Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Practical Abstractions for Automated Verification of Message Passing Concurrency

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Integrated Formal Methods (IFM 2019)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 11918))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Distributed systems are notoriously difficult to develop correctly, due to the concurrency in their communicating subsystems. Several techniques are available to help developers to improve the reliability of message passing software, including deductive verification and model checking. Both these techniques have advantages as well as limitations, which are complementary in nature. This paper contributes a novel verification technique that combines the strengths of deductive and algorithmic verification to reason elegantly about message passing concurrent programs, thereby reducing their limitations. Our approach allows to verify data-centric properties of message passing programs using concurrent separation logic (CSL), and allows to specify their communication behaviour as a process-algebraic model. The key novelty of the approach is that it formally bridges the typical abstraction gap between programs and their models, by extending CSL with logical primitives for proving deductively that a program refines its process-algebraic model. These models can then be analysed via model checking, using mCRL2, to reason indirectly about the program’s communication behaviour. Our verification approach is compositional, comes with a mechanised correctness proof in Coq, and is implemented as an encoding in Viper.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Supplementary material for the paper. https://github.com/utwente-fmt/iFM19-MessagePassingAbstr

  2. Ahrendt, W., Beckert, B., Bubel, R., Hähnle, R., Schmitt, P., Ulbrich, M.: Deductive Software Verification - The KeY Book. Springer, Heidelberg (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49812-6

    Book  Google Scholar 

  3. Ahrendt, W., Chimento, J., Pace, G., Schneider, G.: Verifying data- and control-oriented properties combining static and runtime verification: theory and tools. FMSD 51(1), 200–265 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10703-017-0274-y

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Baeten, J.: Process Algebra with Explicit Termination. Eindhoven University of Technology, Department of Mathematics and Computing Science (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Boyland, J.: Checking interference with fractional permissions. In: Cousot, R. (ed.) SAS 2003. LNCS, vol. 2694, pp. 55–72. Springer, Heidelberg (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44898-5_4

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Brookes, S.: A semantics for concurrent separation logic. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 375(1–3), 227–270 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tcs.2006.12.034

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Brookes, S., O’Hearn, P.: Concurrent separation logic. ACM SIGLOG News 3(3), 47–65 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1145/2984450.2984457

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bunte, O., et al.: The mCRL2 toolset for analysing concurrent systems. In: Vojnar, T., Zhang, L. (eds.) TACAS 2019. LNCS, vol. 11428, pp. 21–39. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-17465-1_2

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Dinsdale-Young, T., Dodds, M., Gardner, P., Parkinson, M.J., Vafeiadis, V.: Concurrent abstract predicates. In: D’Hondt, T. (ed.) ECOOP 2010. LNCS, vol. 6183, pp. 504–528. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14107-2_24

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. Fokkink, W., Zantema, H.: Basic process algebra with iteration: completeness of its equational axioms. Comput. J. 37(4), 259–267 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1093/comjnl/37.4.259

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Francalanza, A., Rathke, J., Sassone, V.: Permission-based separation logic for message-passing concurrency. Log. Methods Comput. Sci. 7, 1–47 (2011). https://doi.org/10.2168/lmcs-7(3:7)2011

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. de Gouw, S., Rot, J., de Boer, F.S., Bubel, R., Hähnle, R.: OpenJDK’s Java.utils.Collection.sort() is broken: the good, the bad and the worst case. In: Kroening, D., Păsăreanu, C.S. (eds.) CAV 2015. LNCS, vol. 9206, pp. 273–289. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21690-4_16

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Groote, J.F., Mousavi, M.R.: Modeling and Analysis of Communicating Systems. MIT Press, Cambridge (2014)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  14. Grumberg, O., Veith, H. (eds.): 25 Years of Model Checking: History, Achievements, Perspectives. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-69850-0

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Honda, K., et al.: Structuring communication with session types. In: Agha, G., et al. (eds.) Concurrent Objects and Beyond. LNCS, vol. 8665, pp. 105–127. Springer, Heidelberg (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-44471-9_5

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  16. Honda, K., Vasconcelos, V.T., Kubo, M.: Language primitives and type discipline for structured communication-based programming. In: Hankin, C. (ed.) ESOP 1998. LNCS, vol. 1381, pp. 122–138. Springer, Heidelberg (1998). https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0053567

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  17. Hur, C., Dreyer, D., Vafeiadis, V.: Separation logic in the presence of garbage collection. In: LICS, pp. 247–256 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1109/LICS.2011.46

  18. Lei, J., Qiu, Z.: Modular reasoning for message-passing programs. In: Ciobanu, G., Méry, D. (eds.) ICTAC 2014. LNCS, vol. 8687, pp. 277–294. Springer, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10882-7_17

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  19. Luo, Z., Zheng, M., Siegel, S.: Verification of MPI programs using CIVL. In: EuroMPI. ACM (2017). https://doi.org/10.1145/3127024.3127032

  20. MPI: A Message-Passing Interface standard. http://www.mpi-forum.org/docs. Accessed Apr 2019

  21. Milner, R.: Communication and Concurrency. Prentice-Hall Inc., Upper Saddle River (1989)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. Müller, P., Schwerhoff, M., Summers, A.J.: Viper: a verification infrastructure for permission-based reasoning. In: Jobstmann, B., Leino, K.R.M. (eds.) VMCAI 2016. LNCS, vol. 9583, pp. 41–62. Springer, Heidelberg (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-49122-5_2

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Nanevski, A., Ley-Wild, R., Sergey, I., Delbianco, G.A.: Communicating state transition systems for fine-grained concurrent resources. In: Shao, Z. (ed.) ESOP 2014. LNCS, vol. 8410, pp. 290–310. Springer, Heidelberg (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-54833-8_16

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Neele, T., Willemse, T.A.C., Groote, J.F.: Solving parameterised Boolean equation systems with infinite data through quotienting. In: Bae, K., Ölveczky, P.C. (eds.) FACS 2018. LNCS, vol. 11222, pp. 216–236. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02146-7_11

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  25. O’Hearn, P.: Resources, concurrency and local reasoning. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 375(1–3), 271–307 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-28644-8_4

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  26. Oortwijn, W., Blom, S., Gurov, D., Huisman, M., Zaharieva-Stojanovski, M.: An abstraction technique for describing concurrent program behaviour. In: Paskevich, A., Wies, T. (eds.) VSTTE 2017. LNCS, vol. 10712, pp. 191–209. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-72308-2_12

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  27. Oortwijn, W., Blom, S., Huisman, M.: Future-based static analysis of message passing programs. In: PLACES, pp. 65–72 (2016). https://doi.org/10.4204/EPTCS.211.7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Peled, D., Gries, D., Schneider, F. (eds.): Software Reliability Methods. Springer, New York (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-3540-6

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. da Rocha Pinto, P., Dinsdale-Young, T., Gardner, P.: TaDA: a logic for time and data abstraction. In: Jones, R. (ed.) ECOOP 2014. LNCS, vol. 8586, pp. 207–231. Springer, Heidelberg (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-44202-9_9

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  30. de Roever, W., et al.: Concurrency Verification: Introduction to Compositional and Noncompositional Methods. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2001)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  31. Sergey, I., Wilcox, J., Tatlock, Z.: Programming and proving with distributed protocols. In: POPL, vol. 2 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1145/3158116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Shankar, N.: Combining model checking and deduction. Handbook of Model Checking, pp. 651–684. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10575-8_20

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  33. Svendsen, K., Birkedal, L., Parkinson, M.: Modular reasoning about separation of concurrent data structures. In: Felleisen, M., Gardner, P. (eds.) ESOP 2013. LNCS, vol. 7792, pp. 169–188. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-37036-6_11

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  34. Uribe, T.E.: Combinations of model checking and theorem proving. In: Kirchner, H., Ringeissen, C. (eds.) FroCoS 2000. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1794, pp. 151–170. Springer, Heidelberg (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/10720084_11

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  35. Vafeiadis, V.: Concurrent separation logic and operational semantics. MFPS, ENTCS 276, 335–351 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.entcs.2011.09.029

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  36. Vafeiadis, V., Parkinson, M.: A marriage of rely/guarantee and separation logic. In: Caires, L., Vasconcelos, V.T. (eds.) CONCUR 2007. LNCS, vol. 4703, pp. 256–271. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-74407-8_18

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  37. Villard, J., Lozes, É., Calcagno, C.: Proving copyless message passing. In: Hu, Z. (ed.) APLAS 2009. LNCS, vol. 5904, pp. 194–209. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-10672-9_15

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  38. Wolper, P., Lovinfosse, V.: Verifying properties of large sets of processes with network invariants. In: Sifakis, J. (ed.) CAV 1989. LNCS, vol. 407, pp. 68–80. Springer, Heidelberg (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-52148-8_6

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work is partially supported by the NWO VICI 639.023.710 Mercedes project and by the NWO TOP 612.001.403 VerDi project.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands

    Wytse Oortwijn & Marieke Huisman

Authors
  1. Wytse Oortwijn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marieke Huisman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Wytse Oortwijn or Marieke Huisman .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden

    Wolfgang Ahrendt

  2. University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway

    Silvia Lizeth Tapia Tarifa

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Oortwijn, W., Huisman, M. (2019). Practical Abstractions for Automated Verification of Message Passing Concurrency. In: Ahrendt, W., Tapia Tarifa, S. (eds) Integrated Formal Methods. IFM 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11918. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-34968-4_22

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-34968-4_22

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-34967-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-34968-4

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation