linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 04/22] verification/dot2k: Make it possible to invoke dot2k without installation

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: <20250411140433.QiY-1pL2@linutronix.de>
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2025 16:04:33 +0200
From: Nam Cao <namcao@...utronix.de>
To: Gabriele Monaco <gmonaco@...hat.com>
Cc: john.ogness@...utronix.de, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/22] verification/dot2k: Make it possible to invoke
 dot2k without installation

On Fri, Apr 11, 2025 at 11:23:25AM +0200, Gabriele Monaco wrote:
> On Fri, 2025-04-11 at 09:37 +0200, Nam Cao wrote:
> > Without installation, dot2k doesn't work:
> >
> > namcao@...low:~/linux/tools/verification$ python3 ./dot2/dot2k
> > Traceback (most recent call last):
> >   File "/home/namcao/linux/tools/verification/./dot2/dot2k", line 12,
> > in <module>
> >     from dot2.dot2k import dot2k
> > ModuleNotFoundError: No module named 'dot2'
> > 
> > Installing dot2k to the system is not always desirable. Sometimes it
> > is not
> > even possible (e.g. no root permission).
> > 
> > Restructure the files to make it work without installing.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Nam Cao <namcao@...utronix.de>
> 
> Mmh, the workflow
> 
> pushd tools/verification
> ...
> popd
>
> 
> has always been working in my case, but probably that's because I have
> PYTHONPATH="." , not sure how much of a good practice that is.

Ahh, PYTHONPATH is the trick. But that shouldn't be required. The scripts
should work out of the box without any environment setup.

> Anyway, since you're already moving things around in 9/22
> ("verification/dot2k: Prepare the frontend for LTL inclusion"), does it
> make sense to keep the commits separated? Or you could directly move to
> rvgen here and just add the ltl related changes in the later commit.

Yes, it makes sense to move them to rvgen here.

> Also, after your changes on my system, I can run the script from the
> kernel directory too, which is much better than having to cd to
> tools/verification .
> If that's something portable, I'd change the default definition of
> monitor_templates_dir and allow the user to run the script only from
> the kernel root.
> 
> What do you think?

I actually prefer running the script from tools/verification. We can allow
user to run from anywhere, with something like:

 class dot2k(Monitor, Dot2c):
-    monitor_templates_dir = "rvgen/templates/dot2k"
+    monitor_templates_dir = os.path.join(os.path.dirname(__file__), "../../rvgen/templates/dot2k")

Best regards,
Nam