linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V5 11/16] Documentation/rv: Add deterministic automata instrumentation documentation

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YtQoqV8tMKh3fvTw@geo.homenetwork>
Date:   Sun, 17 Jul 2022 23:20:09 +0800
From:   Tao Zhou <tao.zhou@...ux.dev>
To:     Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...nel.org>
Cc:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ux-watchdog.org>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
        Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Gabriele Paoloni <gpaoloni@...hat.com>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        Clark Williams <williams@...hat.com>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-trace-devel@...r.kernel.org, Tao Zhou <tao.zhou@...ux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 11/16] Documentation/rv: Add deterministic automata
 instrumentation documentation

On Wed, Jul 13, 2022 at 11:17:27PM +0200, Daniel Bristot de Oliveira wrote:
> Add the da_monitor_instrumentation.rst. It describes the basics
> of RV monitor instrumentation.
> 
> Cc: Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ux-watchdog.org>
> Cc: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
> Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
> Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
> Cc: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
> Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
> Cc: Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
> Cc: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
> Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
> Cc: Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
> Cc: Gabriele Paoloni <gpaoloni@...hat.com>
> Cc: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>
> Cc: Clark Williams <williams@...hat.com>
> Cc: Tao Zhou <tao.zhou@...ux.dev>
> Cc: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
> Cc: linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> Cc: linux-trace-devel@...r.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...nel.org>
> ---
>  .../trace/rv/da_monitor_instrumentation.rst   | 169 ++++++++++++++++++
>  Documentation/trace/rv/index.rst              |   1 +
>  2 files changed, 170 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 Documentation/trace/rv/da_monitor_instrumentation.rst
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/trace/rv/da_monitor_instrumentation.rst b/Documentation/trace/rv/da_monitor_instrumentation.rst
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..7b83d6c7dbed
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/trace/rv/da_monitor_instrumentation.rst
> @@ -0,0 +1,169 @@
> +Deterministic Automata Instrumentation
> +========================================
> +
> +The RV monitor file created by dot2k, with the name "$MODEL_NAME.c"
> +includes a section dedicated to instrumentation.
> +
> +In the example of the wip.dot monitor created on [1], it will look like::
> +
> +  /*
> +   * This is the instrumentation part of the monitor.
> +   *
> +   * This is the section where manual work is required. Here the kernel events
> +   * are translated into model's event.
> +   *
> +   */
> +  static void handle_preempt_disable(void *data, /* XXX: fill header */)
> +  {
> +	da_handle_event_wip(preempt_disable_wip);
> +  }
> +
> +  static void handle_preempt_enable(void *data, /* XXX: fill header */)
> +  {
> +	da_handle_event_wip(preempt_enable_wip);
> +  }
> +
> +  static void handle_sched_waking(void *data, /* XXX: fill header */)
> +  {
> +	da_handle_event_wip(sched_waking_wip);
> +  }
> +
> +  static int start_wip(void)
> +  {
> +	int retval;
> +
> +	retval = da_monitor_init_wip();
> +	if (retval)
> +		return retval;
> +
> +	rv_attach_trace_probe("wip", /* XXX: tracepoint */, handle_preempt_disable);
> +	rv_attach_trace_probe("wip", /* XXX: tracepoint */, handle_preempt_enable);
> +	rv_attach_trace_probe("wip", /* XXX: tracepoint */, handle_sched_waking);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +  }
> +
> +The comment at the top of the section explains the general idea: the
> +instrumentation section translates *kernel events* into the *model's
> +event*.
> +
> +Tracing callback functions
> +-----------------------------
> +
> +The first three functions are the starting point of the callback *handler
> +functions* for each of the three events from the wip model. The developer
> +does not necessarily need to use them: they are just starting points.
> +
> +Using the example of::
> +
> + void handle_preempt_disable(void *data, /* XXX: fill header */)
> + {
> +        da_handle_event_wip(preempt_disable_wip);
> + }
> +
> +The preempt_disable event from the model connects directly to the
> +preemptirq:preempt_disable. The preemptirq:preempt_disable event
> +has the following signature, from include/trace/events/preemptirq.h::
> +
> +  TP_PROTO(unsigned long ip, unsigned long parent_ip)
> +
> +Hence, the handle_preempt_disable() function will look like::
> +
> +  void handle_preempt_disable(void *data, unsigned long ip, unsigned long parent_ip)
> +
> +In this case, the kernel event translates one to one with the automata
> +event, and indeed, no other change is required for this function.
> +
> +The next handler function, handle_preempt_enable() has the same argument
> +list from the handle_preempt_disable(). The difference is that the
> +preempt_enable event will be used to synchronize the system to the model.
> +
> +Initially, the *model* is placed in the initial state. However, the *system*
> +might or might not be in the initial state. The monitor cannot start
> +processing events until it knows that the system has reached the initial state.
> +Otherwise, the monitor and the system could be out-of-sync.
> +
> +Looking at the automata definition, it is possible to see that the system
> +and the model are expected to return to the initial state after the
> +preempt_enable execution. Hence, it can be used to synchronize the
> +system and the model at the initialization of the monitoring section.
> +
> +The initialization is informed via a special handle function, the
> +"da_handle_init_event_$(MONITOR)(event)", in this case::
> +
> +  da_handle_event_wip(preempt_disable_wip);

In this case, it is da_handle_init_event_wip(preempt_disable_wip). Thanks.