Ensure transactions_confirmed is idempotent

In many complexity-reduced implementations of chain syncing using
esplora `transactions_confirmed` may be called redundantly for
transactions which were already confirmed. To ensure this is
idempotent we add two new `ConnectionStyle`s in our tests which
(a) call `transactions_confirmed` twice for each call, ensuring
simple idempotency is ensured and (b) call `transactions_confirmed`
once for each historical block every time we're connecting a new
block, ensuring we're fully idempotent even if every call is
repeated constantly.

In order to actually behave correctly this requires a simple
already-confirmed check in `ChannelMonitor`, which is included.

Author: TheBlueMatt

lightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs

@@ -2860,7 +2860,18 @@ impl<Signer: Sign> ChannelMonitorImpl<Signer> {
 
 		let mut watch_outputs = Vec::new();
 		let mut claimable_outpoints = Vec::new();
-		for tx in &txn_matched {
+		'tx_iter: for tx in &txn_matched {
+			for ev in self.onchain_events_awaiting_threshold_conf.iter() {
+				if ev.txid == tx.txid() {
+					// If a transaction has already been confirmed, ensure we don't bother processing it duplicatively.
+					if let Some(conf_hash) = ev.block_hash {
+						assert_eq!(header.block_hash(), conf_hash,
+							"Transaction {} was already confirmed and is being re-confirmed in a different block.\n\
+							This indicates a severe bug in the transaction connection logic - a reorg should have been processed first!", ev.txid);
+					}
+					continue 'tx_iter;
+				}
+			}
 			if tx.input.len() == 1 {
 				// Assuming our keys were not leaked (in which case we're screwed no matter what),
 				// commitment transactions and HTLC transactions will all only ever have one input,

lightning/src/ln/functional_test_utils.rs

@@ -107,6 +107,14 @@ pub enum ConnectStyle {
 	/// The same as `TransactionsFirst`, however when we have multiple blocks to connect, we only
 	/// make a single `best_block_updated` call.
 	TransactionsFirstSkippingBlocks,
+	/// The same as `TransactionsFirst`, however when we have multiple blocks to connect, we only
+	/// make a single `best_block_updated` call. Further, we call transactions_confirmed multiple
+	/// times to ensure its idempotent.
+	TransactionsDuplicativelyFirstSkippingBlocks,
+	/// The same as `TransactionsFirst`, however when we have multiple blocks to connect, we only
+	/// make a single `best_block_updated` call. Further, we call transactions_confirmed multiple
+	/// times to ensure its idempotent.
+	HighlyRedundantTransactionsFirstSkippingBlocks,
 	/// The same as `TransactionsFirst` when connecting blocks. During disconnection only
 	/// `transaction_unconfirmed` is called.
 	TransactionsFirstReorgsOnlyTip,
@@ -121,14 +129,16 @@ impl ConnectStyle {
 			use core::hash::{BuildHasher, Hasher};
 			// Get a random value using the only std API to do so - the DefaultHasher
 			let rand_val = std::collections::hash_map::RandomState::new().build_hasher().finish();
-			let res = match rand_val % 7 {
+			let res = match rand_val % 9 {
 				0 => ConnectStyle::BestBlockFirst,
 				1 => ConnectStyle::BestBlockFirstSkippingBlocks,
 				2 => ConnectStyle::BestBlockFirstReorgsOnlyTip,
 				3 => ConnectStyle::TransactionsFirst,
 				4 => ConnectStyle::TransactionsFirstSkippingBlocks,
-				5 => ConnectStyle::TransactionsFirstReorgsOnlyTip,
-				6 => ConnectStyle::FullBlockViaListen,
+				5 => ConnectStyle::TransactionsDuplicativelyFirstSkippingBlocks,
+				6 => ConnectStyle::HighlyRedundantTransactionsFirstSkippingBlocks,
+				7 => ConnectStyle::TransactionsFirstReorgsOnlyTip,
+				8 => ConnectStyle::FullBlockViaListen,
 				_ => unreachable!(),
 			};
 			eprintln!("Using Block Connection Style: {:?}", res);
@@ -143,6 +153,7 @@ impl ConnectStyle {
 pub fn connect_blocks<'a, 'b, 'c, 'd>(node: &'a Node<'b, 'c, 'd>, depth: u32) -> BlockHash {
 	let skip_intermediaries = match *node.connect_style.borrow() {
 		ConnectStyle::BestBlockFirstSkippingBlocks|ConnectStyle::TransactionsFirstSkippingBlocks|
+			ConnectStyle::TransactionsDuplicativelyFirstSkippingBlocks|ConnectStyle::HighlyRedundantTransactionsFirstSkippingBlocks|
 			ConnectStyle::BestBlockFirstReorgsOnlyTip|ConnectStyle::TransactionsFirstReorgsOnlyTip => true,
 		_ => false,
 	};
@@ -193,8 +204,13 @@ fn do_connect_block<'a, 'b, 'c, 'd>(node: &'a Node<'b, 'c, 'd>, block: Block, sk
 				node.node.best_block_updated(&block.header, height);
 				node.node.transactions_confirmed(&block.header, &txdata, height);
 			},
-			ConnectStyle::TransactionsFirst|ConnectStyle::TransactionsFirstSkippingBlocks|ConnectStyle::TransactionsFirstReorgsOnlyTip => {
+			ConnectStyle::TransactionsFirst|ConnectStyle::TransactionsFirstSkippingBlocks|
+			ConnectStyle::TransactionsDuplicativelyFirstSkippingBlocks|ConnectStyle::HighlyRedundantTransactionsFirstSkippingBlocks|
+			ConnectStyle::TransactionsFirstReorgsOnlyTip => {
 				node.chain_monitor.chain_monitor.transactions_confirmed(&block.header, &txdata, height);
+				if *node.connect_style.borrow() == ConnectStyle::TransactionsDuplicativelyFirstSkippingBlocks {
+					node.chain_monitor.chain_monitor.transactions_confirmed(&block.header, &txdata, height);
+				}
 				call_claimable_balances(node);
 				node.chain_monitor.chain_monitor.best_block_updated(&block.header, height);
 				node.node.transactions_confirmed(&block.header, &txdata, height);
@@ -205,6 +221,17 @@ fn do_connect_block<'a, 'b, 'c, 'd>(node: &'a Node<'b, 'c, 'd>, block: Block, sk
 				node.node.block_connected(&block, height);
 			}
 		}
+		if *node.connect_style.borrow() == ConnectStyle::TransactionsDuplicativelyFirstSkippingBlocks {
+			for (block, height) in node.blocks.lock().unwrap().iter() {
+				if !block.txdata.is_empty() {
+					// Reconnect all transactions we've ever seen to ensure transaction connection
+					// is *really* idempotent. This is a somewhat likely deployment for some
+					// esplora implementations of chain sync which try to reduce state and
+					// complexity as much as possible.
+					node.chain_monitor.chain_monitor.transactions_confirmed(&block.header, &txdata, *height);
+				}
+			}
+		}
 	}
 	call_claimable_balances(node);
 	node.node.test_process_background_events();
@@ -226,7 +253,8 @@ pub fn disconnect_blocks<'a, 'b, 'c, 'd>(node: &'a Node<'b, 'c, 'd>, count: u32)
 				node.chain_monitor.chain_monitor.block_disconnected(&orig.0.header, orig.1);
 				Listen::block_disconnected(node.node, &orig.0.header, orig.1);
 			},
-			ConnectStyle::BestBlockFirstSkippingBlocks|ConnectStyle::TransactionsFirstSkippingBlocks => {
+			ConnectStyle::BestBlockFirstSkippingBlocks|ConnectStyle::TransactionsFirstSkippingBlocks|
+			ConnectStyle::HighlyRedundantTransactionsFirstSkippingBlocks|ConnectStyle::TransactionsDuplicativelyFirstSkippingBlocks => {
 				if i == count - 1 {
 					node.chain_monitor.chain_monitor.best_block_updated(&prev.0.header, prev.1);
 					node.node.best_block_updated(&prev.0.header, prev.1);

lightning/src/ln/payment_tests.rs

@@ -785,8 +785,9 @@ fn do_test_dup_htlc_onchain_fails_on_reload(persist_manager_post_event: bool, co
 	let funding_txo = OutPoint { txid: funding_tx.txid(), index: 0 };
 	let mon_updates: Vec<_> = chanmon_cfgs[0].persister.chain_sync_monitor_persistences.lock().unwrap()
 		.get_mut(&funding_txo).unwrap().drain().collect();
-	// If we are using chain::Confirm instead of chain::Listen, we will get the same update twice
-	assert!(mon_updates.len() == 1 || mon_updates.len() == 2);
+	// If we are using chain::Confirm instead of chain::Listen, we will get the same update twice.
+	// If we're testing connection idempotency we may get substantially more.
+	assert!(mon_updates.len() >= 1);
 	assert!(nodes[0].chain_monitor.release_pending_monitor_events().is_empty());
 	assert!(nodes[0].node.get_and_clear_pending_events().is_empty());