Skip to content

Conversation

@Shourya742
Copy link
Contributor

I closed earlier PR by mistake and removed all the commits: #86.

@Shourya742
Copy link
Contributor Author

@plebhash I’ve adapted the pool according to what we discussed. Let me know what you think. I’ll handle the JDC and Tproxy updates next in this PR.

@Shourya742 Shourya742 force-pushed the 2025-12-12-add-contextual-error branch from 0c2036e to a898fa1 Compare December 13, 2025 11:48
@plebhash
Copy link
Member

@plebhash I’ve adapted the pool according to what we discussed. Let me know what you think. I’ll handle the JDC and Tproxy updates next in this PR.

looks good to me

@Shourya742 Shourya742 marked this pull request as ready for review December 14, 2025 15:50
@Shourya742 Shourya742 force-pushed the 2025-12-12-add-contextual-error branch 2 times, most recently from 90d442c to 31504fc Compare December 17, 2025 10:15
Copy link
Member

@GitGab19 GitGab19 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I just started the review, but I prefer to have some replies from you before proceeding with the rest, to be sure I got the idea behind the Source introduced here.

@lucasbalieiro
Copy link
Contributor

Started a testing session with the changes of this PR.

@Shourya742 Shourya742 force-pushed the 2025-12-12-add-contextual-error branch 2 times, most recently from 579ae19 to 7446ef0 Compare December 23, 2025 10:14
@Shourya742
Copy link
Contributor Author

This is the policy I am following here: for internal errors, we shut down directly, for non-internal errors, we disconnect or fall back as appropriate.

I am still not entirely sure about the correct behavior when we are opening a channel and something goes wrong while creating the channel snapshot. For now, I am disconnecting the affected downstream, but this could also reasonably be treated as an internal error. Curious to hear what others think.

@Shourya742 Shourya742 force-pushed the 2025-12-12-add-contextual-error branch from 72ff644 to f476065 Compare January 9, 2026 10:26
Comment on lines +454 to +455
messages_results
.push(Err(JDCError::disconnect(e, *downstream_id)));
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Shouldn't this be shutdown?

It seems an internal error

Comment on lines 43 to 45
return Err(JDCError::fallback(
JDCErrorKind::UpstreamMessageDuringSoloMining,
));
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What happens if we fallback while we're already doing SOLO mining?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This gonna never happen, if it does, we just disconnect from the upstream entity. Should I just remove this?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

JDC sets up its mode based on SetupConnection.Success flag which is wrong, fix it.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants