~ [ source navigation ] ~ [ diff markup ] ~ [ identifier search ] ~

TOMOYO Linux Cross Reference
Linux/Documentation/trace/rv/runtime-verification.rst

Version: ~ [ linux-6.12-rc7 ] ~ [ linux-6.11.7 ] ~ [ linux-6.10.14 ] ~ [ linux-6.9.12 ] ~ [ linux-6.8.12 ] ~ [ linux-6.7.12 ] ~ [ linux-6.6.60 ] ~ [ linux-6.5.13 ] ~ [ linux-6.4.16 ] ~ [ linux-6.3.13 ] ~ [ linux-6.2.16 ] ~ [ linux-6.1.116 ] ~ [ linux-6.0.19 ] ~ [ linux-5.19.17 ] ~ [ linux-5.18.19 ] ~ [ linux-5.17.15 ] ~ [ linux-5.16.20 ] ~ [ linux-5.15.171 ] ~ [ linux-5.14.21 ] ~ [ linux-5.13.19 ] ~ [ linux-5.12.19 ] ~ [ linux-5.11.22 ] ~ [ linux-5.10.229 ] ~ [ linux-5.9.16 ] ~ [ linux-5.8.18 ] ~ [ linux-5.7.19 ] ~ [ linux-5.6.19 ] ~ [ linux-5.5.19 ] ~ [ linux-5.4.285 ] ~ [ linux-5.3.18 ] ~ [ linux-5.2.21 ] ~ [ linux-5.1.21 ] ~ [ linux-5.0.21 ] ~ [ linux-4.20.17 ] ~ [ linux-4.19.323 ] ~ [ linux-4.18.20 ] ~ [ linux-4.17.19 ] ~ [ linux-4.16.18 ] ~ [ linux-4.15.18 ] ~ [ linux-4.14.336 ] ~ [ linux-4.13.16 ] ~ [ linux-4.12.14 ] ~ [ linux-4.11.12 ] ~ [ linux-4.10.17 ] ~ [ linux-4.9.337 ] ~ [ linux-4.4.302 ] ~ [ linux-3.10.108 ] ~ [ linux-2.6.32.71 ] ~ [ linux-2.6.0 ] ~ [ linux-2.4.37.11 ] ~ [ unix-v6-master ] ~ [ ccs-tools-1.8.12 ] ~ [ policy-sample ] ~
Architecture: ~ [ i386 ] ~ [ alpha ] ~ [ m68k ] ~ [ mips ] ~ [ ppc ] ~ [ sparc ] ~ [ sparc64 ] ~

  1 ====================
  2 Runtime Verification
  3 ====================
  4 
  5 Runtime Verification (RV) is a lightweight (yet rigorous) method that
  6 complements classical exhaustive verification techniques (such as *model
  7 checking* and *theorem proving*) with a more practical approach for complex
  8 systems.
  9 
 10 Instead of relying on a fine-grained model of a system (e.g., a
 11 re-implementation a instruction level), RV works by analyzing the trace of the
 12 system's actual execution, comparing it against a formal specification of
 13 the system behavior.
 14 
 15 The main advantage is that RV can give precise information on the runtime
 16 behavior of the monitored system, without the pitfalls of developing models
 17 that require a re-implementation of the entire system in a modeling language.
 18 Moreover, given an efficient monitoring method, it is possible execute an
 19 *online* verification of a system, enabling the *reaction* for unexpected
 20 events, avoiding, for example, the propagation of a failure on safety-critical
 21 systems.
 22 
 23 Runtime Monitors and Reactors
 24 =============================
 25 
 26 A monitor is the central part of the runtime verification of a system. The
 27 monitor stands in between the formal specification of the desired (or
 28 undesired) behavior, and the trace of the actual system.
 29 
 30 In Linux terms, the runtime verification monitors are encapsulated inside the
 31 *RV monitor* abstraction. A *RV monitor* includes a reference model of the
 32 system, a set of instances of the monitor (per-cpu monitor, per-task monitor,
 33 and so on), and the helper functions that glue the monitor to the system via
 34 trace, as depicted below::
 35 
 36  Linux   +---- RV Monitor ----------------------------------+ Formal
 37   Realm  |                                                  |  Realm
 38   +-------------------+     +----------------+     +-----------------+
 39   |   Linux kernel    |     |     Monitor    |     |     Reference   |
 40   |     Tracing       |  -> |   Instance(s)  | <-  |       Model     |
 41   | (instrumentation) |     | (verification) |     | (specification) |
 42   +-------------------+     +----------------+     +-----------------+
 43          |                          |                       |
 44          |                          V                       |
 45          |                     +----------+                 |
 46          |                     | Reaction |                 |
 47          |                     +--+--+--+-+                 |
 48          |                        |  |  |                   |
 49          |                        |  |  +-> trace output ?  |
 50          +------------------------|--|----------------------+
 51                                   |  +----> panic ?
 52                                   +-------> <user-specified>
 53 
 54 In addition to the verification and monitoring of the system, a monitor can
 55 react to an unexpected event. The forms of reaction can vary from logging the
 56 event occurrence to the enforcement of the correct behavior to the extreme
 57 action of taking a system down to avoid the propagation of a failure.
 58 
 59 In Linux terms, a *reactor* is an reaction method available for *RV monitors*.
 60 By default, all monitors should provide a trace output of their actions,
 61 which is already a reaction. In addition, other reactions will be available
 62 so the user can enable them as needed.
 63 
 64 For further information about the principles of runtime verification and
 65 RV applied to Linux:
 66 
 67   Bartocci, Ezio, et al. *Introduction to runtime verification.* In: Lectures on
 68   Runtime Verification. Springer, Cham, 2018. p. 1-33.
 69 
 70   Falcone, Ylies, et al. *A taxonomy for classifying runtime verification tools.*
 71   In: International Conference on Runtime Verification. Springer, Cham, 2018. p.
 72   241-262.
 73 
 74   De Oliveira, Daniel Bristot. *Automata-based formal analysis and
 75   verification of the real-time Linux kernel.* Ph.D. Thesis, 2020.
 76 
 77 Online RV monitors
 78 ==================
 79 
 80 Monitors can be classified as *offline* and *online* monitors. *Offline*
 81 monitor process the traces generated by a system after the events, generally by
 82 reading the trace execution from a permanent storage system. *Online* monitors
 83 process the trace during the execution of the system. Online monitors are said
 84 to be *synchronous* if the processing of an event is attached to the system
 85 execution, blocking the system during the event monitoring. On the other hand,
 86 an *asynchronous* monitor has its execution detached from the system. Each type
 87 of monitor has a set of advantages. For example, *offline* monitors can be
 88 executed on different machines but require operations to save the log to a
 89 file. In contrast, *synchronous online* method can react at the exact moment
 90 a violation occurs.
 91 
 92 Another important aspect regarding monitors is the overhead associated with the
 93 event analysis. If the system generates events at a frequency higher than the
 94 monitor's ability to process them in the same system, only the *offline*
 95 methods are viable. On the other hand, if the tracing of the events incurs
 96 on higher overhead than the simple handling of an event by a monitor, then a
 97 *synchronous online* monitors will incur on lower overhead.
 98 
 99 Indeed, the research presented in:
100 
101   De Oliveira, Daniel Bristot; Cucinotta, Tommaso; De Oliveira, Romulo Silva.
102   *Efficient formal verification for the Linux kernel.* In: International
103   Conference on Software Engineering and Formal Methods. Springer, Cham, 2019.
104   p. 315-332.
105 
106 Shows that for Deterministic Automata models, the synchronous processing of
107 events in-kernel causes lower overhead than saving the same events to the trace
108 buffer, not even considering collecting the trace for user-space analysis.
109 This motivated the development of an in-kernel interface for online monitors.
110 
111 For further information about modeling of Linux kernel behavior using automata,
112 see:
113 
114   De Oliveira, Daniel B.; De Oliveira, Romulo S.; Cucinotta, Tommaso. *A thread
115   synchronization model for the PREEMPT_RT Linux kernel.* Journal of Systems
116   Architecture, 2020, 107: 101729.
117 
118 The user interface
119 ==================
120 
121 The user interface resembles the tracing interface (on purpose). It is
122 currently at "/sys/kernel/tracing/rv/".
123 
124 The following files/folders are currently available:
125 
126 **available_monitors**
127 
128 - Reading list the available monitors, one per line
129 
130 For example::
131 
132    # cat available_monitors
133    wip
134    wwnr
135 
136 **available_reactors**
137 
138 - Reading shows the available reactors, one per line.
139 
140 For example::
141 
142    # cat available_reactors
143    nop
144    panic
145    printk
146 
147 **enabled_monitors**:
148 
149 - Reading lists the enabled monitors, one per line
150 - Writing to it enables a given monitor
151 - Writing a monitor name with a '!' prefix disables it
152 - Truncating the file disables all enabled monitors
153 
154 For example::
155 
156    # cat enabled_monitors
157    # echo wip > enabled_monitors
158    # echo wwnr >> enabled_monitors
159    # cat enabled_monitors
160    wip
161    wwnr
162    # echo '!wip' >> enabled_monitors
163    # cat enabled_monitors
164    wwnr
165    # echo > enabled_monitors
166    # cat enabled_monitors
167    #
168 
169 Note that it is possible to enable more than one monitor concurrently.
170 
171 **monitoring_on**
172 
173 This is an on/off general switcher for monitoring. It resembles the
174 "tracing_on" switcher in the trace interface.
175 
176 - Writing "0" stops the monitoring
177 - Writing "1" continues the monitoring
178 - Reading returns the current status of the monitoring
179 
180 Note that it does not disable enabled monitors but stop the per-entity
181 monitors monitoring the events received from the system.
182 
183 **reacting_on**
184 
185 - Writing "0" prevents reactions for happening
186 - Writing "1" enable reactions
187 - Reading returns the current status of the reaction
188 
189 **monitors/**
190 
191 Each monitor will have its own directory inside "monitors/". There the
192 monitor-specific files will be presented. The "monitors/" directory resembles
193 the "events" directory on tracefs.
194 
195 For example::
196 
197    # cd monitors/wip/
198    # ls
199    desc  enable
200    # cat desc
201    wakeup in preemptive per-cpu testing monitor.
202    # cat enable
203    0
204 
205 **monitors/MONITOR/desc**
206 
207 - Reading shows a description of the monitor *MONITOR*
208 
209 **monitors/MONITOR/enable**
210 
211 - Writing "0" disables the *MONITOR*
212 - Writing "1" enables the *MONITOR*
213 - Reading return the current status of the *MONITOR*
214 
215 **monitors/MONITOR/reactors**
216 
217 - List available reactors, with the select reaction for the given *MONITOR*
218   inside "[]". The default one is the nop (no operation) reactor.
219 - Writing the name of a reactor enables it to the given MONITOR.
220 
221 For example::
222 
223    # cat monitors/wip/reactors
224    [nop]
225    panic
226    printk
227    # echo panic > monitors/wip/reactors
228    # cat monitors/wip/reactors
229    nop
230    [panic]
231    printk

~ [ source navigation ] ~ [ diff markup ] ~ [ identifier search ] ~

kernel.org | git.kernel.org | LWN.net | Project Home | SVN repository | Mail admin

Linux® is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds in the United States and other countries.
TOMOYO® is a registered trademark of NTT DATA CORPORATION.

sflogo.php