-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 22
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.
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
coop-close channel integration testing #37
coop-close channel integration testing #37
Conversation
66b5a94 lnprototest: remove the default __enter__ __exit__ implementation (Vincenzo Palazzo) fd9bae5 lnprototest: remove info logging when it is not necessary (Vincenzo Palazzo) c7144c5 doc: adding log information in the Readme (Vincenzo Palazzo) 8ff83a9 ci: during the test in the ci increase verbosity of the tests (Vincenzo Palazzo) 363b9e5 lnprototest: adding teardown directory at the end of the tests (Vincenzo Palazzo) 4b4823c fmt: formatting code (Vincenzo Palazzo) e0cce0a lnprototest: refactroing abstract class and fixed the #14 (Vincenzo Palazzo) Pull request description: kill all the processes when the class was removed from the scope. Fixes #14 This is a refactoring PR cherry-pitched by the PR #37 but it is cleaner to introduce these changes in another PR. Signed-off-by: Vincenzo Palazzo <[email protected]> Top commit has no ACKs. Tree-SHA512: f2bd5f609caecd9a9bb3bfcd4f02fe7bd73a69a63265c5ee9fca73b7c34116ea044c84fabec0c3d009f7604e63121c0d18fa0f54d5eda19cf730130d8f55d0d1
c464f7d
to
f202fb3
Compare
42c10dc
to
4ca53ae
Compare
Concept ACK. More testing around cooperative closing is good :) The motivation for this (as I understand from the c-lightning call) is when a lnprototest test fails bitcoind isn't stopped? Firstly I'm not sure why bitcoind should be stopped if a lnprototest test fails (I guess it depends on the test) and secondly I'm not sure how the code in this PR resolves that. Can you explain? |
Yes, also because we have a little bit of confusion across definition of coop-close in the spec like lightning/bolts#970 (comment) and lightning/bolts#964
Sorry if I miss the point to the PR, this problem is fixed by the following PR #38 In particular if a test fails or lnprototest was not able to clear the work dir in the lnprototest/lnprototest/clightning/clightning.py Lines 166 to 170 in ceeb866
and also all the lnprototest flow between |
442f33e
to
3932da3
Compare
3932da3
to
7f1ba78
Compare
c1ff0a1
to
1c6c016
Compare
92facf5
to
2db6d42
Compare
046d5c0
to
1a5de7b
Compare
aadd90b
to
0d4d793
Compare
0d4d793
to
127fd9f
Compare
7bc966c
to
4b15032
Compare
67c3a4f
to
31f7da7
Compare
bc2c4de
to
e53a8bf
Compare
e53a8bf
to
7831416
Compare
b1677ca
to
a889aad
Compare
Signed-off-by: Vincenzo Palazzo <[email protected]>
f51122b
to
4b1a993
Compare
Signed-off-by: Vincenzo Palazzo <[email protected]> # Title: Signed-off-by: Vincenzo Palazzo <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Vincenzo Palazzo <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Vincenzo Palazzo <[email protected]>
4b1a993
to
ed9d1d6
Compare
ovveride by #62 |
Build on top of #47
This is one of my first attempts to implement the interoperability test for the shutdown workflow described in BOLT2
This should clarify the idea on the implementation side about the following discussion lightning/bolts#964 and lightning/bolts#970
This will override the c-lightning CI flaky test https://github.com/ElementsProject/lightning/pull/4985/files/93f8a11bf60ad9809ced69c9be0ae7ccf922b2eb..7530018014128a24a42f816ab0676cb85f9e96c8#diff-72d78e7a968ac6b078b7a2d84e56d2e026c54f60e56781f878664bcaae4b2bfbR3441