Refactors logging for startup accounts verification

[brooksprumo]

Problem

Startup accounts verification does logging in multiple places, and is also incomplete and inconsistent.

• In verify_snapshot_bank(), we log that verification is happening in the background, even if it actually runs in the foreground.
• If we do end up doing the verification in the foreground, there's no additional logging indicating as such
• The logging for the background verification is inconsistent with other startup logging, esp w.r.t. the start and stop text plus the duration.

Summary of Changes

Unifies all the startup verification logging into verify_accounts_hash().

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 83.0%. Comparing base (3c32519) to head (69f5bb0).
⚠️ Report is 2669 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##           master    #7327     +/-   ##
=========================================
- Coverage    83.0%    83.0%   -0.1%     
=========================================
  Files         800      800             
  Lines      362384   362384             
=========================================
- Hits       300861   300820     -41     
- Misses      61523    61564     +41     

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[roryharr]

Is this comment redundant or incorrect? Seems useful to know that it was skipped.

[brooksprumo]

Before we had it because we always logged:

                info!("Verifying accounts...");

a few lines up, so it was needed to be clear. Now, we only log what we're actually doing. So the absence of any "verifying accounts" logs indicates it was skipped. Wdyt?

[roryharr]

I find it can still be useful to know it was skipped. For example when searching through logs of multiple startup cycles trying to figure out why one was failing and another passed.

[brooksprumo]

Done. I've put the "skipped" log back in 69f5bb0.

[roryharr]

Just for consistency what about let total_time = start.elapsed();

I would guess logging the timing is not useful in this case?

[brooksprumo]

I could add a variable, but it seemed unnecessary. We do log the timing here.

[roryharr]

I mean in the metrics as above.

[brooksprumo]

Verifying accounts in the foreground will always be for testing/debugging usages, so I don't think we need to submit metrics in this case.

[roryharr]

Makes sense!