Print warning message when we find any disabled network upgrade #3038
+105
−2
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Dependency Review✅ No vulnerabilities or license issues or OpenSSF Scorecard issues found.OpenSSF Scorecard
Scanned Files |
Vovchyk
requested changes
Mar 18, 2025
Vovchyk
previously approved these changes
Mar 18, 2025
fmacleal
reviewed
Mar 19, 2025
fmacleal
approved these changes
Mar 20, 2025
48146a2 to
055bc87
Compare
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
We are printing a warning message when running the node so we know which NetworkUpgrade are disabled at the point of the node running.
Motivation and Context
We had an issue where the node of a client was creating a hard fork due to client not having the latest network upgrade
LOVELL700enabled / added to their config.We spent a lot of time trying to investigate the issue and we found out it was a configuration issue. If have noticed the configuration issue before we wouldn't spend a lot of time debugging the problem.
How Has This Been Tested?
We just ran a node from scratch. At the beginning since the block is at height of 0, all the existing network upgrades will be shown, even if they are added to the rsk config, because they will not be active due to the best block height.
Finally, the same node was restarted, so we were able to see how the number of network upgrades printed as disabled were decrease as the best block height was increasing.
Types of changes
Checklist: