packSCMP Continued #373
Merged
packSCMP Continued #373
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
jcp19
reviewed
Jul 25, 2024
jcp19
reviewed
Jul 25, 2024
jcp19
reviewed
Aug 12, 2024
jcp19
reviewed
Aug 13, 2024
Comment on lines
+2919
to
+2923
| // (VerifiedSCION) Gobra is unable to verify permissions for `p.path.PathMeta.CurrINF` | ||
| // and `p.path.PathMeta.CurrHF` directly at the function call. | ||
| // To work around this limitation, these fields are first stored in temporary variables. | ||
| tmpCurrINF := p.path.PathMeta.CurrINF | ||
| tmpCurrHF := p.path.PathMeta.CurrHF |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I still find this supper puzzling. Can you please remind me if you were using any kind of unfolding expression in the function call?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I tried all possible combinations of unfold and unfolding. As soon as the field access is directly a function argument, Gobra complains about missing permissions.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Did you get this error even without any unfolds/unfoldings?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, even without Gobra complains about missing permissions.
jcp19
reviewed
Aug 13, 2024
|
After my comments are addressed, it should be ready to merge on the original SCMP branch |
jcp19
reviewed
Aug 15, 2024
jcp19
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 29, 2024
* start * make type-check * backup * fix syntax errors * establish necessary precondition of DecodeFromBytes * remove TODOs * backup * move on with proof obligations * verify packSCMP; reinstate TODO()s for doing the proof step by step * backup * backup * fix parse and type errors * fix packscmp * backup * backup * kill branches for now * backup * backup * remove files pushed by mistake * del file * fix verification error * change comment format * backup * reset changes to scion_spec.gobra * continue making progress * backup * simplify spec * backup * non-termination again * backup * packSCMP Continued (#373) * fix missing precondition for packSCMP * progress scmp * further progress * further scmp fixes * fix syntax error and strengthen spec of erros.Is function * fix verification error * fix verification errors in process() * drop last scmp assumption * fix verification errors in process() * add missing postconditions to resolveInbound * fix p.d permissions * remove wrong precondition from validateEgressUp() * clean up * feedback * Update router/dataplane.go --------- Co-authored-by: João Pereira <[email protected]> * Move ownership of underlying slice of `SerializableBuffer` to outside of `Mem()` (#374) * fix missing precondition for packSCMP * progress scmp * further progress * further scmp fixes * fix syntax error and strengthen spec of erros.Is function * fix verification error * fix verification errors in process() * drop last scmp assumption * fix verification errors in process() * add missing postconditions to resolveInbound * fix p.d permissions * save * remove wrong precondition from validateEgressUp() * clean up * feedback * change dependencies to new buffer approach * remove buffWithFullPerm flag from scionPacketProcessor * fix verification errors * fix permission mistake * Apply suggestions from code review Co-authored-by: João Pereira <[email protected]> * pass underlying buffer slice to prepareSCMP * remove deep ownership of buffer slice in message * fix verification error in run * fix injectivity issue in run() and verification error in newPacketProcessor * different trigger * proves injectivity for message buffer directly without sets * test: remove unnecessary invariants in run() * improvements to injectivity lemma for messages * introduce new lemma PermsImplyIneq() * fixed missing preconditions * minor fixes and feedback * fix verification error * fmt --------- Co-authored-by: João Pereira <[email protected]> --------- Co-authored-by: Markus Limbeck <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
No description provided.