test/doc: remove misleading comment and improve tests
What the developer wrote
Authored by stratospher
test/doc: remove misleading comment and improve tests
remove misleading comment for m_blocks_unlinked since for
pruned nodes:
- usually A is the missing data (just like in non-pruned nodes)
- in PruneOneBlockFile, we remove entries once data for B is missing.
Co-authored-by: Martin Zumsande <mzumsande@gmail.com>
What changed, and why it matters
This commit only touches documentation and test code. It removes an outdated comment about how pruned nodes track partially downloaded blocks and fixes a timing bug in a test where wallet status was being checked from a stale snapshot instead of live data. There are no changes to production code, no security fix, and no vulnerability.
No security action needed. Treat as normal test/documentation maintenance.
Security signals we found
No strong security signals were identified.
Evidence from the diff
The change deletes a misleading Doxygen comment for m_blocks_unlinked in src/node/blockstorage.h and updates test/functional/feature_pruning.py to call getwalletinfo() inside the wait_until lambdas rather than capturing a stale wallet_info object. This ensures the test polls current wallet state during rescan waits. No consensus, networking, wallet, or storage logic is modified.
Changed components
src/node/blockstorage.h (comment only)test/functional/feature_pruning.py (test-only polling fix)Inspect captured patch +4 / −8
diff --git a/src/node/blockstorage.h b/src/node/blockstorage.h
index 347dbc3c..f9c5753b 100644
--- a/src/node/blockstorage.h
+++ b/src/node/blockstorage.h
@@ -352,7 +352,6 @@ public:
/**
* All pairs A->B, where A (or one of its ancestors) misses transactions, but B has transactions.
- * Pruned nodes may have entries where B is missing data.
*/
std::multimap<CBlockIndex*, CBlockIndex*> m_blocks_unlinked;
diff --git a/test/functional/feature_pruning.py b/test/functional/feature_pruning.py
index 0487a138..4a0b3346 100755
--- a/test/functional/feature_pruning.py
+++ b/test/functional/feature_pruning.py
@@ -6,7 +6,6 @@
WARNING:
This test uses 4GB of disk space.
-This test takes 30 mins or more (up to 2 hours)
"""
import os
@@ -351,17 +350,15 @@ class PruneTest(BitcoinTestFramework):
self.log.info("Stop and start pruning node to trigger wallet rescan")
self.restart_node(2, extra_args=["-prune=550"])
- wallet_info = self.nodes[2].getwalletinfo()
- self.wait_until(lambda: wallet_info["scanning"] == False)
- self.wait_until(lambda: wallet_info["lastprocessedblock"]["height"] == self.nodes[2].getblockcount())
+ self.wait_until(lambda: self.nodes[2].getwalletinfo()["scanning"] == False)
+ self.wait_until(lambda: self.nodes[2].getwalletinfo()["lastprocessedblock"]["height"] == self.nodes[2].getblockcount())
# check that wallet loads successfully when restarting a pruned node after IBD.
# this was reported to fail in #7494.
self.restart_node(5, extra_args=["-prune=550", "-blockfilterindex=1"]) # restart to trigger rescan
- wallet_info = self.nodes[5].getwalletinfo()
- self.wait_until(lambda: wallet_info["scanning"] == False)
- self.wait_until(lambda: wallet_info["lastprocessedblock"]["height"] == self.nodes[0].getblockcount())
+ self.wait_until(lambda: self.nodes[5].getwalletinfo()["scanning"] == False)
+ self.wait_until(lambda: self.nodes[5].getwalletinfo()["lastprocessedblock"]["height"] == self.nodes[0].getblockcount())
def run_test(self):
self.log.info("Warning! This test requires 4GB of disk space")
Why this scored 15/100
Community notes
Notes can correct, qualify, or add evidence to the AI analysis. Every note shown here has been validated by a human moderator.
The AI analysis stands alone for now. Submit a note if you can add evidence or important context.