Skip to content

Test commitment broadcast during different stages of a splice #4068

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Test commitment broadcast during different stages of a splice #4068

wants to merge 3 commits into from
+236 −9

Conversation

wpaulino
Copy link
Contributor

This also caught a bug where we weren't including signatures for pending HTLCs in the initial commitment_signed for the splice.

Depends on #4054.

@wpaulino wpaulino added this to the 0.2 milestone Sep 11, 2025
@wpaulino wpaulino self-assigned this Sep 11, 2025
@ldk-reviews-bot
Copy link

ldk-reviews-bot commented Sep 11, 2025 •
edited
Loading

👋 Thanks for assigning @TheBlueMatt 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.

@wpaulino wpaulino requested a review from jkczyz September 11, 2025 16:53
jkczyz
jkczyz reviewed Sep 12, 2025
View reviewed changes
@ldk-reviews-bot
Copy link

👋 The first review has been submitted!

Do you think this PR is ready for a second reviewer? If so, click here to assign a second reviewer.

@wpaulino
Include HTLC signatures in initial commitment signed for splices
d2d16a6 
While we did consider the pending HTLCs when generating the signatures,
we did not include them in the resulting `commitment_signed` message
sent because we assumed it was only used within a dual-funding context
where there are no pending HTLCs.
@wpaulino
Test commitment broadcast during different stages of a splice
7d0760b 
This ensures a valid commitment transaction is broadcast according to
the different stages of a splice:

1. Negotiated but unconfirmed
2. Confirmed but not locked
3. Locked
@wpaulino
Emit DiscardFunding event when no splice transaction confirms
7456483 
When adding support for emitting these events in the channel monitor, we
only covered the case where one of the splice transaction candidates
confirmed. We also need to emit an event when none of them can confirm
due to a commitment transaction confirming (and no longer under reorg
risk) for the pre-splice funding.
@wpaulino wpaulino force-pushed the test-splice-commitment-broadcast branch from 527c78a to 7456483 Compare September 18, 2025 00:15
@codecov Codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Sep 18, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 96.96970% with 5 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 88.66%. Comparing base (c71334e) to head (7456483).
⚠️ Report is 7 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
lightning/src/ln/splicing_tests.rs 97.14% 2 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
lightning/src/ln/channel.rs 87.50% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files 
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #4068      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   88.63%   88.66%   +0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         176      176              
  Lines      131920   132078     +158     
  Branches   131920   132078     +158     
==========================================
+ Hits       116927   117110     +183     
+ Misses      12325    12305      -20     
+ Partials     2668     2663       -5
Flag Coverage Δ
fuzzing 21.59% <8.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
tests 88.50% <96.96%> (+0.03%) ⬆️

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.

TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt reviewed Sep 18, 2025
View reviewed changes
@jkczyz jkczyz mentioned this pull request Sep 19, 2025
Open
7 tasks
@ldk-reviews-bot
Copy link

🔔 1st Reminder

Hey @TheBlueMatt @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.

1 similar comment
@ldk-reviews-bot
Copy link

🔔 1st Reminder

Hey @TheBlueMatt @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
Copy link

🔔 2nd Reminder

Hey @TheBlueMatt @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.

TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt reviewed Sep 22, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Collaborator

@TheBlueMatt TheBlueMatt left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Code changes LGTM, I'll leave @jkczyz to review the tests in more detail.

jkczyz
jkczyz reviewed Sep 22, 2025
View reviewed changes
lightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs
OnchainEvent::FundingSpendConfirmation { commitment_tx_to_counterparty_output, .. } => {
self.funding_spend_confirmed = Some(entry.txid);
self.confirmed_commitment_tx_counterparty_output = commitment_tx_to_counterparty_output;
if self.alternative_funding_confirmed.is_none() && !self.pending_funding.is_empty() {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

nit: && !self.pending_funding.is_empty() not needed

lightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs
OnchainEvent::FundingSpendConfirmation { commitment_tx_to_counterparty_output, .. } => {
self.funding_spend_confirmed = Some(entry.txid);
self.confirmed_commitment_tx_counterparty_output = commitment_tx_to_counterparty_output;
if self.alternative_funding_confirmed.is_none() && !self.pending_funding.is_empty() {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

When would we get this event when self.alternative_funding_confirmed is Some? Is there some re-org case that could cause this?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@TheBlueMatt TheBlueMatt TheBlueMatt left review comments

@jkczyz jkczyz jkczyz left review comments

At least 1 approving review is required to merge this pull request.

Assignees

@wpaulino wpaulino

Labels
None yet
Projects
Weekly Goals
Status: No status
Milestone
0.2
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@wpaulino @ldk-reviews-bot @TheBlueMatt @jkczyz