Add `tproxy` initializer for Integration Tests by jbesraa · Pull Request #1254 · stratum-mining/stratum

jbesraa · 2024-11-14T13:22:56Z

resolves #1250

codecov · 2024-11-14T13:25:28Z

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 19.30%. Comparing base (67a5926) to head (1fea709).
Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #1254   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   19.30%   19.30%           
=======================================
  Files         164      164           
  Lines       10849    10849           
=======================================
  Hits         2094     2094           
  Misses       8755     8755

Flag	Coverage Δ
binary_codec_sv2-coverage	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
binary_serde_sv2-coverage	`3.65% <ø> (ø)`
binary_sv2-coverage	`5.46% <ø> (ø)`
bip32_derivation-coverage	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
buffer_sv2-coverage	`25.02% <ø> (ø)`
codec_sv2-coverage	`0.01% <ø> (ø)`
common_messages_sv2-coverage	`0.13% <ø> (ø)`
const_sv2-coverage	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
error_handling-coverage	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
framing_sv2-coverage	`0.29% <ø> (ø)`
jd_client-coverage	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
jd_server-coverage	`7.79% <ø> (ø)`
job_declaration_sv2-coverage	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
key-utils-coverage	`2.39% <ø> (ø)`
mining-coverage	`2.51% <ø> (ø)`
mining_device-coverage	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
mining_proxy_sv2-coverage	`0.70% <ø> (ø)`
noise_sv2-coverage	`4.35% <ø> (ø)`
pool_sv2-coverage	`1.38% <ø> (ø)`
protocols	`24.72% <ø> (ø)`
roles	`6.55% <ø> (ø)`
roles_logic_sv2-coverage	`8.06% <ø> (ø)`
sv1-mining-device-coverage	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
sv2_ffi-coverage	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
template_distribution_sv2-coverage	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
translator_sv2-coverage	`9.60% <ø> (ø)`
utils	`25.13% <ø> (ø)`
v1-coverage	`2.47% <ø> (ø)`

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚨 Try these New Features:

Flaky Tests Detection - Detect and resolve failed and flaky tests

github-actions · 2024-11-14T13:28:26Z

Bencher Report

Branch	2024-11-14-tproxy-test-initializer
Testbed	sv1

Click to view all benchmark results

Benchmark	Estimated Cycles	Benchmark Result estimated cycles (Result Δ%)	Upper Boundary estimated cycles (Limit %)	Instructions	Benchmark Result instructions (Result Δ%)	Upper Boundary instructions (Limit %)	L1 Accesses	Benchmark Result accesses (Result Δ%)	Upper Boundary accesses (Limit %)	L2 Accesses	Benchmark Result accesses (Result Δ%)	Upper Boundary accesses (Limit %)	RAM Accesses	Benchmark Result accesses (Result Δ%)	Upper Boundary accesses (Limit %)
get_authorize	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	8,379.00 (-0.94%)	8,801.86 (95.20%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	3,689.00 (-1.57%)	3,881.85 (95.03%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	5,159.00 (-1.84%)	5,450.80 (94.65%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	7.00 (-2.71%)	13.01 (53.82%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	91.00 (+0.56%)	95.87 (94.92%)
get_submit	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	95,407.00 (-0.02%)	95,958.18 (99.43%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	59,346.00 (-0.19%)	59,699.54 (99.41%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	85,222.00 (-0.21%)	85,770.34 (99.36%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	42.00 (-6.59%)	63.98 (65.64%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	285.00 (+1.80%)	289.36 (98.49%)
get_subscribe	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	7,872.00 (-1.79%)	8,357.07 (94.20%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	2,765.00 (-2.43%)	2,962.24 (93.34%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	3,847.00 (-2.88%)	4,144.74 (92.82%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	14.00 (+16.74%)	20.75 (67.45%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	113.00 (-1.00%)	119.67 (94.42%)
serialize_authorize	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	12,210.00 (-0.54%)	12,627.44 (96.69%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	5,266.00 (-1.00%)	5,451.07 (96.60%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	7,325.00 (-1.26%)	7,611.40 (96.24%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	11.00 (+20.55%)	16.13 (68.21%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	138.00 (+0.35%)	143.35 (96.27%)
serialize_deserialize_authorize	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	24,340.00 (-1.39%)	25,270.82 (96.32%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	9,838.00 (-0.53%)	10,048.99 (97.90%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	13,890.00 (-0.53%)	14,202.90 (97.80%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	32.00 (-7.83%)	44.11 (72.54%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	294.00 (-2.43%)	315.62 (93.15%)
serialize_deserialize_handle_authorize	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	30,068.00 (-0.83%)	30,780.36 (97.69%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	12,015.00 (-0.55%)	12,219.64 (98.33%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	17,003.00 (-0.61%)	17,312.03 (98.21%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	58.00 (+4.18%)	67.98 (85.32%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	365.00 (-1.22%)	381.76 (95.61%)
serialize_deserialize_handle_submit	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	126,369.00 (-0.07%)	127,028.60 (99.48%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	73,200.00 (-0.11%)	73,570.56 (99.50%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	104,914.00 (-0.14%)	105,510.30 (99.43%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	105.00 (-1.93%)	133.33 (78.75%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	598.00 (+0.29%)	605.42 (98.77%)
serialize_deserialize_handle_subscribe	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	27,468.00 (-1.30%)	28,638.51 (95.91%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	9,584.00 (-0.66%)	9,779.75 (98.00%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	13,543.00 (-0.76%)	13,838.47 (97.86%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	69.00 (+8.69%)	76.06 (90.72%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	388.00 (-2.06%)	417.14 (93.01%)
serialize_deserialize_submit	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	115,117.00 (-0.10%)	115,890.07 (99.33%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	68,060.00 (-0.06%)	68,421.70 (99.47%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	97,657.00 (-0.08%)	98,248.58 (99.40%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	62.00 (-1.15%)	78.25 (79.24%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	490.00 (-0.22%)	499.30 (98.14%)
serialize_deserialize_subscribe	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	22,842.00 (-1.74%)	24,053.70 (94.96%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	8,143.00 (-0.73%)	8,335.98 (97.68%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	11,467.00 (-0.76%)	11,744.97 (97.63%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	35.00 (-6.04%)	44.45 (78.74%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	320.00 (-2.66%)	348.72 (91.76%)
serialize_submit	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	99,796.00 (-0.05%)	100,357.68 (99.44%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	61,408.00 (-0.16%)	61,736.95 (99.47%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	88,081.00 (-0.19%)	88,608.21 (99.41%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	47.00 (+0.35%)	64.69 (72.66%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	328.00 (+1.05%)	333.97 (98.21%)
serialize_subscribe	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	11,317.00 (-0.71%)	11,742.18 (96.38%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	4,118.00 (-1.51%)	4,307.28 (95.61%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	5,707.00 (-1.91%)	5,999.49 (95.12%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	16.00 (+24.42%)	20.71 (77.27%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	158.00 (+0.26%)	163.88 (96.41%)

🐰 View full continuous benchmarking report in Bencher

github-actions · 2024-11-14T13:28:38Z

Bencher Report

Branch	2024-11-14-tproxy-test-initializer
Testbed	sv1

Click to view all benchmark results

Benchmark	Latency	Benchmark Result nanoseconds (ns) (Result Δ%)	Upper Boundary nanoseconds (ns) (Limit %)
client-submit-serialize	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	6,649.70 (-0.76%)	7,073.99 (94.00%)
client-submit-serialize-deserialize	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	7,646.70 (+0.04%)	7,924.64 (96.49%)
client-submit-serialize-deserialize-handle/client-submit-serialize-deserialize-handle	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	8,208.20 (+0.13%)	8,553.42 (95.96%)
client-sv1-authorize-serialize-deserialize-handle/client-sv1-authorize-serialize-deserialize-handle	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	875.97 (+0.10%)	946.06 (92.59%)
client-sv1-authorize-serialize-deserialize/client-sv1-authorize-serialize-deserialize	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	683.11 (+1.39%)	723.71 (94.39%)
client-sv1-authorize-serialize/client-sv1-authorize-serialize	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	247.41 (-0.49%)	261.55 (94.59%)
client-sv1-get-authorize/client-sv1-get-authorize	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	157.67 (+0.04%)	163.65 (96.35%)
client-sv1-get-submit	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	6,409.70 (-1.12%)	7,171.26 (89.38%)
client-sv1-get-subscribe/client-sv1-get-subscribe	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	273.71 (-1.22%)	297.56 (91.98%)
client-sv1-subscribe-serialize-deserialize-handle/client-sv1-subscribe-serialize-deserialize-handle	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	733.02 (-0.43%)	817.57 (89.66%)
client-sv1-subscribe-serialize-deserialize/client-sv1-subscribe-serialize-deserialize	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	626.10 (+4.02%)	669.19 (93.56%)
client-sv1-subscribe-serialize/client-sv1-subscribe-serialize	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	207.25 (+0.05%)	224.32 (92.39%)

🐰 View full continuous benchmarking report in Bencher

github-actions · 2024-11-14T13:28:41Z

Bencher Report

Branch	2024-11-14-tproxy-test-initializer
Testbed	sv2

Click to view all benchmark results

Benchmark	Latency	Benchmark Result nanoseconds (ns) (Result Δ%)	Upper Boundary nanoseconds (ns) (Limit %)
client_sv2_handle_message_common	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	44.23 (-0.84%)	47.22 (93.67%)
client_sv2_handle_message_mining	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	74.63 (-1.02%)	84.29 (88.54%)
client_sv2_mining_message_submit_standard	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	14.65 (-0.07%)	14.72 (99.56%)
client_sv2_mining_message_submit_standard_serialize	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	269.56 (+1.32%)	316.40 (85.19%)
client_sv2_mining_message_submit_standard_serialize_deserialize	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	615.03 (+1.82%)	750.34 (81.97%)
client_sv2_open_channel	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	147.10 (-0.36%)	156.94 (93.73%)
client_sv2_open_channel_serialize	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	280.53 (-1.55%)	316.13 (88.74%)
client_sv2_open_channel_serialize_deserialize	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	389.11 (+2.91%)	415.15 (93.73%)
client_sv2_setup_connection	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	158.74 (-1.33%)	175.75 (90.32%)
client_sv2_setup_connection_serialize	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	490.17 (+4.66%)	573.42 (85.48%)
client_sv2_setup_connection_serialize_deserialize	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	991.81 (+1.84%)	1,069.19 (92.76%)

🐰 View full continuous benchmarking report in Bencher

github-actions · 2024-11-14T13:28:54Z

Bencher Report

Branch	2024-11-14-tproxy-test-initializer
Testbed	sv2

🚨 1 Alert

Benchmark	Measure Units	View	Benchmark Result (Result Δ%)	Upper Boundary (Limit %)
client_sv2_mining_message_submit_standard_serialize_deserialize	Estimated Cycles estimated cycles	📈 plot 🚨 alert (🔔) 🚷 threshold	27,882.00 (+1.27%)	27,787.35 (100.34%)

Click to view all benchmark results

Benchmark	Estimated Cycles	Benchmark Result estimated cycles (Result Δ%)	Upper Boundary estimated cycles (Limit %)	Instructions	Benchmark Result instructions (Result Δ%)	Upper Boundary instructions (Limit %)	L1 Accesses	Benchmark Result accesses (Result Δ%)	Upper Boundary accesses (Limit %)	L2 Accesses	Benchmark Result accesses (Result Δ%)	Upper Boundary accesses (Limit %)	RAM Accesses	Benchmark Result accesses (Result Δ%)	Upper Boundary accesses (Limit %)
client_sv2_handle_message_common	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	2,103.00 (+0.45%)	2,206.38 (95.31%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	473.00 (-0.07%)	488.52 (96.82%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	733.00 (-0.39%)	757.28 (96.79%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	8.00 (+46.92%)	14.11 (56.69%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	38.00 (-0.04%)	41.17 (92.30%)
client_sv2_handle_message_mining	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	8,204.00 (-0.00%)	8,286.46 (99.00%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	2,137.00 (-0.03%)	2,143.08 (99.72%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	3,159.00 (-0.06%)	3,170.60 (99.63%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	36.00 (+1.25%)	42.18 (85.36%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	139.00 (-0.02%)	140.89 (98.66%)
client_sv2_mining_message_submit_standard	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	6,323.00 (+0.69%)	6,391.88 (98.92%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	1,750.00 (-0.05%)	1,766.88 (99.04%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	2,548.00 (-0.23%)	2,575.62 (98.93%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	20.00 (+17.92%)	24.54 (81.49%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	105.00 (+0.94%)	107.12 (98.02%)
client_sv2_mining_message_submit_standard_serialize	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	14,838.00 (+0.73%)	14,962.93 (99.17%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	4,694.00 (-0.02%)	4,710.88 (99.64%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	6,748.00 (-0.16%)	6,782.04 (99.50%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	50.00 (+14.86%)	53.51 (93.44%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	224.00 (+1.11%)	227.63 (98.41%)
client_sv2_mining_message_submit_standard_serialize_deserialize	📈 view plot 🚨 view alert (🔔) 🚷 view threshold	27,882.00 (+1.27%)	27,787.35 (100.34%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	10,645.00 (+0.60%)	10,647.81 (99.97%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	15,502.00 (+0.68%)	15,502.80 (99.99%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	89.00 (+9.32%)	90.16 (98.71%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	341.00 (+1.77%)	341.64 (99.81%)
client_sv2_open_channel	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	4,409.00 (+0.30%)	4,605.96 (95.72%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	1,461.00 (-0.02%)	1,476.52 (98.95%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	2,159.00 (-0.04%)	2,184.41 (98.84%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	9.00 (+1.05%)	17.43 (51.65%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	63.00 (+0.61%)	68.23 (92.34%)
client_sv2_open_channel_serialize	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	14,046.00 (-0.08%)	14,431.12 (97.33%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	5,064.00 (-0.01%)	5,079.52 (99.69%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	7,326.00 (+0.00%)	7,352.03 (99.65%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	35.00 (-0.22%)	43.23 (80.95%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	187.00 (-0.16%)	198.06 (94.42%)
client_sv2_open_channel_serialize_deserialize	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	22,854.00 (+0.84%)	22,903.41 (99.78%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	8,040.00 (+0.24%)	8,073.98 (99.58%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	11,689.00 (+0.18%)	11,753.01 (99.46%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	84.00 (+12.87%)	85.46 (98.30%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	307.00 (+1.15%)	311.41 (98.58%)
client_sv2_setup_connection	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	4,681.00 (-0.07%)	4,772.88 (98.07%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	1,502.00 (-0.02%)	1,517.52 (98.98%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	2,276.00 (-0.11%)	2,299.13 (98.99%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	12.00 (+27.57%)	16.04 (74.83%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	67.00 (-0.58%)	69.80 (95.99%)
client_sv2_setup_connection_serialize	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	16,190.00 (+0.12%)	16,458.18 (98.37%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	5,963.00 (-0.01%)	5,978.52 (99.74%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	8,660.00 (-0.04%)	8,691.71 (99.64%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	43.00 (+7.69%)	53.29 (80.69%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	209.00 (+0.10%)	216.26 (96.64%)
client_sv2_setup_connection_serialize_deserialize	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	35,722.00 (+0.48%)	35,753.45 (99.91%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	14,888.00 (+0.26%)	14,907.75 (99.87%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	21,882.00 (+0.31%)	21,920.23 (99.83%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	94.00 (+1.52%)	113.21 (83.03%)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	382.00 (+0.72%)	384.65 (99.31%)

🐰 View full continuous benchmarking report in Bencher

plebhash · 2024-11-15T13:16:46Z

    template_provider
 }
+
+pub async fn start_sv2_translator(upstream: SocketAddr) -> SocketAddr {


let's try to keep starter APIs consistent, as highlighted in #1234

I'm not opinionated towards any specific approach

I just feel it's important to be careful in fragmenting patterns because that will eventually result in a poor UX for SRI contributors writing tests while working on this like e.g.: #1229 (which will likely happen sooner, rather than later)

I think the approach here is mostly what we want. No need for the end user to call get_available_address but the role itself does that and returns it

plebhash · 2024-11-15T13:30:58Z

+    listening_address
+}
+
+fn measure_hashrate(duration_secs: u64) -> f64 {


interesting approach of dynamically measuring local CPU hashrate

this strategy will save us A LOT of headache and it's quite a game changer in comparison to the static nature of MG tests

Credit to @GitGab19

plebhash · 2024-11-15T13:47:31Z

+    .expect("failed");
+    let listening_address = get_available_address();
+    let listening_port = listening_address.port();
+    let hashrate = measure_hashrate(3) as f32 / 100.0;


why divide by 100?

This is done just part of the testing, I think this will change also until we figure out the best numbers here and in measure_hashrate

plebhash · 2024-11-15T14:01:12Z

+    let mut hashes: u64 = 0;
+    let duration = std::time::Duration::from_secs(duration_secs);
+
+    let hash = |share: &mut [u8; 80]| -> Target {


why return Target, it seems to be used nowhere?

plebhash · 2024-11-15T14:02:46Z

+        let mut nonce = u64::from_le_bytes(nonce);
+        nonce += 1;
+        share[0..8].copy_from_slice(&nonce.to_le_bytes());
+        let hash = Sha256::digest(&share).to_vec();


Bitcoin protocol uses sha256d, which means we actually calculate sha256 2x

every ASIC hashrate will tell you how many sha256d hashes were calculated in a second, not sha256

here's an easy way to calculate sha256d hashes with stratum_common:

use stratum_common::bitcoin::hashes::{sha256d, Hash, HashEngine}; let input = 0; let mut engine = sha256d::Hash::engine(); engine.input(&input); let hashed = sha256d::Hash::from_engine(engine).into_inner();

plebhash · 2024-11-15T14:09:51Z

+    let mut share = {
+        let mut rng = thread_rng();
+        let mut arr = [0u8; 80];
+        rng.fill(&mut arr[..]);
+        arr
+    };
+    let start_time = std::time::Instant::now();
+    let mut hashes: u64 = 0;
+    let duration = std::time::Duration::from_secs(duration_secs);


I'm fine with this approach but it seems a bit convoluted and confusing to read/understand

I'm not convinced we really need to replicate the bitcoin protocol so closely if all we want is to know the capacity of the system to calculate sha256d (attention to the d, it's 2x sha256)

why not simply hash some simple input?

if you REALLY want to closely replicate what happens on bitcoin mining, I would suggest leveraging rust-bitcoin

you can initialize a Header struct and then call header.block_hash() to "mine" it.

that's how both mining-device and sv1-mining-device do it

jbesraa · 2024-11-17T16:38:54Z

@plebhash the measure_hashrate function and any function it uses is just a copy-pasta from a code @GitGab19 previously wrote. This pull request only uses this functionality without making changes to it yet. I think we should leave those change to be examined in the actual testing pull requests that will follow up.

plebhash · 2024-11-19T12:18:57Z

@plebhash the measure_hashrate function and any function it uses is just a copy-pasta from a code @GitGab19 previously wrote. This pull request only uses this functionality without making changes to it yet. I think we should leave those change to be examined in the actual testing pull requests that will follow up.

I must point out that my comments about sha256d above are not purely aesthetic.

in it's current form, this measure_hashrate function is going to provide a wrong hashrate estimation because it's only calculating sha256, not sha256d (which is what actually happens on Bitcoin mining, and therefore the fundamental definition of hashrate).

I don't think we should introduce something with broken functionality to fix later, especially given that it's pretty straightforward to fix it now.

please see #1254 (comment)

plebhash · 2024-11-19T12:40:40Z

after discussing with @GitGab19 (he did not write this code) we tracked down the root cause of the confusion around measure_hashrate function:

stratum/roles/translator/src/lib/downstream_sv1/diff_management.rs

Lines 374 to 400 in 8c98647

    
           fn measure_hashrate(duration_secs: u64) -> f64 { 
        
               let mut share = generate_random_80_byte_array(); 
        
               let start_time = Instant::now(); 
        
               let mut hashes: u64 = 0; 
        
               let duration = Duration::from_secs(duration_secs); 
        
               while start_time.elapsed() < duration { 
        
                   for _ in 0..10000 { 
        
                       hash(&mut share); 
        
                       hashes += 1; 
        
                   } 
        
               } 
        
               let elapsed_secs = start_time.elapsed().as_secs_f64(); 
        
               hashes as f64 / elapsed_secs 
        
           } 
        
           fn hash(share: &mut [u8; 80]) -> Target { 
        
               let nonce: [u8; 8] = share[0..8].try_into().unwrap(); 
        
               let mut nonce = u64::from_le_bytes(nonce); 
        
               nonce += 1; 
        
               share[0..8].copy_from_slice(&nonce.to_le_bytes()); 
        
               let hash = Sha256::digest(&share).to_vec(); 
        
               let hash: U256<'static> = hash.try_into().unwrap(); 
        
               hash.into() 
        
           }

we should not blindly copy-paste this code because it will result in a broken ITF

I'm taking note of this on #1229 so it can be fixed as we modularize vardiff (which is what these unit tests are for)

plebhash reviewed Nov 15, 2024

View reviewed changes

jbesraa marked this pull request as ready for review November 18, 2024 09:56

plebhash mentioned this pull request Nov 19, 2024

Vardiff currently unsupported pool side #1229

Closed

plebhash changed the title ~~Add tproxy initializer~~ Add tproxy initializer for Integration Tests Nov 19, 2024

plebhash approved these changes Nov 19, 2024

View reviewed changes

Add tproxy initializer

1fea709

plebhash merged commit 0520c58 into stratum-mining:main Nov 19, 2024

jbesraa deleted the 2024-11-14-tproxy-test-initializer branch February 12, 2025 10:35

Conversation

jbesraa commented Nov 14, 2024

Uh oh!

codecov Bot commented Nov 14, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Nov 14, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Nov 14, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Nov 14, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Nov 14, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

🚨 1 Alert

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

plebhash Nov 15, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

plebhash Nov 15, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

jbesraa commented Nov 17, 2024

Uh oh!

plebhash commented Nov 19, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

plebhash commented Nov 19, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

codecov Bot commented Nov 14, 2024 •

edited

Loading

github-actions Bot commented Nov 14, 2024 •

edited

Loading

github-actions Bot commented Nov 14, 2024 •

edited

Loading

github-actions Bot commented Nov 14, 2024 •

edited

Loading

github-actions Bot commented Nov 14, 2024 •

edited

Loading

plebhash Nov 15, 2024 •

edited

Loading

plebhash Nov 15, 2024 •

edited

Loading

plebhash commented Nov 19, 2024 •

edited

Loading

plebhash commented Nov 19, 2024 •

edited

Loading