Advertisement

Checking for Deadlock, Double-Free and Other Abuses in the Linux Kernel Source Code

  • Peter T. Breuer
  • Simon Pickin
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3994)

Abstract

The analysis described in this article detects about two real and uncorrected deadlock situations per thousand C source files or million lines of code in the Linux kernel source, and three accesses to freed memory, at a few seconds per file. In distinction to model-checking techniques, the analysis applies a configurable “3-phase” Hoare-style logic to an abstract interpretation of C code to obtain its results.

Keywords

Program Logic Abstract Interpretation Program Fragment Program Language Design Spin Lock 
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.

References

  1. 1.
    Breuer, P.T., Martínez Madrid, N., Sánchez, L., Marín, A., Delgado Kloos, C.: A formal method for specification and refinement of real-time systems. In: Proc. 8’th EuroMicro Workshop on Real Time Systems, L’aquilla, Italy, pp. 34–42. IEEE Press, Los Alamitos (1996)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Breuer, P.T., Delgado Kloos, C., Martínez Madrid, N., López Marin, A., Sánchez, L.: A Refinement Calculus for the Synthesis of Verified Digital or Analog Hardware Descriptions in VHDL. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems (TOPLAS) 19(4), 586–616 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Breuer, P.T., Valls, M.G.: Static Deadlock Detection in the Linux Kernel. In: Llamosí, A., Strohmeier, A. (eds.) Ada-Europe 2004. LNCS, vol. 3063, pp. 52–64. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cousot, P., Cousot, R.: Abstract interpretation: A unified lattice model for static analysis of programs by construction or approximation of fixpoints. In: Proc. 4th ACM Symp. on the Principles of Programming Languages, pp. 238–252 (1977)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Foster, J.S., Fähndrich, M., Aiken, A.: A Theory of Type Qualifiers. In: Proc. ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation (PLDI 1999), Atlanta, Georgia (May 1999)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Foster, J.S., Terauchi, T., Aiken, A.: Flow-Sensitive Type Qualifiers. In: Proc. ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation (PLDI 2002), Berlin, Germany, June 2002, pp. 1–12 (2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Johnson, R., Wagner, D.: Finding User/Kernel Pointer Bugs With Type Inference. In: Proc. 13th USENIX Security Symposium, San Diego, CA, USA, August 9-13 (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wagner, D., Foster, J.S., Brewer, E.A., Aiken, A.: A First Step Towards Automated Detection of Buffer Overrun Vulnerabilities. In: Proc. Network and Distributed System Security (NDSS) Symposium, San Diego, CA, USA, February 2-4 (2000)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter T. Breuer
    • 1
  • Simon Pickin
    • 1
  1. 1.Universidad Carlos III de MadridLeganesSpain

Personalised recommendations