Bitcoin-only firmware integration #658

cy-utkarshM · 2025-06-16T06:38:43Z

Added base features
Refactored firmware layout
Backed up intermediate working states

muzaffarbhat07 · 2025-06-16T14:24:30Z

resolve conflicts and fix ci

muzaffarbhat07 · 2025-06-24T09:05:41Z

apps/btc_family/btc_pub_key.c

  memcpy(data.params,
         request->initiate.wallet_id,
         sizeof(request->initiate.wallet_id));
+#ifndef BTC_ONLY_BUILD


Move the above defined variables(for exchange app function call) also inside the if block

muzaffarbhat07 · 2025-06-24T09:08:03Z

apps/btc_family/btc_pub_key.c

  memzero(seed, sizeof(seed));

  if (sign_address) {
+    #ifndef BTC_ONLY_BUILD


Keep the whole if (sign_address) block inside the #ifndef BTC_ONLY_BUILD block. Also, keep the sign_address variable declaration statement in the #ifndef BTC_ONLY_BUILD

muzaffarbhat07 · 2025-06-24T09:09:54Z

apps/btc_family/btc_txn.c

    }

    if (use_signature_verification) {
+      #ifndef BTC_ONLY_BUILD


Move all code related to exchange app inside the #ifndef BTC_ONLY_BUILD block. Be it variable(global or local) declarations or if conditions or function calls.

Removed static bool use_signature_verification = false; from the global/static variables section.

Added bool use_signature_verification = false; inside the #ifndef BTC_ONLY_BUILD block within validate_request_data. This makes use_signature_verification a local variable to validate_request_data when BTC_ONLY_BUILD is not defined.

Added bool use_signature_verification = false; inside the #ifndef BTC_ONLY_BUILD block within get_user_verification. This makes use_signature_verification a local variable to get_user_verification when BTC_ONLY_BUILD is not defined. I also kept your comment explaining the current state of this variable's usage.

Why is static bool use_signature_verification = false; removed from the global/static variables section and added as local variable? This breaks exchange flow.

I've pushed a fix that corrects this. use_signature_verification is now a static variable again at the file level to preserve its state across function calls, but the entire declaration is properly wrapped within the #ifndef BTC_ONLY_BUILD block.

muzaffarbhat07 · 2025-06-24T09:10:27Z

common/coin_support/coin_specific_data.c

+//       free(meta_data_arr[i].data_struct.coin_data);
+//     }
+//   }
+// }


Why is this code commented?

this code was never used, after talking to Pulkit I removed it.

Yes, but we can also just guard it.

Okay then I will guard it then!

muzaffarbhat07 · 2025-06-24T09:14:29Z

common/core/core_flow_init.c

  registry_add_app(get_ltc_app_desc());
  registry_add_app(get_doge_app_desc());
  registry_add_app(get_dash_app_desc());
+  registry_add_app(get_inheritance_app_desc());


inheritance app is added twice

muzaffarbhat07 · 2025-06-27T06:41:43Z

.github/workflows/build.yml

          content_type=$(file -b --mime-type Main-Release-outputs/Cypherock-Main.bin)
          curl   -X POST   -H "Content-Type: ${content_type}"   -H "Accept: application/vnd.github+json"   -H "Authorization: Bearer ${auth_token}"  -H "X-GitHub-Api-Version: 2022-11-28"   ${upload_url}?name=Cypherock-Main.bin  --data-binary @Main-Release-outputs/Cypherock-Main.bin
-          curl   -X POST   -H "Content-Type: ${content_type}"   -H "Accept: application/vnd.github+json"   -H "Authorization: Bearer ${auth_token}"  -H "X-GitHub-Api-Version: 2022-11-28"   ${upload_url}?name=version.txt  --data-binary @version.txt
+          curl   -X POST   -H "Content-Type: ${content_type}"   -H "Accept: application/vnd.github+json"   -H "Authorization: Bearer ${auth_token}"  -H "X-GitHub-Api-Version: 2022-11-28"   ${upload_url}?name=version.txt  --data-binary @version.txt


Upload btc only firmware to github also. Also generate its hash. Take reference from odix pr

muzaffarbhat07 · 2025-06-27T06:44:00Z

CMakeLists.txt

 OPTION(DEV_SWITCH "Additional features/logs to aid developers" OFF)
 OPTION(UNIT_TESTS_SWITCH "Compile build for main firmware or unit tests" OFF)
+OPTION(BTC_ONLY "Build firmware for Bitcoin only" OFF)



In case of btc only, append -btc to project name. Take reference from odix pr

muzaffarbhat07 · 2025-06-28T15:00:00Z

utilities/proto/generate-protob.sh

+        "${PROTO_COMMON_SRC}/manager"
+        "${PROTO_COMMON_SRC}/btc"
+        "${PROTO_COMMON_SRC}/inheritance"
+    )


Top level common proto files(like core.proto, error.proto) are missing in btc only

muzaffarbhat07

Can you explain the need to change the variable name EXECUTABLE to PROJECT

cy-utkarshM · 2025-08-17T23:41:32Z

Can you explain the need to change the variable name EXECUTABLE to PROJECT

The PROJECT_NAME variable already comes from the top-level CMakeLists.txt, and it is guaranteed to be the correct project identifier (e.g., Cypherock-Main-btc).
Creating a new variable (EXECUTABLE) that just wraps ${PROJECT_NAME}.elf was redundant.

This reverts commit 4b242d2.

This reverts commit b92ed97.

cy-utkarshM force-pushed the feat/test_btc branch from 35f10d2 to 853a3c4 Compare June 23, 2025 20:32

fix: Resolve merge conflict and exchange app issue

8004cf4

cy-utkarshM force-pushed the feat/test_btc branch from 853a3c4 to 8004cf4 Compare June 24, 2025 07:49

muzaffarbhat07 requested changes Jun 24, 2025

View reviewed changes

cy-utkarshM force-pushed the feat/test_btc branch 3 times, most recently from a505414 to a2fe260 Compare June 25, 2025 07:39

fix: Minor updates as per pr review

6683767

cy-utkarshM force-pushed the feat/test_btc branch from d736a97 to 6683767 Compare June 25, 2025 07:47

pro-utkarshM added 2 commits June 25, 2025 13:26

style: Apply code formatting to match ci guidelines

de5cef0

fix: Minor updates as per pr review

5ec4208

cy-utkarshM force-pushed the feat/test_btc branch 2 times, most recently from 47379d7 to ad7911c Compare June 27, 2025 05:57

chore: Update gh actions workflows

54bf3b4

cy-utkarshM force-pushed the feat/test_btc branch from ad7911c to 54bf3b4 Compare June 27, 2025 06:17

muzaffarbhat07 requested changes Jun 27, 2025

View reviewed changes

pro-utkarshM added 2 commits June 27, 2025 16:46

feat: Updated gh build worklow to build btc only app

7859ca4

fix: Correctly generate protos for btc_only builds

07e4f49

muzaffarbhat07 requested changes Jun 28, 2025

View reviewed changes

pro-utkarshM added 4 commits July 2, 2025 18:12

fix: Include top-level protos in btc-only build

f7e1888

fix: Include top-level protos in btc-only build

e121db4

feat: Changing versioning

b92ed97

feat: Changing versioning

4b242d2

muzaffarbhat07 requested changes Aug 14, 2025

View reviewed changes

cy-utkarshM changed the title ~~Initial Bitcoin-only firmware integration:~~ Bitcoin-only firmware integration Aug 17, 2025

Merge branch 'develop' into feat/test_btc

ba440cf

muzaffarbhat07 changed the base branch from develop to feat/btc-only/base September 3, 2025 15:17

revert: Changing versioning

d368904

This reverts commit 4b242d2.

revert: Changing versioning

e171b0c

This reverts commit b92ed97.

muzaffarbhat07 force-pushed the feat/test_btc branch from bf34ef8 to e171b0c Compare September 4, 2025 07:47

fix: Build issue

3fcfbfe

muzaffarbhat07 approved these changes Sep 4, 2025

View reviewed changes

muzaffarbhat07 merged commit c7e6786 into feat/btc-only/base Sep 4, 2025
6 checks passed

muzaffarbhat07 deleted the feat/test_btc branch September 4, 2025 09:02

Bitcoin-only firmware integration #658

Bitcoin-only firmware integration #658

Uh oh!

Conversation

cy-utkarshM commented Jun 16, 2025

Uh oh!

muzaffarbhat07 commented Jun 16, 2025

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!

muzaffarbhat07 Jun 25, 2025 • 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!

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!

muzaffarbhat07 Jun 27, 2025 • 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!

muzaffarbhat07 Jun 27, 2025 • 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!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

muzaffarbhat07 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

cy-utkarshM commented Aug 17, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

muzaffarbhat07 Jun 25, 2025 •

edited

Loading

muzaffarbhat07 Jun 27, 2025 •

edited

Loading

muzaffarbhat07 Jun 27, 2025 •

edited

Loading