Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

SPEN: A Solver for Separation Logic

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
NASA Formal Methods (NFM 2017)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 10227))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Spen is a solver for a fragment of separation logic (SL) with inductively-defined predicates covering both (nested) list structures as well as various kinds of trees, possibly extended with data. The main functionalities of Spen are deciding the satisfiability of a formula and the validity of an entailment between two formulas, which are essential for verification of heap manipulating programs. The solver also provides models for satisfiable formulas and diagnosis for invalid entailments. Spen combines several concepts in a modular way, such as boolean abstractions of SL formulas, SAT and SMT solving, and tree automata membership testing. The solver has been successfully applied to a rather large benchmark of various problems issued from program verification tools.

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

Notes

  1. 1.

    https://github.com/mihasighi/spen.

  2. 2.

    Available at http://minisat.se.

  3. 3.

    www.starexec.org, an Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2609 at 2.40 GHz of and 10 MB cache.

References

  1. Berdine, J., Calcagno, C., O’Hearn, P.W.: A decidable fragment of separation logic. In: Lodaya, K., Mahajan, M. (eds.) FSTTCS 2004. LNCS, vol. 3328, pp. 97–109. Springer, Heidelberg (2004). doi:10.1007/978-3-540-30538-5_9

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Brotherston, J., Gorogiannis, N., Petersen, R.L.: A generic cyclic theorem prover. In: Jhala, R., Igarashi, A. (eds.) APLAS 2012. LNCS, vol. 7705, pp. 350–367. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-35182-2_25

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Calcagno, C., Yang, H., O’Hearn, P.W.: Computability and complexity results for a spatial assertion language for data structures. In: Hariharan, R., Vinay, V., Mukund, M. (eds.) FSTTCS 2001. LNCS, vol. 2245, pp. 108–119. Springer, Heidelberg (2001). doi:10.1007/3-540-45294-X_10

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Chin, W.-N., David, C., Nguyen, H.H., Qin, S.: Automated verification of shape, size and bag properties via user-defined predicates in separation logic. Sci. Comput. Program. 77(9), 1006–1036 (2012). Elsevier

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. De Moura, L., Bjørner, N.: Z3: an efficient SMT solver. In: Ramakrishnan, C.R., Rehof, J. (eds.) TACAS 2008. LNCS, vol. 4963, pp. 337–340. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). doi:10.1007/978-3-540-78800-3_24

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Enea, C., Lengál, O., Sighireanu, M., Vojnar, T.: Compositional entailment checking for a fragment of separation logic. In: Garrigue, J. (ed.) APLAS 2014. LNCS, vol. 8858, pp. 314–333. Springer, Cham (2014). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-12736-1_17

    Google Scholar 

  7. Enea, C., Saveluc, V., Sighireanu, M.: Compositional invariant checking for overlaid and nested linked lists. In: Felleisen, M., Gardner, P. (eds.) ESOP 2013. LNCS, vol. 7792, pp. 129–148. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-37036-6_9

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. Enea, C., Sighireanu, M., Wu, Z.: On automated lemma generation for separation logic with inductive definitions. In: Finkbeiner, B., Pu, G., Zhang, L. (eds.) ATVA 2015. LNCS, vol. 9364, pp. 80–96. Springer, Cham (2015). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-24953-7_7

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Iosif, R., Rogalewicz, A., Vojnar, T.: Deciding entailments in inductive separation logic with tree automata. In: Cassez, F., Raskin, J.-F. (eds.) ATVA 2014. LNCS, vol. 8837, pp. 201–218. Springer, Cham (2014). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-11936-6_15

    Google Scholar 

  10. Iosif, R., Rogalewicz, A., Simacek, J.: The tree width of separation logic with recursive definitions. In: Bonacina, M.P. (ed.) CADE 2013. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 7898, pp. 21–38. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-38574-2_2

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. O’Hearn, P., Reynolds, J., Yang, H.: Local reasoning about programs that alter data structures. In: Fribourg, L. (ed.) CSL 2001. LNCS, vol. 2142, pp. 1–19. Springer, Heidelberg (2001). doi:10.1007/3-540-44802-0_1

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Pérez, J.A.N., Rybalchenko, A.: Separation logic modulo theories. In: Shan, C. (ed.) APLAS 2013. LNCS, vol. 8301, pp. 90–106. Springer, Cham (2013). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-03542-0_7

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Piskac, R., Wies, T., Zufferey, D.: Automating separation logic using SMT. In: Sharygina, N., Veith, H. (eds.) CAV 2013. LNCS, vol. 8044, pp. 773–789. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-39799-8_54

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Qiu, X., Garg, P., Stefanescu, A., Madhusudan, P.: Natural proofs for structure, data, and separation. In: Proceedings of PLDI 2013. ACM Press (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Sighireanu, M., Cok, D.: Report on SL-COMP’14. JSAT 9, 173–186 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

This work was supported by the French ANR project Vecolib, the Czech Science Foundation (project 17-12465S), the BUT FIT project FIT-S-17-4014, the IT4IXS: IT4Innovations Excellence in Science project (LQ1602), and by the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Unions Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (grant agreement No. 678177).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Univ. Paris Diderot, IRIF CNRS UMR 8243, Paris, France

    Constantin Enea & Mihaela Sighireanu

  2. FIT, Brno University of Technology, IT4Innovations Centre of Excellence, Brno, Czech Republic

    Ondřej Lengál & Tomáš Vojnar

Authors
  1. Constantin Enea
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ondřej Lengál
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mihaela Sighireanu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Tomáš Vojnar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ondřej Lengál .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Stanford University, Palo Alto, California, USA

    Clark Barrett

  2. NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, California, USA

    Misty Davies

  3. NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, California, USA

    Temesghen Kahsai

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this paper

Cite this paper

Enea, C., Lengál, O., Sighireanu, M., Vojnar, T. (2017). SPEN: A Solver for Separation Logic. In: Barrett, C., Davies, M., Kahsai, T. (eds) NASA Formal Methods. NFM 2017. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10227. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57288-8_22

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57288-8_22

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-57287-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-57288-8

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation