4812017-07-14T22:46:44 <cfields> any clue what the huge chunk of padding is?
4822017-07-14T22:47:22 <sipa> the nopws?
4832017-07-14T22:47:46 <sipa> cfields: can you try changing the movdqa instructions to movdqu ?
4842017-07-14T22:47:52 <sipa> (a = aligned, u = unaligned)
4852017-07-14T22:48:04 <cfields> yea, 0x91 through 0x10000
4862017-07-14T22:48:11 <cfields> ok
4872017-07-14T22:48:35 *** arowser has quit IRC
4882017-07-14T22:50:05 <cfields> nope :(
4892017-07-14T22:50:12 <sipa> cfields: my guess is that to the OSX assembler ".align 16" means "align to a 2^16-byte boundary"
4902017-07-14T22:50:53 <sipa> instead of "align to 16-byte boundary"
4912017-07-14T22:50:55 <cfields> ah
4922017-07-14T22:54:06 <sipa> cfields: pushed again, try again pretty please?
4932017-07-14T22:54:16 <cfields> heh, sure
4942017-07-14T22:54:21 <sipa> added some more alignas'es
4952017-07-14T22:54:32 <sipa> i think there are instructions beyond movdqa that require aligned input
4962017-07-14T22:56:40 *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4972017-07-14T22:57:15 <cfields> still no go
4982017-07-14T22:57:43 <cfields> you saw me mention that the result is always the sha2 init values, right?
4992017-07-14T22:58:01 <sipa> oh, no
5002017-07-14T22:58:19 <cfields> hash is "19cde05babd9831f8c68059b7f520e513af54fa572f36e3c85ae67bb67e6096a"
5012017-07-14T23:03:00 *** arowser has quit IRC
5022017-07-14T23:03:04 <sipa> cfields: you're aware the yasm function takes its parameters in a different order?
5032017-07-14T23:03:54 <cfields> yes, i had to reverse them to make it work
5042017-07-14T23:05:02 <sipa> grrr
5052017-07-14T23:05:49 <sipa> i really don't see how the state can be untouched with your disasm code... unless blocks=0
5062017-07-14T23:07:05 *** juscamarena_ has quit IRC
5072017-07-14T23:09:13 *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5082017-07-14T23:15:32 <cfields> i'm stumped too. It gets in there sometimes with blocks=0, but even if I early-return, same result
5092017-07-14T23:15:46 *** juscamarena_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5102017-07-14T23:15:59 <sipa> can you give a latest disasm?
5112017-07-14T23:16:17 <sipa> can you step through it with a debugger, to see if it's actually doing anything?
5122017-07-14T23:16:28 <sipa> (stepi in gdb will execute 1 instruction)
5132017-07-14T23:16:47 <cfields> i've tried to get in with no luck
5142017-07-14T23:16:50 <cfields> i can try again
5152017-07-14T23:17:05 <cfields> (it's lldb, and i'm not at all familiar with it)
5162017-07-14T23:23:46 <sipa> cfields: just some thing i'm noticing from the latest disasm you posted: the stack pointer isn't being updated, but is addressed with negative offsets (which is legal, but different from other platforms)
5172017-07-14T23:24:00 <sipa> it also saves and restores the frame pointer, but does not actually use it
5182017-07-14T23:25:06 <cfields> sipa: i noticed the negative offsets too. how can that be the case?
5192017-07-14T23:25:40 <sipa> cfields: it's legal to use some stack space below the stack pointer (google for red zone)
5202017-07-14T23:26:23 <sipa> if you want to set a breakpoint, set it to the loop2 label
5212017-07-14T23:26:37 <cfields> interesting
5222017-07-14T23:26:45 <sipa> if loop2 is reached, it should always update the context
5232017-07-14T23:26:58 <cfields> that's a rabbit hole for a different day though :)
5242017-07-14T23:26:59 <sipa> (the updating happens in the addq/movq sequence right before done_loop)
5252017-07-14T23:27:11 <sipa> eh, addl/movl
5262017-07-14T23:27:40 <sipa> can you just post a latest disasm? :)
5272017-07-14T23:27:50 <cfields> haha, 1 sec
5282017-07-14T23:31:31 *** arowser has quit IRC
5292017-07-14T23:35:01 <cfields> sipa: https://pastebin.com/raw/rqNABs3S
5302017-07-14T23:36:28 <cfields> uh, I switched to -O0 for better debugging, let me know if you want an -O2 to match the others
5312017-07-14T23:36:46 <cfields> i assume it doesn't matter much here
5322017-07-14T23:36:58 <cfields> i was just trying to get it un-inlined
5332017-07-14T23:37:28 <cfields> (it wasn't anyway. oops)
5342017-07-14T23:37:38 *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5352017-07-14T23:38:21 <sipa> cfields: my latest code just doesn't compile with clang 4.0
5362017-07-14T23:38:29 <sipa> are you sure you're testing the right thing?
5372017-07-14T23:38:35 <cfields> i moved the alignas's around
5382017-07-14T23:38:40 <cfields> if that's what you mean
5392017-07-14T23:38:43 <sipa> ok
5402017-07-14T23:38:45 <sipa> yes
5412017-07-14T23:39:07 <sipa> trying to reproduce on linux
5422017-07-14T23:39:43 <cfields> i tried dumping the dispatcher and hard-coding the call instead
5432017-07-14T23:39:54 <cfields> thought there might be some static init race. no help though.
5442017-07-14T23:40:15 <sipa> what clang version are you using?
5452017-07-14T23:40:35 <cfields> stupid apple...
5462017-07-14T23:40:49 <cfields> Apple LLVM version 7.3.0 (clang-703.0.29)
5472017-07-14T23:41:00 <cfields> no clue what ^^ is
5482017-07-14T23:41:18 <cfields> let me see if a cross build works, then we'll have an upstream clang for data point
5492017-07-14T23:42:45 <sipa> works fine with clang-4.0
5502017-07-14T23:42:47 <sipa> trying 3.7 now
5512017-07-14T23:43:12 <sipa> eh, 3.7 fails on some c++11 stuff
5522017-07-14T23:43:32 <cfields> for reference, i'm building with 3.7.1 now for cross
5532017-07-14T23:43:33 <cfields> eh?
5542017-07-14T23:43:43 <sipa> In file included from ./httpserver.h:10:
5552017-07-14T23:43:43 <sipa> /usr/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/6.3.0/../../../../include/c++/6.3.0/functional:1370:11: error: no matching constructor for initialization of 'std::tuple<packaged_task<bool (event_base *, evhttp *)>, event_base *, evhttp *>'
5562017-07-14T23:43:46 <cfields> c++ lib issues?
5572017-07-14T23:43:47 <sipa> : _M_bound(std::forward<_Tp>(__f), std::forward<_Up>(__args)...)
5582017-07-14T23:43:50 <sipa> ^ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
5592017-07-14T23:44:06 <sipa> why is it using gcc-6.3's include dir?
5602017-07-14T23:44:26 <cfields> give it -stdlib=libc++
5612017-07-14T23:46:18 <cfields> (you might need LD_LIBRARY_PATH set to run)
5622017-07-14T23:47:11 <cfields> ok, cross with 3.7.1 dies the same way
5632017-07-14T23:49:32 <sipa> ok, compiling with 3.7.0
5642017-07-14T23:52:02 <sipa> /home/pw/git/bitcoin-shasse/src/util.cpp:861: undefined reference to `boost::filesystem::path::imbue(std::__1::locale const&)'
5652017-07-14T23:53:01 <cfields> heh, your boost was built against libstdc++
5662017-07-14T23:53:27 <sipa> can i do a depends build on linux with clang?
5672017-07-14T23:53:31 <sipa> on/for lnux
5682017-07-14T23:54:00 *** lilmarco has quit IRC
5692017-07-14T23:54:11 <cfields> you can probably just do up a tiny stub app using CSHA256 directly, no?
5702017-07-14T23:56:05 *** arowser has quit IRC