[CHIA-1562] move signature validation into run_block_generator()

[arvidn]

This PR is best reviewed one commit at a time. However, the second commit contains the bulk of the changes.

Purpose:

By combining executing CLVM, parsing (and some validation of) conditions with signature validation, we do more work under a single GIL release, improving the concurrency of block validation.

This is arguably also a simplification of the code, making it a bit more robust. Instead of optionally validating signatures in two places, we now do it unconditionally in one place. (although, there is technically still the option to not validate the signatures, but we currently only use that in tests and in block creation when all we want to do is to compute the final cost of the block).

This is also a step twoards demoting get_name_puzzle_conditions() into a test-only function. It's used in many places where the signature is either not available or not set correctly. This PR replaces all production uses of this function.

Validating signatures in pre-validate

pre_validate_blocks_multiprocessing() no longer accepts the validate_signatures=False parameter. It's always validates signatures.

Since signature validation now happens in the pre-validation step, validate_block_body() no longer validates it. Which also means it doesn't need the BLSCache passed in to it.

This also means Blockchain.add_block() no longer needs to take the BLS cache. It validates the block body, but the signature validation has already happened in pre-validate.

Current Behavior:

The block signature validation is done in validate_block_body() or pre_validate_block(). In validate_block_body() we can optionally pass in the BLS cache, to save time on BLS pairings. We do this for new unfinished blocks, since they are likely to contain signatures that we've already validated in the mempool. The mempool adds pairings to the BLS cache.

Both of these functions can optionally not validate signatures. Sometimes we rely on this in tests, where we don't bother producing correct signatures, or want to save time. The validate_signature=False option is used when we receive a new FullBlock whose corresponding UnfinishedBlock we've already validated. We save time by not validating the signatures again.

New Behavior:

The block signature validation is done in run_block_generator() (and run_block_generator2(), post hard-fork). This happens along side of running the block generator and parsing the resulting conditions. An invalid signature generates a failure directly in this step.

This is always run as part of pre-validation, in thread pools.

run_block_generator() takes an optional BLS cache and signature to validate. We pass in the BLS cache only when validating UnfinishedBlocks. This is already done in main, in FullNode.add_unfinished_block(). What's new is that the resulting SpendBundleConditions now records that we've validated the conditions, and when adding the corresponding FullBlock, we just pick up the SpendBundleConditions from the unfinished block cache.

Testing Notes:

[github-actions]

This pull request has conflicts, please resolve those before we can evaluate the pull request.

[github-actions]

Conflicts have been resolved. A maintainer will review the pull request shortly.

[github-actions]

This pull request has conflicts, please resolve those before we can evaluate the pull request.

[github-actions]

Conflicts have been resolved. A maintainer will review the pull request shortly.

[arvidn]

the missing test coverage is not new

[github-actions]

File	Coverage	Missing Lines
chia/consensus/blockchain.py	60.0%	lines 699, 720
chia/consensus/multiprocess_validation.py	92.0%	lines 50, 147

Total	Missing	Coverage
94 lines	4 lines	95%

[coveralls-official]

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 11700675112

Warning: This coverage report may be inaccurate.

This pull request's base commit is no longer the HEAD commit of its target branch. This means it includes changes from outside the original pull request, including, potentially, unrelated coverage changes.

• For more information on this, see Tracking coverage changes with pull request builds.
• To avoid this issue with future PRs, see these Recommended CI Configurations.
• For a quick fix, rebase this PR at GitHub. Your next report should be accurate.

Details

• 90 of 94 (95.74%) changed or added relevant lines in 15 files are covered.
• 18 unchanged lines in 8 files lost coverage.
• Overall coverage decreased (-0.001%) to 90.903%

---

Changes Missing Coverage	Covered Lines	Changed/Added Lines	%
chia/consensus/blockchain.py	3	5	60.0%
chia/consensus/multiprocess_validation.py	23	25	92.0%

Files with Coverage Reduction	New Missed Lines	%
chia/_tests/simulation/test_simulation.py	1	96.45%
chia/daemon/client.py	1	74.1%
chia/server/server.py	1	81.84%
chia/plotters/madmax.py	1	50.6%
chia/full_node/full_node.py	1	86.28%
chia/data_layer/data_layer.py	2	86.09%
chia/server/node_discovery.py	4	80.18%
chia/daemon/server.py	7	83.28%

Totals
Change from base Build 11691476343:	-0.001%
Covered Lines:	102809
Relevant Lines:	112867

---

💛 - Coveralls