Skip to content
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

Dash llmq backports #2921

Open
wants to merge 9 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

panleone
Copy link

@panleone panleone commented Apr 4, 2024

Backport dash PRs (in the following order):
dashpay#2640
dashpay#2672
dashpay#2674
dashpay#2702
dashpay#2705
dashpay#2706
dashpay#2707

NB: Some or them are partial backports since most of our llmq files are already updated to a more recent upstream version. So I basically ended up picking the commits that touch only the files quorums_signing_shares.* and quorums_signing.*

I suggest to review by checking each individual commit against the corresponding upstream one

@panleone panleone added this to the 6.0.0 milestone Apr 4, 2024
@panleone panleone self-assigned this Apr 4, 2024
codablock and others added 9 commits April 7, 2024 13:02
When iterating the db, we should also include entries that match exactly
the end time.
Profiling has shown that a lot of time is spent in resizing the data
vector when large messages are involved.
This removes the burden on the message handler thread when many sig batches
arrive. The expensive part of deserialization is now performed in the sig
shares worker thread.

This also removes the need for the specialized deserialization of the sig
shares which tried to avoid the malleability check, as CBLSLazySignature does
not perform malleability checks at all.
To avoid repeated calls into LevelDB
When the current iteration resulted in CPU intensive work, it's likely that
the next iteration will result in work as well. Do not sleep in that case,
as we're otherwise wasting (unused) CPU resources.
Copy link
Member

@Liquid369 Liquid369 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

tACK 22efef0
Sorry for delay in review had this done for abit but hadn't posted

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants