Re: [PATCH V8 01/16] rv: Add Runtime Verification (RV) interface

[Tao Zhou]

On Wed, Jul 27, 2022 at 07:11:29PM +0200, Daniel Bristot de Oliveira wrote:

> +static ssize_t enabled_monitors_write(struct file *filp, const char __user *user_buf,
> +				      size_t count, loff_t *ppos)
> +{
> +	char buff[MAX_RV_MONITOR_NAME_SIZE + 2];

If I am not wrong, but "joke" from myself is very possible.

char buff[MAX_RV_MONITOR_NAME_SIZE + 1];

+1 is for one '\0'. The above have '\0\0'. One '\0' is enough.

> +	struct rv_monitor_def *mdef;
> +	int retval = -EINVAL;
> +	bool enable = true;
> +	char *ptr = buff;
> +	int len;
> +
> +	if (count < 1 || count > MAX_RV_MONITOR_NAME_SIZE + 1)

Use `count > MAX_RV_MONITOR_NAME_SIZE` check the up bound.

> +		return -EINVAL;
> +
> +	memset(buff, 0, sizeof(buff));
> +
> +	retval = simple_write_to_buffer(buff, sizeof(buff) - 1, ppos, user_buf, count);

simple_write_to_buffer(buff, sizeof(buff), ppos, user_buf, count)

> +	if (retval < 0)
> +		return -EFAULT;
> +
> +	ptr = strim(buff);

I see isspace() that the mask `_S` is for space/lf/tab, but I do
not know if the lf stands for being able to strim the '\n'. If so
there is no problem here. if use buffer is "wip\n\n", we should
treat it the same as "wip", no?

> +/*
> + * Monitoring on global switcher!
> + */
> +static bool __read_mostly monitoring_on;
> +
> +/**
> + * rv_monitoring_on - checks if monitoring is on
> + *
> + * Returns 1 if on, 0 otherwise.
> + */
> +bool rv_monitoring_on(void)
> +{
> +	/* Ensures that concurrent monitors read consistent monitoring_on */
> +	smp_rmb();

Here invalidate message will be processed and send the read message
and get updated monitoring_on from another cpu. I feel confused
because there is half part of the memory barrier pair. But this half
way from my mind in this case has effect. This is the first time that
I know it can be synced this way. Let me guess this way.

> +	return READ_ONCE(monitoring_on);
> +}

I checked the load of monitoring_on, there are three cases:
file read     file write(call load self)     event handler check
Store of monitoring_on: one in init rv, another is file write after
call load self.
The file is created before the turn_monitoring_on() called in 
rv_init_interface(). So there may be existing the store race
at the init part. Just after the monitoring_on file created,
and other cpus do monitoring_on flips operations and at the
same time the init code do turn_monitor_on(). Or the enabled
file be writen to enable/disable monitors happening before
monitoring_on is set in init rv. That means the event handler
can be start before the monitoring_on is turned on in init rv.
The turn_monitoring_on() in rv_init_interface() is not a switcher
because it may has been beated by file flips operations before.

> +
> +/*
> + * monitoring_on general switcher.
> + */
> +static ssize_t monitoring_on_read_data(struct file *filp, char __user *user_buf,
> +				       size_t count, loff_t *ppos)
> +{
> +	const char *buff;
> +
> +	buff = rv_monitoring_on() ? "1\n" : "0\n";

I hope this will not be inlined..

> +
> +	return simple_read_from_buffer(user_buf, count, ppos, buff, strlen(buff) + 1);
> +}
> +static void destroy_monitor_dir(struct rv_monitor_def *mdef)
> +{
> +	reactor_cleanup_monitor(mdef);

reactor_cleanup_monitor() appear in this patch but not defined.

> +	rv_remove(mdef->root_d);
> +}
> +struct dentry *get_monitors_root(void);
> +int init_rv_monitors(struct dentry *root_dir);

init_rv_monitors() definition do not appear in this patch. Thanks,