Advertisement

Communication Topology Analysis for Concurrent Programs

  • Matthieu Martel
  • Marc Gengler
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1885)

Abstract

In this article, we address the problem of statically determining an approximation of the communication topology of concurrent programs. These programs may contain dynamic process and channel creations and may communicate channel names as well as functions, possibly containing other communications.

We introduce a control flow analysis which builds finite state automata to improve its precision. The method is twofold. First, we build an automaton for each process in the concurrent system yielding an approximation of how the synchronizations realized by the sequential components are ordered. Second, we extract the communication topology from a reduced product automaton, which size is polynomial in the size of the original program. This analysis was implemented and we apply it to the verification of a circuit allocation mechanism.

Keywords

Control Channel Partial Evaluation Concurrent System Virtual Circuit Synchronization Point 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Alles, A.: ATM Internetworking. Technical report, CISCO Systems Inc. (1995)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Amtoft, T., Nielson, F., Nielson, H.R.: Behaviour analysis and safety conditions: a case study in CML. In: Astesiano, E. (ed.) ETAPS 1998 and FASE 1998. LNCS, vol. 1382, pp. 255–269. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Berry, D., Milner, R., Turner, D.N.: A semantics for ML concurrency primitives. In: Proceedings of the ACM-SIGPLAN Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages POPL 1992, ACM, New York (1992)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bodei, C., Degano, P., Nielson, F., Nielson, H.R.: Control flow analysis for the pi-calculus. In: Sangiorgi, D., de Simone, R. (eds.) CONCUR 1998. LNCS, vol. 1466, pp. 84–98. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bodei, C., Degano, P., Nielson, F., Nielson, H.R.: Static analysis of processes for no read-up and no write-down. In: Thomas, W. (ed.) FOSSACS 1999. LNCS, vol. 1578, pp. 120–134. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Colby, C.: Analyzing the communication topology of concurrent pro- grams. In: Proceedings of the ACM-SIGPLAN Symposium on Partial Evaluation and semantic based program manipulations PEPM 1995, pp. 202–213. ACM, New York (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Consel, C., Danvy, O.: Partial evaluation: Principles and perspectives. In: Proceedings of the ACM-SIGPLAN Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages POPL 1993. ACM, New York (1993)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gengler, M., Martel, M.: Self-applicable partial evaluation for the pi-calculus. In: Partial Evaluation and Semantics-Based Program Manipulation, PEPM 1997, pp. 36–46 (1997)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gengler, M., Martel, M.: Desétages en Concurrent ML. In: Rencontres Francophones du Parallélisme, Renpar10 (1998)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jagannathan, S.: Locality abstractions for parallel and distributed computing. In: Ito, T., Yonezawa, A. (eds.) TPPP 1994. LNCS, vol. 907, Springer, Heidelberg (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kobayashi, N., Nakade, M., Yonezawa, A.: Static analysis of communications for asynchronous concurrent programming languages. In: Mycroft, A. (ed.) SAS 1995. LNCS, vol. 983, pp. 225–242. Springer, Heidelberg (1995)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Marinescu, M., Goldberg, B.: Partial evaluation techniques for con- current programs. In: ACM-SIGPLAN Symposium on Partial Evaluation and Semantic Based Program Manipulations PEPM 1997, pp. 47–62. ACM, New York (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mercouroff, N.: An algorithm for analyzing communicating processes. LNCS, vol. 598, pp. 312–325. Springer, Heidelberg (1992)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nielson, F., Nielson, H.R.: Constraints for polymorphics behaviours of Concurrent ML. In: Jouannaud, J.-P. (ed.) CCL 1994. LNCS, vol. 845, pp. 73–88. Springer, Heidelberg (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nielson, F., Nielson, H.R.: Higher-order concurrent programs with finite communication topology. In: Proceedings of the ACM-SIGPLAN Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages POPL 1994, pp. 84–97. ACM, New York (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Nielson, F., Nielson, H.R.: Static and dynamic processor allocation for higher-order concurrent languages. In: Mosses, P.D., Schwartzbach, M.I., Nielsen, M. (eds.) CAAP 1995, FASE 1995, and TAPSOFT 1995. LNCS, vol. 915, pp. 590–604. Springer, Heidelberg (1995)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nielson, F., Nielson, H.R.: Infinitary control flow analysis: a collec- ting semantics for closure analysis. In: ACM-SIGPLAN Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages POPL 1997, pp. 332–345. ACM, New York (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nielson, F., Nielson, H.R.: Communication analysis for Concurrent ML. In: ML with Concurrency. Monograph in Computer Science, pp. 185–251. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nielson, F., Nielson, H.R., Hankin, C.: Principles of Program Analysis. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)MATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Reppy, J.H.: An operational semantics of first-class synchronous operations. Technical Report TR-91-1232, Department of Computer Science, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853 (1991)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Reppy, J.H.: Higher-order Concurrency. PhD thesis, Department of Computer Science, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853 (1992)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Reppy, J.H.: Concurrent Programming in ML. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Shivers, O.: Control flow analysis in scheme. In: Proceedings of the ACM- SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, PLDI 1988, pp. 164–174. ACM, New York (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Shivers, O.: Control Flow Analysis of Higher Order Languages. PhD thesis, Carnegie Mellon University, Technical Report CMU-CS-91-145 (1991)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Solberg, K.L., Nielson, F., Nielson, H.R.: Systematic realisation of control flow analyses for CML. In: ACM-SIGPLAN International Conference on Functional Programming, ICFP 1997, pp. 38–51. ACM, New York (1997)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Tanenbaum, A.S.: Computer Networks, 3rd edn. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1996)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Matthieu Martel
    • 1
  • Marc Gengler
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratoire d’Informatique de Marseille (LIM)Parc Scientifique et Technologique de LuminyMarseille Cedex 9France

Personalised recommendations