tiamak/Peya
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases 1 Wiki Activity

support for sweep_all (#47)

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
akildemir
2025-08-18 14:06:56 +03:00
committed by GitHub
parent ec33664734
commit 13ee838f3c
5 changed files with 18 additions and 25 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

2
src/carrot_core/config.h
View File

@@ -70,7 +70,7 @@ static constexpr const unsigned char CARROT_DOMAIN_SEP_SUBADDRESS_SCALAR[] = "Ca
static constexpr const unsigned int CARROT_MIN_TX_OUTPUTS = 2;
static constexpr const unsigned int CARROT_MAX_TX_OUTPUTS = 8;
static constexpr const unsigned int CARROT_MIN_TX_INPUTS = 1;
static constexpr const unsigned int CARROT_MAX_TX_INPUTS = 128;
static constexpr const unsigned int CARROT_MAX_TX_INPUTS = 64;
// SPARC addressing protocol domain separators
static constexpr const unsigned char SPARC_DOMAIN_SEP_RETURN_PUBKEY_ENCRYPTION_MASK[] = "SPARC return pubkey encryption mask";

30
src/carrot_impl/input_selection.cpp
View File

@@ -318,33 +318,27 @@ std::vector<std::size_t> get_input_counts_in_preferred_order()
// 1 or 2 randomly, then
// other ascending powers of 2, then
// other ascending positive numbers
//! @TODO: MRL discussion about 2 vs 1 default input count when 1 input can pay. If we default
// to 1, then that may reveal more information about the amount, and reveals that one can't pay
// with 1 output when using 2. Vice versa, if we default to 2, then that means that one only
// owns 1 output when using 1. It may be the most advantageous to randomly switch between
// preferring 1 vs 2. See: https://lavalle.pl/planning/node437.html. Con to this approach: if we
// default to 1 over 2 always then there's scenarios where we net save tx fees and proving time.
//static_assert(CARROT_MAX_TX_INPUTS == FCMP_PLUS_PLUS_MAX_INPUTS, "inconsistent input count max limit");
static_assert(CARROT_MIN_TX_INPUTS == 1 && CARROT_MAX_TX_INPUTS == 128,
// preferring 1 vs 2. See: https://lavalle.pl/planning/node437.html. Con to this approach: if we
// default to 1 over 2 always then there's scenarios where we net save tx fees and proving time.
//static_assert(CARROT_MAX_TX_INPUTS == FCMP_PLUS_PLUS_MAX_INPUTS, "inconsistent input count max limit");
static_assert(CARROT_MIN_TX_INPUTS == 1 && CARROT_MAX_TX_INPUTS == 64,
"refactor this function for different input count limits");
const bool random_bit = 0 == (crypto::rand<uint8_t>() & 0x01);
if (random_bit)
return {2, 1, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 3, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23,
24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48,
49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73,
74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97,
98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116,
117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127};
return {2, 1, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 3, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23,
24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47,
48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63};
else
return {1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 3, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23,
24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48,
49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73,
74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97,
98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116,
117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127};
return {1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 3, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23,
24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47,
48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63};
}
//-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
select_inputs_func_t make_single_transfer_input_selector(

4
src/simplewallet/simplewallet.cpp
View File

@@ -7929,8 +7929,8 @@ bool simple_wallet::sweep_main(uint32_t account, uint64_t below, bool locked, co
prompt << tr("WARNING: Outputs of multiple addresses are being used together, which might potentially compromise your privacy.\n");
}
if (!process_ring_members(ptx_vector, prompt, m_wallet->print_ring_members()))
return true;
// if (!process_ring_members(ptx_vector, prompt, m_wallet->print_ring_members()))
// return true;
if (ptx_vector.size() > 1) {
prompt << boost::format(tr("Sweeping %s in %llu transactions for a total fee of %s. Is this okay?")) %

2
src/wallet/tx_builder.cpp
View File

@@ -742,7 +742,7 @@ std::vector<carrot::CarrotTransactionProposalV1> make_carrot_transaction_proposa
subaddr_account,
subaddr_indices,
only_below ? only_below : MONEY_SUPPLY,
0,
1, // ignore_below
top_block_index))
continue;

5
src/wallet/wallet2.cpp
View File

@@ -11610,9 +11610,8 @@ std::vector<wallet2::pending_tx> wallet2::create_transactions_all(uint64_t below
const auto tx_proposals = tools::wallet::make_carrot_transaction_proposals_wallet2_sweep_all(*this, below, address, is_subaddress, outputs, priority, extra, tx_type, subaddr_account, subaddr_indices);
std::vector<pending_tx> ptx_vector;
ptx_vector.reserve(tx_proposals.size());
// TODO: use CLSAGS here..
// for (const auto &tx_proposal : tx_proposals)
// ptx_vector.push_back(tools::wallet::finalize_all_proofs_from_transfer_details_as_pending_tx(tx_proposal, *this));
for (const auto &tx_proposal : tx_proposals)
ptx_vector.push_back(tools::wallet::finalize_all_proofs_from_transfer_details_as_pending_tx(tx_proposal, *this));
return ptx_vector;
}