WWW.DISSERTATION.XLIBX.INFO
FREE ELECTRONIC LIBRARY - Dissertations, online materials
 
<< HOME
CONTACTS



Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 6 | 7 || 9 | 10 |   ...   | 22 |

«Oracle Semantics Aquinas Hobor A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of Princeton University in Candidacy for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy ...»

-- [ Page 8 ] --

4.9. APPLYING CSL TO THE EXAMPLE PROGRAM  current thread into the lock for unlock or into the child thread for fork. The precondition requires a function e with precondition P and postcondition Q. Just as for unlock, we apply an operator to force the precondition to have the desired property, in this case only precision22.

Since the precondition P is a map from the arguments e to an assertion, the precondition of the fork rule requires that the assertion precisely P (e) hold. Just as in the case of unlock, if P (e) is precise, precisely P (e) = P (e); otherwise it will be equal to false, meaning that the fork statement in question cannot be proven to be safe using CSL. After the fork statement, the parent thread loses the assertion precisely P (e). The child process will then start with the assertion precisely P (e) when it starts.

4.9 Applying CSL to the example

–  –  –

We demonstrate the usefulness of our CSL by demonstrating how to apply it to critical parts of the example program from section 3.2.

4.9.1 The resource invariant R(l) The key resource invariant is given in figure 4.2. It is divided into two parts: S(l, P ) and R(l). In effect, S(l, P ) is specialized to each lock, In the Coq development, precision is guaranteed with a side condition; the presentation here is equivalent and more consistent with the other rules.

CHAPTER 4. CONCURRENT SEPARATION LOGIC



–  –  –

while the R(l) definition is boilerplate. The convention used when defining S(l, P ) is that l is the address of the lock and P is the lock’s invariant, which will include S(l, P ). Because we are using the recursion operator µ to form resource invariants, S(l, P ) must be contractive in P ; as long as P is used inside a lock or hold assertion then this requirement is easily satisfied. The formal definition of contractiveness is technical and is deferred until section 7.3.9.

In line 1, S(l, P ) implies that the locations l + 1 and l + 2 are fully owned and point to the same value. In line 2, S(l, P ) also implies that the location l+3 is owned, and is being used as a signal to communicate that the child thread is done processing. While the child is working, l+3 is set to 1, to indicate that it is continuing to compute. When the child is done, it sets l+3 to 0, and gives up the location l, which is a lock with invariant P (fufilling the convention for the boilerplate), and which is partially owned with the left half of the full share. This allows the child to return all of its resources to its parent cleanly, and thus exit holding

4.9. APPLYING CSL TO THE EXAMPLE PROGRAM  no resources.

S(l, P ) is contractive in P since P is only used inside a lock invariant. S(l, P ) is precise since the separating conjunction of two precise predicates is precise and since exactly one half of the disjunction on line 2 is true at any time. Moreover, S(l, P ) is valid since it is built from the operators presented in sections 4.1 and 4.7. By inspection, S(l, P ) is closed to local variables. Therefore S(l, P ) is tight.

The boilerplate definition for R(l) is given on line 3. It uses the recursive operator µ to tie the knot and ensures that the lock invariant implies that the lock is held, as required for the unlock rule. Since S(l, P ) is contractive, µ is well-defined. Since S(l, P ) is tight, so is R(l).

4.9.2 Verification of selected instructions Here we show how to apply the rules of CSL to verify parts of the example program. For cross-referencing purposes, we use the same numbering here as in section 3.2. For clarity we omit the use of Γ (the map from functions to specifications) in the presentation of our rules.

i. The pre- and postconditions of main are emp. Since emp is the identity element, a precondition of emp indicates that main can be called at any time. The postcondition of emp indicates that when it exits, main will no longer own any resources. In traditional separation logic this would mean that all of the resources allocated by main had been freed. However, in CSL it is possible for resources to be allocated and then given away in a lock;

CHAPTER 4. CONCURRENT SEPARATION LOGIC

 this means that a postcondition of emp is not strong enough to guarantee that all resources have been freed on program termination. There are several approaches to guaranteeing this stronger property, such as requiring certain programming disciplines, or, alternatively, forcing lock invariants to have certain properties, an approach utilized by Gotsman et al. in [GBC+ 07].

ii. Lines 2 and 3 of the example program require only standard separation logic. It is important that L be initialized to 0 for (iii).

iii. The make lock in main turns location L into a lock with invariant R(L). The postcondition of line 3 is

–  –  –

For full details on the rules for borrowing from Γ, see [AB07].

Like a maps-to assertion, the “is a lock with invariant R” assertion is valid and precise.

CHAPTER 4. CONCURRENT SEPARATION LOGIC



which allows us to use the fork rule as follows:

–  –  –

Therefore, the spawned child thread is given the left half of lock L, and the parent retains the right half. We then return the specification of f to Γ.





v. Although the assignment on line 6 was worrisome in the informal presentation, in the formalism it is quite straightforward. A part of the frame from (iv) that comes from (iii) is

–  –  –

On line 8, the test *(L+3) == 0 is done to break out of the loop.

Given that the precondition of line 8 is the loop invariant, if the test succeeds, then the postcondition of the loop will hold by foldunfold. If the test fails, then the state will not change, and the loop invariant will hold after line 8. If R(L) holds before line 9, then it will hold afterwards. Therefore the precondition to the unlock statement on line 10 is

–  –  –

and by adding the frame back in we can prove the loop invariant.

vii. The postcondition of the loop given in (vi) implies that main has reacquired the full ownership of lock L. Accordingly, after

abstracting away the frame we can apply the free lock rule:

–  –  –

viii. The postcondition of the loop given in (vi) also implies that L + 1 and L + 2 point to the same value, so the test on 15 will always succeed and the program will not get stuck on line 16.

ix. The cleanup on lines 17–18 follows from the standard rules of separation logic, and implies the postcondition emp of main.

x. The precondition of f was discussed above in (iv), and the meanCHAPTER 4. CONCURRENT SEPARATION LOGIC  ing of emp as a postcondition was discussed in (i).

xi. The precondition and loop invariant of the loop starting on line

–  –  –

On line 24, the loop invariant R(L) is temporarily broken; L + 1 does not point to the same value as L + 2. However, this is permitted since the lock invariant does not have to hold while the lock is held. On line 25, the invariant is restored, leading to a postcondition of

–  –  –

This gives us the postcondition emp, which satisfies the postcondition given in line 21, so we can safely return on line 29.

Notice that the child thread gave up all its resources before returning. It did so by unlocking the lock L. However, one of the resources it gave up by unlocking L was the visibility of L itself!

In general we want every thread to give up all resources before exiting, and in general it must do so by unlocking a lock. We accomplish this by taking advantage of the recursion operator as demonstrated above.

Now the main thread can safely dispose the lock L, as explained in (vii).

If the test on line 26 does not succeed, state is not modified on line 30, giving a precondition of

–  –  –

which implies the loop invariant.

In [Man08], Mansky verifies this program with our CSL in Coq; in addition to filling in various details omitted above, he gives a sense for the process of verifying a program in Coq. Furthermore, taking a lesson from Knuth, he actually implemented the algorithm in C (with POSIX threads) and tested it.

–  –  –

We have presented a new concurrent separation logic. The logic includes many powerful assertions, including impredicative quantification, recursive invariants, fractional permissions, and first-class locks and function pointers.

We have given Hoare rules for using these assertions to reason about Concurrent C minor programs, including rules for lock, unlock, and fork. We have developed new operators such as tightly to express those rules cleanly. Finally we have demonstrated how to use these rules and operators to verify the example program from section 3.2.

In the remainder of this thesis we will present a soundness proof of our concurrent separation logic with respect to Concurrent C minor.

Chapter 5 Erased Concurrent Operational Semantics In chapter 3 we introduced Concurrent C minor, and in chapter 4 we gave it an axiomatic semantics, Concurrent Separation Logic. This chapter gives Concurrent C minor a formal concurrent operational semantics, which we call an erased semantics. In chapters 8, 9, and 10, we will prove the soundness of CSL with respect to the erased semantics1.

The erased concurrent operational semantics justifies the claim that Concurrent C minor has a reasonable model of conventional concurrency. It is not easy to prove properties about the erased semantics.

It is easier to reason about an unerased semantics, which tracks additional bookkeeping information (see chapter 8). In section 8.6 we prove an erasure theorem that says that the unerased semantics is a conPortions of this chapter have been published before as [HAZ08a] and [HAZ08b].

–  –  –

semantics holds on the unerased concurrent operational semantics. The erasure theorem then guarantees that the properties hold on our erased semantics.

One problem with the erased semantics given here is that it does not compose well with the compiler correctness proofs. If we erase too soon, at the source language, then the compiler will not be able to rely on the bookkeeping features of the unerased semantics in its proofs; as discussed further in section 8.6, the correct time to erase is at the very end of compilation, on the machine code.

In section 5.1 we give a vastly simplified semantics for sequential C minor because the complexities of the sequential language are not the focus of this thesis; in the Coq development we utilize the full C minor of Appel and Blazy [AB07]. In section 5.2, we give the erased concurrent step relation to show that we have a reasonable model for concurrency.

Our concurrent semantics has an unusual interleaving model; in section

5.3 we discuss why the interleaving model is reasonable.

5.1. ERASED SEQUENTIAL STEP RELATION 

5.1 Erased sequential step relation Here we present a highly simplified version of sequential C minor; the Coq development uses the full sequential C minor of Appel and Blazy, which is given in figure 2.3.

The syntax of simplified C minor is given by the following grammar:

–  –  –

A value v is a natural number n. There are eight different kinds of statements: three sequential statements, given as simplified examples of the kinds of statements in C minor, and five concurrent statements.

The store statement [v1 ]:=v2 updates the memory at location v1 to have value v2. The call statement call f v starts a subroutine function

–  –  –

the state. The lock statement waits until the lock v is unlocked, and then locks the lock. The unlock statement unlocks the lock v. The fork statement starts a new thread with a function call to f.

A sequential computation state, also called an erased world w, is a pair of locals ρ (a map from identifiers to values) and memory m; in our simplified syntax, ρ is unused, but it is used in the full C minor and so is included here.

A control contains program syntax and has the following grammar:

–  –  –

cases. The first case, er-sstep-update, handles the store statement by updating the memory at location v1 to have value v2 and advancing to the next statement κ. The second case, er-sstep-call, performs a function call by replacing the call statement with the body of the function Ψ(f ) and applying the arguments v. The third case, er-sstep-seq, takes apart a sequence statement. The fourth case, er-sstep-makelock, and fifth case, er-sstep-freelock, do nothing other than advance to the next statement κ.

For the fully concurrent instructions lock, unlock, and fork, the erased sequential step relation gets stuck.

5.2 Erased concurrent step relation A schedule ℧ is a finite list of natural numbers that act as thread-IDs.

The number at the head of the schedule tells the concurrent operational semantics which thread to execute next. When the schedule runs out, the concurrent machine safely halts computation.

With a fixed schedule, our semantics is fully deterministic, which simplifies the proofs, particularly proofs about sequential features that assume determinacy. Of course, concurrent systems are not usually considered to be deterministic. We ensure that the proved properties hold regardless of the way threads interleave by universally quantifying over all schedules.

We use a finite schedule because it allows us to do induction easily.

CHAPTER 5. ERASED CONCURRENT OPERATIONAL

SEMANTICS  We do not restrict the length of a schedule, so when we quantify over all schedules we include schedules of arbitrary length. Therefore our proved properties will be true for any finite amount of time.

–  –  –

Krun κ means that the thread is in a runnable state, with κ as the next control to execute. Klock v κ means that the thread is waiting on a lock at address v; after acquiring the lock it will continue with κ.



Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 6 | 7 || 9 | 10 |   ...   | 22 |


Similar works:

«EVALUATION OF PEARL MILLET FORAGE By Fadi M. Hassanat Department of Animal Science McGill University Montreal, Quebec November, 2007 A Thesis Submitted for the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of Doctor in Philosophy Ⓒ Fadi Hassanat, 2007 ABSTRACT This research evaluated millet as forage source for ruminants. Four studies were conducted using two cultivars of forage millet [i.e. brown midrib (BM) and regular (RM)]. The first...»

«THE 13th INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF ISSEI International Society for the Study of European Ideas in cooperation with the University of Cyprus On Nietzsche’s Concept of ‘European Nihilism’ Ruth Burch (PhD in Philosophy, Warwick University) Via Boggia 10 CH-6900 Lugano-Paradiso, Ticino Switzerland Email: burchru@hotmail.com In Nietzsche’s view, the traditional scientists and philosophical moralists are ultimately unstoppably attracted to nihilism. That is why, in The Gay Science,...»

«Faculty of Arts and Philosophy Dagmar De Tandt ‘Making Heads Throb Heartlike’: David Foster Wallace’s Oblivion as a Deleuzian Clinical and Critical Project Supervisor: Sarah Posman Master dissertation submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of “Master in English” Academic year 2012-2013 Acknowledgments ‘(.) thesis, the project that had occupied and defined me for months’ (Here and There)1 In the car reading interviews with David Foster Wallace: ‘[James Brown:...»

«EXPLAINING BURNOUT: A MIXED METHOD INVESTIGATION OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY WORKERS by Sara L. Schwarz Cook A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy Capella University September 2006 © Sara L. Schwarz Cook, 2006 Abstract The research presented in this dissertation utilized both qualitative and quantitative strategies to identify factors that predict burnout of Information Technology workers. The first phase of the study included...»

«E r r o r s in V a r i a b l e s R e g r e s s i o n : W h a t is t h e a p p r o p r i a t e m o d e l ? Thesis subm itted to CARDIFF UNIVERSITY for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY by JONATHAN WILLIAM GILLARD November 2007, School of M athematics, Cardiff University UMI Number: U585018 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and...»

«Modernism’s Material Forms: Literary Experiments in Transatlantic Print Culture, 1880-1945 by Jennifer J. Sorensen Emery-Peck A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (English Language and Literature) in The University of Michigan Doctoral Committee: Professor Sara Blair, Chair Professor Jonathan Freedman Professor June Howard Associate Professor Kali Israel Associate Professor John Whittier-Ferguson © Jennifer J. Sorensen...»

«Characterization, diagnosis and environmental survival of turkey arthritis reoviruses A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA BY Sunil Kumar IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Advisors: Drs. Sagar M. Goyal and Robert E. Porter June 2014 © Sunil Kumar 2014 Acknowledgements My graduate experience has been like no other endeavor I have ever pursued. It has been a time of great growth, life changes, and learning. I am so...»

«Societal marketing concept and spirituality in the workplace theory: Finding the common ground 1 Anselmo Ferreira Vasconcelos Abstract This paper suggests that there exist many theoretical linkages between the societal marketing concept (SMC) and spirituality in the workplace (SWP) theory. Thus, it is reviewed the literature of both SMC and the emerging field of SWP theory in order to find unexplored commonalities between them. As a result, it acknowledges that SMC broached a new perspective in...»

«Understanding the Athenian Fear of Socrates Richmond Journal of Philosophy 12 (Spring 2006) William P. Kiblinger Understanding the Athenian Fear of Socrates: A Reading of Plato's Apology of Socrates William P. Kiblinger Who was Socrates? Was he a sincere student or a sincere skeptic? Or was he sly and disingenuous? Or perhaps he was none of these, but more of a religious saint. Whatever the answer (if such a thing is finally possible), one thing is for sure: one must assess Socrates’ use of...»

«i UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO Neurophysiologic Correlates to Sensory and Cognitive Processing in Altered States of Consciousness A Dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in Neurosciences by Baruch Rael Cahn Committee in charge: Mark Geyer, Chair John Polich, Co-Chair Steve Hillyard Martin Paulus Jaime Pineda Vilayanur Ramachandran Franz Vollenweider 2007 ii Copyright Baruch Rael Cahn, 2007 All Rights Reserved iii The...»

«UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY GeoPubSubHub: A Geospatial Publish/Subscribe Architecture for the World-Wide Sensor Web by Chih-Yuan Huang A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY DEPARTMENT OF GEOMATICS ENGINEERING CALGARY, ALBERTA JANUARY, 2014 © Chih-Yuan Huang 2014 Abstract The World-Wide Sensor Web has become a useful technique for monitoring the physical world at spatial and temporal scales that were...»

«Naturalism and Normative Science Henrik Rydenfelt Abstract: Naturalist views in philosophy often combine a Quinean denial of a first philosophy – the idea that science cannot be based on a foundation more secure than itself – with the (metaphysical) position that science is our best or privileged means of finding out what there is. My task here is to inquire what the status of the latter normative claim is in light of the former. Based on a reading of different contemporary “pragmatist”...»





 
<<  HOME   |    CONTACTS
2016 www.dissertation.xlibx.info - Dissertations, online materials

Materials of this site are available for review, all rights belong to their respective owners.
If you do not agree with the fact that your material is placed on this site, please, email us, we will within 1-2 business days delete him.