If the node hasn’t processed the inv from the outbound peer before the mocktime bump, the peer won’t be preferred after the other inv timeouts, failing the test . Therefore, add a sync, just like there is one after the send_message calls in the previous lines.
Fixes #31833
The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers.
For details see: https://corecheck.dev/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls/31837.
See the guideline for information on the review process.
| Type | Reviewers |
|---|---|
| ACK | instagibbs, maflcko |
If your review is incorrectly listed, please react with 👎 to this comment and the bot will ignore it on the next update.
This prevents intermittent failures - if the node hasn't processed
the inv from the outbound peer before the mocktime bump, the peer
won't be preferred after the other inv timeouts, failing the test .
Therefore, add a sync, just like there is one after the send_message
calls in the previous lines.
273@@ -274,6 +274,7 @@ def test_preferred_tiebreaker_inv(self):
274 pref_peer = self.nodes[0].add_outbound_p2p_connection(
275 TestP2PConn(), wait_for_verack=True, p2p_idx=1, connection_type="outbound-full-relay")
276 pref_peer.send_message(msg_inv([CInv(t=MSG_WTX, h=0xff00ff00)]))
277+ pref_peer.sync_with_ping()
send_and_ping
send_message, so in theory it could be renamed to send_without_ping to make the misuse more apparent? Though, that’d be a follow-up.
didn’t get to it before merge.
not many remaining cases
well, I count ~130 still, so definitely some churn involved changing most of these. Still, it would make sense to me.