test: add invalid tx templates for use in functional tests #14457

   6 | @@ -7,7 +7,9 @@
   7 |  import struct
   8 |  import time
   9 |  
  10 | -from test_framework.blocktools import create_block, create_coinbase, create_tx_with_script, get_legacy_sigopcount_block
  11 | +from test_framework.blocktools import (
  12 | +    create_block, create_coinbase, create_tx_with_script, get_legacy_sigopcount_block,

---

 131 | +        # Submit blocks for rejection, each of which contains a single transaction
 132 | +        # (aside from coinbase) which should be considered invalid.
 133 | +        for TxTemplate in invalid_txs.iter_all_templates():
 134 | +            template = TxTemplate(spend_tx=spend_tx)
 135 | +
 136 | +            # Something about the serialization code for missing inputs creates

---

  78 | +        tx.vout.append(CTxOut(0, sc.CScript([sc.OP_TRUE] * 100)))
  79 | +        tx.calc_sha256()
  80 | +        return tx
  81 | +
  82 | +
  83 | +

---

   6 | @@ -7,7 +7,9 @@
   7 |  import struct
   8 |  import time
   9 |  
  10 | -from test_framework.blocktools import create_block, create_coinbase, create_tx_with_script, get_legacy_sigopcount_block
  11 | +from test_framework.blocktools import (
  12 | +    create_block, create_coinbase, create_tx_with_script, get_legacy_sigopcount_block,
  13 | +    MAX_BLOCK_SIGOPS)

---

  56 | +    def get_ctx(self, *args, **kwargs):
  57 | +        """Return a CTransaction that is invalid per the subclass."""
  58 | +        pass
  59 | +
  60 | +
  61 | +class OutputMissing(BadTxTemplate):

---

  29 | +
  30 | +MAX_P2SH_SIGOPS = 15  # See policy/policy.h.
  31 | +
  32 | +
  33 | +class BadTxTemplate:
  34 | +    """Allows simple consruction of a certain kind of invalid tx. Base class to be subclassed."""

---

  45 | +
  46 | +    # Is this tx considered valid when included in a block, but not for acceptance into
  47 | +    # the mempool (i.e. does it violate policy but not consensus)?
  48 | +    valid_in_block = False
  49 | +
  50 | +    def __init__(self, spend_tx=None, spend_block=None):

---

  51 | +        self.spend_tx = spend_block.vtx[0] if spend_block else spend_tx
  52 | +        self.spend_avail = sum(i.nValue for i in self.spend_tx.vout)
  53 | +        self.valid_txin = CTxIn(COutPoint(self.spend_tx.sha256, 0), b"", 0xffffffff)
  54 | +
  55 | +    @abc.abstractmethod
  56 | +    def get_ctx(self, *args, **kwargs):

---

  99 | @@ -95,16 +100,21 @@ def run_test(self):
 100 |          self.save_spendable_output()
 101 |          self.sync_blocks([b0])
 102 |  
 103 | +        # These constants chosen specifically to trigger an immature coinbase spend
 104 | +        # at a certain time below.
 105 | +        NUM_BUFFER_BLOCKS_TO_GENERATE = 100

---

  47 | +    # the mempool (i.e. does it violate policy but not consensus)?
  48 | +    valid_in_block = False
  49 | +
  50 | +    def __init__(self, *, spend_tx=None, spend_block=None):
  51 | +        self.spend_tx = spend_block.vtx[0] if spend_block else spend_tx
  52 | +        self.spend_avail = sum(i.nValue for i in self.spend_tx.vout)

---

 139 | +            template = TxTemplate(spend_tx=attempt_spend_tx)
 140 | +
 141 | +            # Something about the serialization code for missing inputs creates
 142 | +            # a different hash in the test client than on bitcoind, resulting
 143 | +            # in a mismatching merkle root during block validation.
 144 | +            # Skip until we figure out what's going on.

---