Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A program logic for obstruction-freedom

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Frontiers of Computer Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Though obstruction-free progress property is weaker than other non-blocking properties including lock-freedom and wait-freedom, it has advantages that have led to the use of obstruction-free implementations for software transactional memory (STM) and in anonymous and fault-tolerant distributed computing. However, existing work can only verify obstruction-freedom of specific data structures (e.g., STM and list-based algorithms).

In this paper, to fill this gap, we propose a program logic that can formally verify obstruction-freedom of practical implementations, as well as verify linearizability, a safety property, at the same time. We also propose informal principles to extend a logic for verifying linearizability to verifying obstruction-freedom. With this approach, the existing proof for linearizability can be reused directly to construct the proof for both linearizability and obstruction-freedom. Finally, we have successfully applied our logic to verifying a practical obstruction-free double-ended queue implementation in the first classic paper that has proposed the definition of obstruction-freedom.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lamport L. Proving the correctness of multiprocess programs. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 1977, SE-3(2): 125–143

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Herlihy M P, Wing J M. Linearizability: a correctness condition for concurrent objects. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, 1990, 12(3): 463–492

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Herlihy M, Shavit N. The Art of Multiprocessor Programming. Amsterdam: Morgan Kaufmann, 2008

    Google Scholar 

  4. Liang H, Feng X. Modular verification of linearizability with non-fixed linearization points. In: Proceedings of the 34th ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation. 2013, 459–470

  5. da Rocha Pinto P, Dinsdale-Young T, Gardner P. TaDA: a logic for time and data abstraction. In: Proceedings of the 28th European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming. 2014, 207–231

  6. Jung R, Swasey D, Sieczkowski F, Svendsen K, Turon A, Birkedal L, Dreyer D. Iris: monoids and invariants as an orthogonal basis for concurrent reasoning. ACM SIGPLAN Notices, 2015, 50(1): 637–650

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. da Rocha Pinto P, Dinsdale-Young T, Gardner P, Sutherland J. Modular termination verification for non-blocking concurrency. In: Proceedings of the 25th European Symposium on Programming. 2016, 176–201

  8. Liang H, Feng X, Shao Z. Compositional verification of termination-preserving refinement of concurrent programs. In: Proceedings of the Joint Meeting of the 23rd EACSL Annual Conference on Computer Science Logic (CSL) and the Twenty-Ninth Annual ACM/IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (LICS). 2014, 65

  9. Liang H, Feng X. A program logic for concurrent objects under fair scheduling. In: Proceedings of the 43rd Annual ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages. 2016, 385–399

  10. Guerraoui R, Henzinger T A, Jobstmann B, Singh V. Model checking transactional memories. In: Proceedings of the 29th ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation. 2008, 372–382

  11. Abdulla P, Dwarkadas S, Rezine A, Shriraman A, Zhu Y. Verifying safety and liveness for the FlexTM hybrid transactional memory. In: Proceedings of 2013 Design, Automation & Test in Europe Conference & Exhibition. 2013, 785–790

  12. Gotsman A, Cook B, Parkinson M, Vafeiadis V. Proving that non-blocking algorithms don’t block. In: Proceedings of the 36th Annual ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages. 2009, 16–28

  13. Herlihy M. Wait-free synchronization. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, 1991, 13(1): 124–149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Fraser K. Practical lock-freedom. No. UCAM-CL-TR-579. University of Cambridge, Computer Laboratory, 2004

  15. Herlihy M, Luchangco V, Moir M. Obstruction-free synchronization: double-ended queues as an example. In: Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems. 2003, 522–529

  16. Saha A, Chatterjee A, Pal N, Ghosh A, Chaki N. A lightweight implementation of obstruction-free software transactional memory. In: Chaki R, Saeed K, Choudhury S, Chaki N, eds. Applied Computation and Security Systems. New Delhi: Springer, 2014, 67–84

    Google Scholar 

  17. Ghosh A, Chaki N. Design of a new OFTM algorithm towards abortfree execution. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Distributed Computing and Internet Technology. 2013, 255–266

  18. Tabba F, Moir M, Goodman J R, Hay A W, Wang C. NZTM: nonblocking zero-indirection transactional memory. In: Proceedings of the 21st Annual Symposium on Parallelism in Algorithms and Architectures. 2009, 204–213

  19. Marathe V J, Scherer III W N, Scott M L. Adaptive software transactional memory. In: Proceedings of the 19th International Symposium on Distributed Computing. 2005, 354–368

  20. Guerraoui R, Ruppert E. Anonymous and fault-tolerant shared-memory computing. Distributed Computing, 2007, 20(3): 165–177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Bouzid Z, Raynal M, Sutra P. Anonymous obstruction-free (n, k)-set agreement with n−k+1 atomic read/write registers. Distributed Computing, 2018, 31(2): 99–117

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  22. Fraser K, Harris T. Concurrent programming without locks. ACM Transactions on Computer Systems, 2007, 25(2): 5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Moir M S, Luchangco V M, Herlihy M. Obstruction-free data structures and mechanisms with separable and/or substitutable contention management mechanisms: US09052944B2. 2005-04-15

  24. Fich F E, Luchangco V, Moir M, Shavit N. Obstruction-Free algorithms can be practically wait-free. In: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Distributed Computing. 2005, 78–92

  25. Liang H, Hoffmann J, Feng X, Shao Z. Characterizing progress properties of concurrent objects via contextual refinements. In: Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Concurrency Theory. 2013, 227–241

  26. Liang H, Feng X. Progress of concurrent objects with partial methods. Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages, 2017, 2(POPL): 20

    Google Scholar 

  27. Li Z H, Feng X Y. Verifying contextual refinement with ownership transfer. Journal of Computer Science and Technology, 2021, 36(6): 1342–1366

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Hoffmann J, Marmar M, Shao Z. Quantitative reasoning for proving lock-freedom. In: Proceedings of the 28th Annual ACM/IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science. 2013, 124–133

  29. Liang H, Feng X. Progress of concurrent objects. Foundations and Trends® in Programming Languages, 2020, 5(4): 282–414

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Filipović I, O’Hearn P, Rinetzky N, Yang H. Abstraction for concurrent objects. Theoretical Computer Science, 2010, 411(51–52): 4379–4398

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 61632005).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Computer Science and Technology, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, 230026, China

    Zhao-Hui Li

  2. Department of Computer Science and Technology, Nanjing University, Nanjing, 210023, China

    Xin-Yu Feng

  3. State Key Laboratory for Novel Software Technology, Nanjing University, Nanjing, 210023, China

    Xin-Yu Feng

Authors
  1. Zhao-Hui Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Xin-Yu Feng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Xin-Yu Feng.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests The authors declare that they have no competing interests or financial conflicts to disclose.

Additional information

Supplementary information The supplementary information is available online at https://journal.hep.com.cn and https://link.springer.com.

Zhao-Hui Li is a PhD candidate in the School of Computer Science and Technology at University of Science and Technology of China, China. He obtained his BS degree in computer science from the University of Science and Technology of China, China in 2014. His research interests are in programming languages and formal methods, with a focus on the verification of concurrent programs.

Xin-Yu Feng is a professor in Department of Computer Science at Nanjing University, China. He obtained his PhD degree in computer science from Yale University, USA in 2007, ME and BS degrees in computer science from Nanjing University, China in 2002 and 1999, respectively. His research interests are on theories of programming languages and formal program verification.

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Li, ZH., Feng, XY. A program logic for obstruction-freedom. Front. Comput. Sci. 18, 186208 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11704-023-2774-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11704-023-2774-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation