-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 138
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
Improving Plan API and adding examples. #559
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Improving Plan API and adding examples. #559
Conversation
You would need |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Some small comments
3b6a1f9
to
980664b
Compare
85f793b
to
b4b7d09
Compare
0f8550c
to
bc99df2
Compare
This is pretty hard to review because there are a load of patches that are not related to the PR description that make non-trivial changes. Perphaps either push them up as separate PRs or add to the description something like "WIP, only review the last patch please, still work in progress" if that is what is intended. Feel free to say if I've totally missed some context and it should be clear what is going on here. |
Sorry for not adding enough context. I have added some context about the work in the PR description. The PR currently depends on plan API and we are waiting for it to get merged. For reviewing, I would say https://github.com/rust-bitcoin/rust-miniscript/pull/559/files/5166d85171c3561c2acaa99c175c08e2a9b1164e..bc99df24fe269a4f64c9136243ab4046d0cda533#diff-4e793d33eeb8ca8c2f0404fe38b64bb60e0c7bb596977b5619777ed59213978a |
561a883
to
61ee4f7
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Left some feedback after one round of review.
src/descriptor/mod.rs
Outdated
@@ -569,6 +569,51 @@ impl Descriptor<DefiniteDescriptorKey> { | |||
} | |||
|
|||
impl Descriptor<DescriptorPublicKey> { | |||
/// Count total possible assets for a given descriptor. | |||
pub fn count_assets(&self) -> u64 { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Are you sure that this function will not overflow?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah. It may overflow. I can have some checks over the overflow conditions.
25f8bf5
to
cfbd65a
Compare
a3de3a3
to
bee48ff
Compare
Hi @Harshil-Jani, good work splitting the PR up and organising your commits. Here is a blog post that I link every apprentice programmer to so they can learn to write commit messages that help them get their commits merged. The easier you make it for reviewers to review your work the more chance you have of them doing so and of you hard work getting merged. Review time is the by far the most limited resource we have in open source, the better we all make use of it the better for the project. Thanks mate. (Also you can update your PR description now this is off draft.) |
bee48ff
to
a19eac0
Compare
@tcharding Thanks a lot for the link. I have taken your feedback and improved my commit messages aliging with the diff. Would be awaiting for review. |
Thanks for the extra effort @Harshil-Jani, could you please add the "why" to the commit log of each patch - its really hard to review changes if one doesn't know why the author is making the changes. |
Using `all_assets` method, you can get all possible asset for a given node of Miniscript AST. Eg : multi(2,A,B,C) will give possible combinations as AB, AC, BC. This API will allow the developers to figure out all the possible spend paths for a given descriptor. Signed-off-by: Harshil Jani <harshiljani2002@gmail.com>
This commit wraps the all_assets function for all possible descriptor types. It also adds `count_assets` function which can count the total possible ways to obtain an asset for a given descriptor. This API will help developer to count the possible ways. In-fact this will also help in protecting that if some descriptor is very large and has huge number of possible spend paths then it could simply be dropped off and we can protect the network from traffic. Signed-off-by: Harshil Jani <harshiljani2002@gmail.com>
There were helper functions to compute nCk (k combinations of n given things) and product of K different combinations. Those were duplicated in mod.rs of descriptor and astelem.rs of miniscript. This commit de-duplicates them and store them in util.rs Signed-off-by: Harshil Jani <harshiljani2002@gmail.com>
For the planning module we are considering that total possible ways to spend should always be less than 1000. This protects the network from any DDoS Attack if in case you receive a very large descriptor enough that it has 1000 possible spend paths. Signed-off-by: Harshil Jani <harshiljani2002@gmail.com>
This commit adds a new example file which explains how we can use planner API with the taproot descriptor and compute different possible spend path and actually spend them. This would help developers to understand and learn new planning functionality. Signed-off-by: Harshil Jani <harshiljani2002@gmail.com>
Recently we have had plan API into the rust-miniscript so this example is being updated for better use of plan API with more clear explanation Signed-off-by: Harshil Jani <harshiljani2002@gmail.com>
a19eac0
to
d7c28c2
Compare
@tcharding Sorry for a long delay. Had some personal stuff came up. I have again updated the commit message. Please check them out and let me know in case those are unclear. |
plan.update_psbt_input(&mut input); | ||
|
||
// Update the PSBT input from the result which we have obtained from the Plan. | ||
input.update_with_descriptor_unchecked(&descriptor).unwrap(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why do we update the input with the descriptor after updating it with the plan. The plan should do everything you need?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
While finalizing we need to inform the signer which keys we want to sign. And to do this we need pkh
in place of their hashes.
The way current planner module is designed it doesn't support raw pkh
and converts things into hashes. So, there is this workaround #589 and #557 which substitutes pkh
from expr_raw_pkh
.
Here what we did is that we took all the possible keys and mapped them with their hashes only to convert them back to their pkh form. Assuming that we only depend on plan then it is going to return us with the hash of keys that are required to be signed. But we would also need other pkh
's that we need to dissatisfy.
Reference to more context on this :
#481 (comment)
#481 (comment)
#589
#557
Example of above discussion
Assume five keys A,B,C,D,E
User wants to plan txn using with A,C,E.
Case 1 : We don't update the input with descriptor
- Plan returns Hash(A), Hash(C), Hash(E)
- Input only contains hashes for A,C,E
- Map contains : | A, Hash(A) | C, Hash(C) | E, Hash(E) |
- We don't get pkhs for B and D since they are not present in the map.
Case 2 : We update the input with descriptor
- Plan returns Hash(A), Hash(C), Hash(E)
- We update input with descriptor so it contains A,B,C,D,E
- Map contains : | A, Hash(A) | B, Hash(B) | C, Hash(C) | D, Hash(D) | E, Hash(E) |
- We have all pkh full keys.
This PR intends to complete some after works on top of #481 . Me and @sanket1729 had multiple iterations since I was working on it as a Summer of Bitcoin project.
The goals which we have added for improvement over the plan module are as follows :