Skip to content

chore(verfication): remove {:only} #517

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 11 commits into from
Jul 16, 2024
Merged
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension


Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
40 changes: 40 additions & 0 deletions .github/workflows/check_only_keyword.yml
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,40 @@
# This workflow checks if you are checking in dafny code
# with the keyword {:only}, it adds a message to the pull
# request to remind you to remove it.
name: Check {:only} decorator presence

on:
pull_request:

jobs:
grep-only-verification-keyword:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
permissions:
issues: write
pull-requests: write
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v3
with:
fetch-depth: 0

- name: Check only keyword
id: only-keyword
shell: bash
run:
# checking in code with the dafny decorator {:only}
# will not verify the entire file or maybe the entire project depending on its configuration
# This action checks if you are either adding or removing the {:only} decorator and posting on the pr if you are.
echo "ONLY_KEYWORD=$(git diff origin/main origin/${GITHUB_HEAD_REF} **/*.dfy | grep -i {:only})" >> "$GITHUB_OUTPUT"

- name: Check if ONLY_KEYWORD is not empty
id: comment
env:
PR_NUMBER: ${{ github.event.number }}
GITHUB_TOKEN: ${{ secrets.GITHUB_TOKEN }}
ONLY_KEYWORD: ${{ steps.only-keyword.outputs.ONLY_KEYWORD }}
if: ${{env.ONLY_KEYWORD != ''}}
run: |
COMMENT="It looks like you are adding or removing the dafny keyword {:only}.\nIs this intended?"
Comment on lines +29 to +37
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why not just have this action fail? If I'm working on a PR and it does not pass for this reason, that feels like a good thing?

COMMENT_URL="https://api.github.com/repos/${{ github.repository }}/issues/${PR_NUMBER}/comments"
curl -s -H "Authorization: token ${GITHUB_TOKEN}" -X POST $COMMENT_URL -d "{\"body\":\"$COMMENT\"}"
exit 1
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -439,7 +439,6 @@ module {:options "/functionSyntax:4" } AwsKmsEcdhKeyring {
{
const materials: Materials.DecryptionMaterialsPendingPlaintextDataKey
const cryptoPrimitives: Primitives.AtomicPrimitivesClient
const senderPublicKey: seq<uint8>
const recipientPublicKey: seq<uint8>
const client: KMS.IKMSClient
const grantTokens: KMS.GrantTokenList
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -582,6 +581,11 @@ module {:options "/functionSyntax:4" } AwsKmsEcdhKeyring {
}
}

:- Need(
KMS.IsValid_PublicKeyType(sharedSecretPublicKey),
E("Received Recipient Public Key of incorrect expected length")
);

//= aws-encryption-sdk-specification/framework/aws-kms/aws-kms-ecdh-keyring.md#ondecrypt
//# The keyring MUST derive the shared secret
//# by calling [AWS KMS DeriveSharedSecret]()
Expand Down
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -541,7 +541,7 @@ module {:options "/functionSyntax:4" } RawECDHKeyring {
&& Materials.DecryptionMaterialsTransitionIsValid(materials, res.value)

}
method {:vcs_split_on_every_assert} {:only} Invoke(
method {:vcs_split_on_every_assert} Invoke(
edk: Types.EncryptedDataKey,
ghost attemptsState: seq<ActionInvoke<Types.EncryptedDataKey, Result<Materials.SealedDecryptionMaterials, Types.Error>>>
) returns (res: Result<Materials.SealedDecryptionMaterials, Types.Error>)
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -851,4 +851,4 @@ module {:options "/functionSyntax:4" } RawECDHKeyring {
function E(s : string) : Types.Error {
Types.AwsCryptographicMaterialProvidersException(message := s)
}
}
}
Loading