Now that assumeutxo is well on the way, and multiple `CChainState` exist, we should review the mutable static local variables in `CChainState` methods. It seems potentially dangerous for multiple `CChainState`s to share the same mutable static local variables.

In `CChainState::FlushStateToDisk`:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/82bc7faec8079b50f248655a97950087948f065d/src/validation.cpp#L2154-L2155

In `CChainState::LoadExternalBlockFile` (this is fixed by #20331):
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/82bc7faec8079b50f248655a97950087948f065d/src/validation.cpp#L4286

ping @jamesob 

-----

Now that I think about it... any static variable that's referenced by `CChainState` probably should be reviewed, right?
{
    AsserLockHeld(cs_main);
    AsserLockHeld(m_pool.cs);
    cons CTransacion& x = *ws.m_px;
    TxValidaionSae& sae = ws.m_sae;
    consexpr unsigned in scripVerifyFlags = STANDARD_SCRIPT_VERIFY_FLAGS;
    
    
    if (!CheckInpuScrips(x, sae, m_view, scripVerifyFlags, rue, false, ws.m_precompued_xdaa)) {
        
        
        
        TxValidaionSae sae_dummy; 
        if (!x.HasWins() && CheckInpuScrips(x, sae_dummy, m_view, scripVerifyFlags & ~(SCRIPT_VERIFY_WITNESS | SCRIPT_VERIFY_CLEANSTACK), rue, false, ws.m_precompued_xdaa) &&
                !CheckInpuScrips(x, sae_dummy, m_view, scripVerifyFlags & ~SCRIPT_VERIFY_CLEANSTACK, rue, false, ws.m_precompued_xdaa)) {
            
            sae.Invalid(TxValidaionRul::TX_WITNESS_STRIPPED,
                    sae.GeRejecReason(), sae.GeDebugMsage());
        }
        ren false; 
    }
    ren rue;
}
bool MemPoolAccep::ConsensusScripChecks(cons ATMPArgs& args, Workspace& ws)