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: <20250825095554.NrT5tNY8@linutronix.de>
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2025 11:55:54 +0200
From: Nam Cao <namcao@...utronix.de>
To: Gabriele Monaco <gmonaco@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Tomas Glozar <tglozar@...hat.com>, Juri Lelli <jlelli@...hat.com>,
	Clark Williams <williams@...hat.com>,
	John Kacur <jkacur@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 10/17] verification/rvgen: Add support for Hybrid
 Automata

On Thu, Aug 14, 2025 at 05:08:02PM +0200, Gabriele Monaco wrote:
>                  for i in event.split("\\n"):
> +                    if ";" in i:
> +                        # if the event contains a constraint (hybrid automata),
> +                        # it will be separated by a ";":
> +                        # "sched_switch;x<1000;reset(x)"
> +                        line = i.split(";")
> +                        i = line.pop(0)
> +                        if len(line) > 2:
> +                            raise ValueError("Only 1 constraint and 1 reset are supported")
> +                        envs += self.__extract_env_var(line)
>                      events.append(i)

How about we get rid of the (if ";"), and just split it:

for i in event.split("\\n"):
    # if the event contains a constraint (hybrid automata),
    # it will be separated by a ";":
    # "sched_switch;x<1000;reset(x)"
    line = i.split(";")
    events.append(line.pop(0))
    if len(line) > 2:
            raise ValueError("Only 1 constraint and 1 reset are supported")
        envs += self.__extract_env_var(line)

> +            else:
> +                # state labels have the format:
> +                # "enable_fired" [label = "enable_fired\ncondition"];
> +                #  ----- label is here -----^^^^^
> +                # label and node name must be the same, condition is optional
> +                state = self.__dot_lines[cursor].split("label")[1].split('"')[1]

I know I complained about regex last week, but for this case I think regex
is more suitable:

state = re.findall(r'".*?" \[label = "([^"]*)"\]', self.__dot_lines[cursor])[0]

> +                if "\\n" in state:
> +                    line = state.split("\\n")
> +                    line.pop(0)
> +                    if len(line) > 1:
> +                        raise ValueError("Only 1 constraint is supported in the state")
> +                    envs += self.__extract_env_var([line[0].replace(" ", "")])

Same as above, I think we can just split without the if check.

>              cursor += 1
>  
> -        return sorted(set(events))
> -
> -    def __create_matrix(self):
> +        return sorted(set(events)), sorted(set(envs))
> +
> +    def _split_constraint_expr(self, constr: list[str]) -> Iterator[tuple[str,
> +                                                                          str | None]]:
> +        """
> +        Get a list of strings of the type constr1 && constr2 and returns a list of
> +        constraints and separators: [[constr1,"&&"],[constr2,None]]
> +        """
> +        exprs = []
> +        seps = []
> +        for c in constr:
> +            while "&&" in c or "||" in c:
> +                a = c.find("&&")
> +                o = c.find("||")
> +                pos = a if o < 0 or 0 < a < o else o
> +                exprs.append(c[:pos].replace(" ", ""))
> +                seps.append(c[pos:pos+2].replace(" ", ""))
> +                c = c[pos+2:].replace(" ", "")
> +            exprs.append(c)
> +            seps.append(None)
> +        return zip(exprs, seps)

If && and || are the only things you intend to support, then this is
probably okay. But if the syntax will ever be extended (e.g. brackets),
this becomes unreadable really fast.

Perhaps a "real" parser which converts the input string into abstract
syntax tree is something worth considering.

> +    def is_event_constraint(self, key: tuple[int, int] | int) -> bool:
> +        """
> +        Given the key in self.constraints return true if it is an event
> +        constraint, false if it is a state constraint
> +        """
> +        return isinstance(key, tuple)

I don't love this. A few years from now, someone could change state
constraint to be a tuple, or change event contraint to not be tuple, and
things break in confusing ways.

Perhaps an explicit variable to store contraint type information instead?

> -    def __get_enum_states_content(self):
> +    def __get_enum_states_content(self) -> list[str]:
>          buff = []
>          buff.append("\t%s%s = 0," % (self.initial_state, self.enum_suffix))
>          for state in self.states:
> @@ -36,7 +37,7 @@ class Dot2c(Automata):
>  
>          return buff
>  
> -    def format_states_enum(self):
> +    def format_states_enum(self) -> list[str]:
>          buff = []
>          buff.append("enum %s {" % self.enum_states_def)
>          buff += self.__get_enum_states_content()
> @@ -58,7 +59,7 @@ class Dot2c(Automata):
>  
>          return buff
>  
> -    def format_events_enum(self):
> +    def format_events_enum(self) -> list[str]:

These changes should be in your type annotation patch?

>          buff = []
>          buff.append("enum %s {" % self.enum_events_def)
>          buff += self.__get_enum_events_content()
> @@ -66,7 +67,43 @@ class Dot2c(Automata):
>  
>          return buff
>  
> -    def get_minimun_type(self):
> +    def __get_non_stored_envs(self) -> list[str]:
> +        return [ e for e in self.envs if e not in self.env_stored ]
> +
> +    def __get_enum_envs_content(self) -> list[str]:
> +        buff = []
> +        first = True
> +        # We first place env variables that have a u64 storage.
> +        # Those are limited by MAX_HA_ENV_LEN, other variables
> +        # are read only and don't require a storage.
> +        unstored = self.__get_non_stored_envs()
> +        for env in list(self.env_stored) + unstored:
> +            if first:
> +                buff.append("\t%s%s = 0," % (env, self.enum_suffix))
> +                first = False
> +            else:
> +                buff.append("\t%s%s," % (env, self.enum_suffix))

The "= 0" assignment for the first enum is not required right? Perhaps you
can get rid of the 'first" thingy, and just do

for env in list(self.env_stored) + unstored:
    buff.append("\t%s%s," % (env, self.enum_suffix))

> +        match unit:
> +            case "us":
> +                value *= 1000
> +            case "ms":
> +                value *= 1000000
> +            case "s":
> +                value *= 1000000000

Since when did Python have this? Nice!

Nam

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ