Don't ban remote peer when ckb_vm received Ctrl-C signal when processing chunk_tx

[eval-exec]

What problem does this PR solve?

Issue Number: close #4701

Related changes

• let ckb_vm::Error::External("stopped") return ErrorKind::Internal instead of ErrorKind::Script

return ErrorKind::Internal then ckb will not think the tx is malformled:

ckb/util/types/src/core/tx_pool.rs

Lines 68 to 84 in 8cb49e4

	fn is_malformed_from_verification(error: &Error) -> bool {
	match error.kind() {
	ErrorKind::Transaction => error
	.downcast_ref::<TransactionError>()
	.expect("error kind checked")
	.is_malformed_tx(),
	ErrorKind::Script => true,
	ErrorKind::Internal => {
	error
	.downcast_ref::<InternalError>()
	.expect("error kind checked")
	.kind()
	== InternalErrorKind::CapacityOverflow
	}
	_ => false,
	}
	}

Check List

Tests

• Unit test
• Integration test
• Manual test (add detailed scripts or steps below)
• No code ci-runs-only: [ quick_checks,linters ]

Side effects

• None

Release note

Title Only: Include only the PR title in the release note.

[chenyukang]

seems not a proper PR title.

[eval-exec]

seems not a proper PR title.

Got it, I'll update the title. Any suggestions?

[eval-exec]

Need to create a new Error to handle this case:InternalErrorKind::Interrupts

[chenyukang]

what's other reason may make VM scheduler return VMInternalError::External?

[eval-exec]

script/src/syscalls/debugger.rs
48:            .map_err(|e| VMError::External(format!("String from buffer {e:?}")))?;
script/src/syscalls/mod.rs
126:            _ => Err(Error::External(format!("CellField parse_from_u64 {i}"))),
148:            _ => Err(Error::External(format!("HeaderField parse_from_u64 {i}"))),
164:            _ => Err(Error::External(format!("InputField parse_from_u64 {i}"))),
197:            _ => Err(Error::External(format!("SourceEntry parse_from_u64 {i}"))),
243:            _ => Err(Error::External(format!("Place parse_from_u64 {i}"))),

[chenyukang]

how can we add a unit test for this, it seems hard but worth having a try.

[eval-exec]

how can we add a unit test for this, it seems hard but worth having a try.

Sure, I will add unit test.