…etbase.cpp

78c8f4f refactor: Replace RecursiveMutex with Mutex in netbase.cpp (Hennadii Stepanov)

Pull request description:

  The functions that could lock this mutex, i.e., `{S,G}etProxy()`, `{S,G}etNameProxy()`, `HaveNameProxy()`, `IsProxy()`, do not call itself recursively, and do not call each other either directly or indirectly. Therefore, the `g_proxyinfo_mutex` could be a non-recursive mutex.

  Related to bitcoin#19180.

ACKs for top commit:
  MarcoFalke:
    ACK 78c8f4f , reviewed with the -W git option 👮
  vasild:
    ACK 78c8f4f verified that recursion does not happen

Tree-SHA512: fc077fb371f38af5d05f1383c6bebf9926167c257892936fefd2d4fe6f679ca40124d25099e09f645d8ec266df222f96c5d0f9fd39eddcad15cbde0b427bc205

….cpp

cc5c0d2 refactor: Fix formatting of timedata.cpp (Hennadii Stepanov)
c2410ce refactor: Replace RecursiveMutex with Mutex in timedata.cpp (Hennadii Stepanov)

Pull request description:

  Only `GetTimeOffset()` and `AddTimeData()` functions lock this mutex. They do not call itself recursively, and do not call each other either directly or indirectly. Therefore, the `g_timeoffset_mutex` could be a non-recursive mutex.

  Related to #19180.

ACKs for top commit:
  MarcoFalke:
    ACK cc5c0d2 , checked the second commit with  --word-diff-regex=. --ignore-all-space -U0 🦉
  vasild:
    ACK cc5c0d2 verified that recursion is not happening

Tree-SHA512: 38f6df689374d4a1a0e9aedb3ed5e885d8285c4da6b75f9bc84ae036936a159ef8276462db33b4f4dd5c71c6312fa9b45380f7a5726959665bc71dc39031be88

….cpp

bacbfb6 refactor: Replace RecursiveMutex with Mutex in warnings.cpp (Hennadii Stepanov)

Pull request description:

  The functions that could lock this mutex, i.e., `SetMiscWarning()`, `{S,G}etfLargeWorkForkFound()`, `SetfLargeWorkInvalidChainFound()`, `GetWarnings()`, do not call itself recursively, and do not call each other either directly or indirectly. Therefore, the `g_warnings_mutex` could be a non-recursive mutex.

  Related to #19180.

ACKs for top commit:
  laanwj:
    Code review ACK bacbfb6
  MarcoFalke:
    ACK bacbfb6 , reviewed with -W  --word-diff-regex=. 🎿

Tree-SHA512: cc06d3d30e4051115d176dcfbd496c8562a70087369bccde756c1de42d7dc3f415ef20d3d69ad2599c1d0cd4228d604d7564adc17beac7b6ff92b924b8c20d54

Summary:
> Step by step, going to replace all of the RecursiveMutex instances with the Mutex ones throughout the code base :)
>
> Not sure if it is possible in all cases though...
>
> This one is a low-hanging fruit.

This is a backport of [[bitcoin/bitcoin#19180 | core#19180]]

Test Plan: `ninja all check-all`

Reviewers: #bitcoin_abc, majcosta

Reviewed By: #bitcoin_abc, majcosta

Differential Revision: https://reviews.bitcoinabc.org/D9279

…arnings.cpp

bacbfb6 refactor: Replace RecursiveMutex with Mutex in warnings.cpp (Hennadii Stepanov)

Pull request description:

  The functions that could lock this mutex, i.e., `SetMiscWarning()`, `{S,G}etfLargeWorkForkFound()`, `SetfLargeWorkInvalidChainFound()`, `GetWarnings()`, do not call itself recursively, and do not call each other either directly or indirectly. Therefore, the `g_warnings_mutex` could be a non-recursive mutex.

  Related to bitcoin#19180.

ACKs for top commit:
  laanwj:
    Code review ACK bacbfb6
  MarcoFalke:
    ACK bacbfb6 , reviewed with -W  --word-diff-regex=. 🎿

Tree-SHA512: cc06d3d30e4051115d176dcfbd496c8562a70087369bccde756c1de42d7dc3f415ef20d3d69ad2599c1d0cd4228d604d7564adc17beac7b6ff92b924b8c20d54