AI-generated analysisPublished automatically and not human-verified. Validated context appears in community notes below.
← Watch feed
Informational 15 Bitcoin

Fix flaky wallet funding tests (#3253)

Public commit record

What the developer wrote

Authored by Bastien Teinturier

86/100 · Strong
Fix flaky wallet funding tests (#3253)

We fix a few flaky tests in our channel FSM that test scenarios where
errors are received while creating funding transactions. The issue was
that we used a dummy wallet that could complete its call before our
calls to `awaitCond(alice.stateName == WAIT_FOR_FUNDING_INTERNAL)`.

We use a new dummy on-chain wallet that never responds to transaction
funding calls to allow tests to inject failure events.
✓ Descriptive subject✓ Names a concrete action or component✓ Provides detailed explanatory context✓ Mentions testing or verification✓ Links an issue, advisory, or supporting reference
The short version

What changed, and why it matters

This commit only changes test code. It fixes flaky automated tests in the Eclair Lightning node by introducing a fake wallet that never completes funding transactions, so tests can reliably simulate error events during channel funding. There is no change to production code and no security vulnerability is being fixed or introduced.

Recommended action

No security action required. This is a test reliability improvement. Reviewers may verify that the new blocking wallet is only used in tests and that no production wallet implementation was altered.

Security signals we found

01

No production code changes

02

Test-only refactoring

03

No cryptographic, network, or consensus changes

04

No input validation, authentication, or authorization changes

Risk score

Why this scored 15/100

Our methodology →
Potential impact 0/30
Exploitability 0/25
Stealth signal 0/15
Affected reach 0/15
Confidence 10/10
Evidence quality 5/5
Human-validated context

Community notes

Notes can correct, qualify, or add evidence to the AI analysis. Every note shown here has been validated by a human moderator.

No validated notes yet.

The AI analysis stands alone for now. Submit a note if you can add evidence or important context.