linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 12/22] verification/rvgen: Restructure the classes to prepare for LTL inclusion

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: <20250527092734.BgoHvn6n@linutronix.de>
Date: Tue, 27 May 2025 11:27:48 +0200
From: Nam Cao <namcao@...utronix.de>
To: Gabriele Monaco <gmonaco@...hat.com>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	john.ogness@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 12/22] verification/rvgen: Restructure the classes to
 prepare for LTL inclusion

On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 11:15:21AM +0200, Gabriele Monaco wrote:
> 
> 
> On Mon, 2025-05-19 at 12:27 +0200, Nam Cao wrote:
> > Both container generation and DA monitor generation is implemented in
> > the
> > class dot2k. That requires some ugly "if is_container ... else ...".
> > If
> > linear temporal logic support is added at the current state, the "if
> > else"
> > chain is longer and uglier.
> > 
> > Furthermore, container generation is irrevelant to .dot files. It is
> > therefore illogical to be implemented in class "dot2k".
> > 
> > Clean it up, restructure the dot2k class into the following class
> > hierarchy:
> > 
> >          (RVGenerator)
> >               /\
> >              /  \
> >             /    \
> >            /      \
> >           /        \
> >     (Container)  (Monitor)
> >                     /\
> >                    /  \
> >                   /    \
> >                  /      \
> >               (dot2k)  [ltl2k] <- intended
> > 
> > This allows a simple and clean integration of LTL.
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Gabriele Monaco <gmonaco@...hat.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Nam Cao <namcao@...utronix.de>
> > ---
> 
> Steve,
> 
> since this series is quite /meaty/ and it seems the later parts require
> a bit more discussion about tracepoints, could we start merging until
> here (1-12/22)?
> I'd be tempted merging also 13 (actual LTL introduction) but perhaps
> keeping it together with the LTL monitors is cleaner.

The x86 patches have been merged through tip tree. My plan is sending the
next version without the merged x86 patches, and without the arm64 patch -
it can be sent separately. Then the whole series can be applied.

I will do it after the merge window.

Best regards,
Nam