Track HTLCs in rfq policies

[GeorgeTsagk]

Description

This PR adds a simple in-memory tracking of accepted htlcs in the RFQ policy level. HTLCs that passed the policy check are now tracked by each policy, possibly affecting future policy check outcomes (depends on individual policy's implementation)

[coveralls]

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 12185650868

Details

• 0 of 141 (0.0%) changed or added relevant lines in 4 files are covered.
• 28 unchanged lines in 5 files lost coverage.
• Overall coverage decreased (-0.1%) to 40.737%

---

Changes Missing Coverage	Covered Lines	Changed/Added Lines	%
rfq/manager.go	0	1	0.0%
tapcfg/server.go	0	1	0.0%
chain_bridge.go	0	4	0.0%
rfq/order.go	0	135	0.0%

Files with Coverage Reduction	New Missed Lines	%
internal/test/helpers.go	2	86.95%
asset/mock.go	3	92.18%
commitment/tap.go	4	83.91%
asset/asset.go	4	81.26%
tappsbt/mock.go	15	85.2%

Totals
Change from base Build 12180566227:	-0.1%
Covered Lines:	25788
Relevant Lines:	63304

---

💛 - Coveralls

[guggero]

As mentioned offline, we also need to track and take into account canceled HTLCs from previous attempts.
These can be subscribed to with https://lightning.engineering/api-docs/api/lnd/router/subscribe-htlc-events.

[ffranr]

I'm up-to-date with this PR. I agree with Oli's comments.

[GeorgeTsagk]

@ffranr @guggero
I updated the PR to now include an htlc event subscription.
We now maintain a map of htlc circuit keys to rfq policy
When an htlc forward is failed we retrieve the htlc circuit key, fetch the corresponding policy and have it to stop tracking the htlc.

[GeorgeTsagk]

Will also see how to add some coverage here

[ffranr]

Will also see how to add some coverage here

@GeorgeTsagk should i review this before you add coverage or wait for that extra changes?

[GeorgeTsagk]

Will also see how to add some coverage here

@GeorgeTsagk should i review this before you add coverage or wait for that extra changes?

You can review
Coverage will soon be added in the LitD itests

[GeorgeTsagk]

Rebased on #1224 to include manual rfq scid functionality in SendPayment

[guggero]

Looks pretty good. Left a couple of comments to simplify the code and make it more concurrency safe.

[ffranr]

I'm up to date on this. Will wait for the revised commits based on Oli's review.

[GeorgeTsagk]

Thank you @ffranr @guggero

I just pushed the commits that address your feedback, also rebased on latest #1224

[guggero]

Almost there! Concurrency is very tricky, so a couple of more comments on the mutexes.

[guggero]

LGTM pending the dependent PR.

[GeorgeTsagk]

Rebased on main after merging dependent PR, PTAL

Updated LitD itests to point to 1923ca2

[guggero]

LGTM 🎉

[ffranr]

I'm not sure if we need

htlcToPolicy lnutils.SyncMap[models.CircuitKey, Policy]

Please see review comments.

[ffranr]

Will leave merging down to @GeorgeTsagk .