Skip to content
6 changes: 5 additions & 1 deletion lightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -3172,7 +3172,11 @@ impl<Signer: WriteableEcdsaChannelSigner> ChannelMonitorImpl<Signer> {
(htlc, htlc_source.as_ref().map(|htlc_source| htlc_source.as_ref()))
), logger);
} else {
debug_assert!(false, "We should have per-commitment option for any recognized old commitment txn");
// Our fuzzers aren't contrained by pesky things like valid signatures, so can
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

nit: constrained

// spend our funding output with a transaction which doesn't match our past
// commitment transactions. Thus, we can only debug-assert here when not
// fuzzing.
debug_assert!(cfg!(fuzzing), "We should have per-commitment option for any recognized old commitment txn");
fail_unbroadcast_htlcs!(self, "revoked counterparty", commitment_txid, tx, height,
block_hash, [].iter().map(|reference| *reference), logger);
}
Expand Down
4 changes: 3 additions & 1 deletion lightning/src/chain/onchaintx.rs
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -806,7 +806,9 @@ impl<ChannelSigner: WriteableEcdsaChannelSigner> OnchainTxHandler<ChannelSigner>
claim_id
},
};
debug_assert!(self.pending_claim_requests.get(&claim_id).is_none());
// Because fuzzing can cause hash collisions, we can end up with conflicting claim
// ids here, so we only assert when not fuzzing.
debug_assert!(cfg!(fuzzing) || self.pending_claim_requests.get(&claim_id).is_none());
for k in req.outpoints() {
log_info!(logger, "Registering claiming request for {}:{}", k.txid, k.vout);
self.claimable_outpoints.insert(k.clone(), (claim_id, conf_height));
Expand Down