Unlock utxos when peer is unavailable for splice #564
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
If the peer is offline when the swap-in job requests a splice-in, the request will be ignored, but we weren't unlocking UTXOs, preventing any further attempt. Also add an optimistic synchronization in the swap-in job, which as a side effect will cause us to retry swaps everytime the peer gets reconnected (vs at every new block or liquidity policy update previously).
pm47
commented
Dec 8, 2023
| @@ -453,6 +453,7 @@ class Peer( | |||
| .combine(currentTipFlow.filterNotNull()) { walletState, currentTip -> Pair(walletState, currentTip.first) } | |||
| .combine(swapInFeeratesFlow.filterNotNull()) { (walletState, currentTip), feerate -> Triple(walletState, currentTip, feerate) } | |||
| .combine(nodeParams.liquidityPolicy) { (walletState, currentTip, feerate), policy -> TrySwapInFlow(currentTip, walletState, feerate, policy) } | |||
| .combine(channelsFlow.filter { it.values.all { channel -> channel !is Offline && channel !is Syncing } }) { req, _ -> req } // this is only for synchronization, we discard the channels data | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
NB: this is a simplification of waitForPeerReady(), which doesn't handle the "local syncing" corner case.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Doesn't that mean that any user affected by the "local syncing" issue won't be able to initiate swap-ins? This would be a regression, right?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If you look at the handler for RequestChannelOpen, in the "local syncing" case requests always end up being ignored. It's probably a (rare) bug, but technically not a regression 😓
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I removed this part in 71e2ae3.
t-bast
approved these changes
Dec 8, 2023
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
If the peer is offline when the swap-in job requests a splice-in, the request will be ignored, but we weren't unlocking UTXOs, preventing any further attempt.
Also add an optimistic synchronization in the swap-in job, which as a side effect will cause us to retry swaps everytime the peer gets reconnected (vs at every new block or liquidity policy update previously).
cc @dpad85 @robbiehanson