Repository: bitcoin/bitcoin
File: src/validation.cpp (C++)

Code before:

        // Add any equal or more work headers to setBlockIndexCandidates
        auto candidate_it = candidate_blocks_by_work.lower_bound(invalid_walk_tip->pprev->nChainWork);
        while (candidate_it != candidate_blocks_by_work.end()) {
            if (!CBlockIndexWorkComparator()(candidate_it->second, invalid_walk_tip->pprev)) {
                setBlockIndexCandidates.insert(candidate_it->second);
                candidate_it = candidate_blocks_by_work.erase(candidate_it);
            } else {
                ++candidate_it;
            }
        }

        // Track the last disconnected block, so we can correct its BLOCK_FAILED_CHILD status in future
        // iterations, or, if it's the last one, call InvalidChainFound on it.
        to_mark_failed = invalid_walk_tip;
    }

    m_chainman.CheckBlockIndex();

    {
        LOCK(cs_main);
        if (m_chain.Contains(to_mark_failed)) {
            // If the to-be-marked invalid block is in the active chain, something is interfering and we can't proceed.
            return false;
        }

        // Mark pindex as invalid if it never was in the main chain
        if (!pindex_was_in_chain && !(pindex->nStatus & BLOCK_FAILED_MASK)) {
            pindex->nStatus |= BLOCK_FAILED_VALID;
            m_blockman.m_dirty_blockindex.insert(pindex);
            setBlockIndexCandidates.erase(pindex);
            m_chainman.m_failed_blocks.insert(pindex);
        }

        // If any new blocks somehow arrived while we were disconnecting
        // (above), then the pre-calculation of what should go into
        // setBlockIndexCandidates may have missed entries. This would
        // technically be an inconsistency in the block index, but if we clean
        // it up here, this should be an essentially unobservable error.
        // Loop back over all block index entries and add any missing entries
        // to setBlockIndexCandidates.
        for (auto& [_, block_index] : m_blockman.m_block_index) {
            if (block_index.IsValid(BLOCK_VALID_TRANSACTIONS) && block_index.HaveNumChainTxs() && !setBlockIndexCandidates.value_comp()(&block_index, m_chain.Tip())) {
                setBlockIndexCandidates.insert(&block_index);
            }
        }

        InvalidChainFound(to_mark_failed);
    }

    // Only notify about a new block tip if the active chain was modified.

Review comment (suggestion):
In commit "validation: in invalidateblock, calculate m_best_header right away" (809413fde6893e60078e02b401a9d98a3e341fc1)

Maybe replace "but there may be better ones" with "but there could be a better header, which will be found in the loop below", because current comment seems to imply that the code will not actually find the best header.

Code after:

        // We immediately mark the disconnected blocks as invalid.
        // This prevents a case where pruned nodes may fail to invalidateblock
        // and be left unable to start as they have no tip candidates (as there
        // are no blocks that meet the "have data and are not invalid per
        // nStatus" criteria for inclusion in setBlockIndexCandidates).
        invalid_walk_tip->nStatus |= BLOCK_FAILED_VALID;
        m_blockman.m_dirty_blockindex.insert(invalid_walk_tip);
        setBlockIndexCandidates.erase(invalid_walk_tip);
        setBlockIndexCandidates.insert(invalid_walk_tip->pprev);
        if (invalid_walk_tip == to_mark_failed->pprev && (to_mark_failed->nStatus & BLOCK_FAILED_VALID)) {
            // We only want to mark the last disconnected block as BLOCK_FAILED_VALID; its children
            // need to be BLOCK_FAILED_CHILD instead.
            to_mark_failed->nStatus = (to_mark_failed->nStatus ^ BLOCK_FAILED_VALID) | BLOCK_FAILED_CHILD;
            m_blockman.m_dirty_blockindex.insert(to_mark_failed);
        }

        // Mark out-of-chain descendants of the invalidated block as invalid
        // (possibly replacing a pre-existing BLOCK_FAILED_VALID with BLOCK_FAILED_CHILD)
        // Add any equal or more work headers that are not invalidated to setBlockIndexCandidates
        // Recalculate m_best_header if it became invalid.
        auto candidate_it = highpow_outofchain_headers.lower_bound(invalid_walk_tip->pprev->nChainWork);

        const bool best_header_needs_update{m_chainman.m_best_header->GetAncestor(invalid_walk_tip->nHeight) == invalid_walk_tip};
        if (best_header_needs_update) {
            // pprev is definitely still valid at this point, but there may be better ones
            m_chainman.m_best_header = invalid_walk_tip->pprev;
        }

        while (candidate_it != highpow_outofchain_headers.end()) {
            CBlockIndex* candidate{candidate_it->second};
            if (candidate->GetAncestor(invalid_walk_tip->nHeight) == invalid_walk_tip) {
                // Children of failed blocks should be marked as BLOCK_FAILED_CHILD instead.
                candidate->nStatus &= ~BLOCK_FAILED_VALID;
                candidate->nStatus |= BLOCK_FAILED_CHILD;
                m_blockman.m_dirty_blockindex.insert(candidate);
                // If invalidated, the block is irrelevant for setBlockIndexCandidates
                // and for m_best_header and can be removed from the cache.
                candidate_it = highpow_outofchain_headers.erase(candidate_it);
                continue;
            }
            if (!CBlockIndexWorkComparator()(candidate, invalid_walk_tip->pprev) &&
                candidate->IsValid(BLOCK_VALID_TRANSACTIONS) &&
                candidate->HaveNumChainTxs()) {
                setBlockIndexCandidates.insert(candidate);
                // Do not remove candidate from the highpow_outofchain_headers cache, because it might be a descendant of the block being invalidated
                // which needs to be marked failed later.
            }
            if (best_header_needs_update &&
                m_chainman.m_best_header->nChainWork < candidate->nChainWork) {
                m_chainman.m_best_header = candidate;