wip: fix(userspace/libsinsp): recognize statically (un)satisfiable evt.num leaves in ppm_codes#3009
Open
leogr wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
wip: fix(userspace/libsinsp): recognize statically (un)satisfiable evt.num leaves in ppm_codes#3009leogr wants to merge 1 commit into
leogr wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
… leaves in ppm_codes Signed-off-by: Leonardo Grasso <me@leonardograsso.com>
Contributor
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: leogr The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
Perf diff from master - unit testsHeap diff from master - unit testsHeap diff from master - scap fileBenchmarks diff from master |
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #3009 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 75.65% 75.74% +0.09%
==========================================
Files 299 299
Lines 32936 33059 +123
Branches 5119 5136 +17
==========================================
+ Hits 24919 25042 +123
Misses 8017 8017
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
What type of PR is this?
/kind bug
Any specific area of the project related to this PR?
/area libsinsp
Does this PR require a change in the driver versions?
What this PR does / why we need it:
The event code search (
libsinsp::filter::ast::ppm_event_codes/ppm_sc_codes) over-approximates every non-evt.typeleaf to the full set of event types. That's sound but imprecise: a condition likeevt.num=0- which can never be true at runtime, sinceevt.numstarts at 1 - is reported as matching all event types instead of none.This PR teaches the visitor to statically resolve
evt.numleaves against theevt.num >= 1runtime invariant:evt.num=0,evt.num<1,evt.num<=0,evt.num in (0)) now resolve to the empty setevt.num!=0,evt.num>0,evt.num>=1) resolve to the full setNegation is handled at the leaf level (since the visitor pushes negation down via De Morgan's laws), so
not (evt.num=0)correctly resolves back to all event types.We need this since it's the libs half of fixing the
LOAD_NO_EVTTYPEfalse positive that Falco emits for thenever_trueidiom ((evt.num=0)) - the canonical placeholder used across the default ruleset for tuning. See falcosecurity/falco#3883.Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Related to falcosecurity/falco#3883
N.B. I'm intentionally not using
Fixeshere, since the user-facing warning lives in Falco. This PR is a prerequisite, and a follow-up Falco PR will complete the fix.Special notes for your reviewer:
This is the same warning family - and the same kind of narrow, targeted visitor improvement - as falcosecurity/falco#3546, which was fixed in libs by 4cd3f96.
I deliberately avoided a general satisfiability pass and scoped this to a single field with a documented invariant.
/milestone 0.26.0
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?: