remove shutdown notification from downstream disconnect

[Shourya742]

closes: #1426

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 18.40%. Comparing base (1fe2395) to head (300ad13).
Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1427      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   17.95%   18.40%   +0.44%     
==========================================
  Files         167      156      -11     
  Lines       11936    10945     -991     
==========================================
- Hits         2143     2014     -129     
+ Misses       9793     8931     -862     

Flag	Coverage Δ
binary_codec_sv2-coverage	0.00% <ø> (ø)
binary_serde_sv2-coverage	3.40% <ø> (ø)
binary_sv2-coverage	5.11% <ø> (ø)
bip32_derivation-coverage	0.00% <ø> (ø)
buffer_sv2-coverage	25.02% <ø> (ø)
codec_sv2-coverage	0.01% <ø> (ø)
common_messages_sv2-coverage	0.12% <ø> (ø)
const_sv2-coverage	0.00% <ø> (ø)
error_handling-coverage	0.00% <ø> (ø)
framing_sv2-coverage	0.27% <ø> (ø)
jd_client-coverage	0.38% <ø> (ø)
jd_server-coverage	7.79% <ø> (ø)
job_declaration_sv2-coverage	0.00% <ø> (ø)
key-utils-coverage	2.39% <ø> (ø)
mining-coverage	2.34% <ø> (+0.01%)	⬆️
mining_device-coverage	0.00% <ø> (ø)
mining_proxy_sv2-coverage	0.70% <ø> (ø)
noise_sv2-coverage	4.25% <ø> (ø)
pool_sv2-coverage	2.04% <ø> (ø)
protocols	23.86% <ø> (ø)
roles	3.46% <ø> (-2.38%)	⬇️
roles_logic_sv2-coverage	8.70% <ø> (ø)
sv2_ffi-coverage	0.00% <ø> (ø)
template_distribution_sv2-coverage	0.00% <ø> (ø)
translator_sv2-coverage	?
utils	25.13% <ø> (ø)
v1-coverage	2.31% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[GitGab19]

tACK

[plebhash]

the following MG tests are failing in a deterministic way:

• pool-sri-test-close-channel
• translation-proxy-broke-pool

interestingly, the second one already has an (supposedly equivalent, but apparently not) Integration Test on #1415

I cherry-picked 442edc758a1145418991b4acf4cc2f36a7c7a83a into this branch and the Integration Test does pass (which indicates that it's not 100% equivalent)

[Shourya742]

the following MG tests are failing in a deterministic way:

• pool-sri-test-close-channel
• translation-proxy-broke-pool

interestingly, the second one already has an (supposedly equivalent, but apparently not) Integration Test on #1415

I cherry-picked 442edc758a1145418991b4acf4cc2f36a7c7a83a into this branch and the Integration Test does pass (which indicates that it's not 100% equivalent)

they are passing now...

[pavlenex]

Hey @Shourya742, your PR cannot be rebased due to conflicts. Could you resolve them, please?

[Shourya742]

Hey @Shourya742, your PR cannot be rebased due to conflicts. Could you resolve them, please?

Rebasing, is this Pav or ready-to-be-merged feature.

[plebhash]

Hey @Shourya742, your PR cannot be rebased due to conflicts. Could you resolve them, please?

Rebasing, is this Pav or ready-to-be-merged feature.

haha I'm also curious!

but we do have a failed workflow here: https://github.com/stratum-mining/stratum/actions/runs/13084331649/job/36513393806#step:4:119

[plebhash]

it's just Pav's bot:

stratum/.github/workflows/auto-rebase.yaml

Lines 57 to 58 in 1ee8977

	# Post a comment on the PR to notify the author about the conflict
	gh pr comment $pr_number --body "Hey @$PR_AUTHOR_NAME, your PR cannot be rebased due to conflicts. Could you resolve them, please?"

[plebhash]

in honor to @GitGab19