Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Automatic Protocol Conformance Checking of Recursive and Parallel Component-Based Systems

  • Conference paper
Component-Based Software Engineering (CBSE 2008)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 5282))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Today model checking of security or safety properties of component-based systems based on finite protocols has the flaw that either parallel or sequential systems can be checked. Parallel systems can be described often by well known Petri nets, but it is not possible to model recursive behaviour. On the other hand sequential systems based on pushdown automata can capture recursion and recursive callbacks [27], but they do not provide parallel behaviour in general.

In this work we show how this gap can be filled if process rewrite systems (introduced by Mayr [16]) are used to capture the behaviour of components. The protocols of the components interfaces specified as finite state machines can be combined to a system equal to a process rewrite system. By calculating the reachability of the fault state range one gets a trace (counterexample) which does not satisfy the properties specified by all protocols of the combined components, if any error exists.

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 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

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Allen, R., Garlan, S.: A formal basis for architectural connection. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology 6(3), 213–249 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Alur, R., Etessami, K., Yannakakis, M.: Analysis of recursive state machines. In: Berry, G., Comon, H., Finkel, A. (eds.) CAV 2001. LNCS, vol. 2102, pp. 207–220. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Benedikt, M., Godefroid, P., Reps, T.: Model checking of unrestricted hierarchical state machines. In: Orejas, F., Spirakis, P.G., van Leeuwen, J. (eds.) ICALP 2001. LNCS, vol. 2076, pp. 652–666. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Bouajjani, A., Esparza, J., Finkel, A., Maler, O., Rossmanith, P., Willems, B., Wolper, P.: An efficient automata approach to some problems on context-free grammars. Information Processing Letters 74(5-6), 221–227 (2000)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Bouajjani, A., Habermehl, P.: Constrained properties, semilinear systems, and petri nets. In: Sassone, V., Montanari, U. (eds.) CONCUR 1996. LNCS, vol. 1119, pp. 481–497. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Burkart, O., Steffen, B.: Model checking for context-free processes. In: Cleaveland, W.R. (ed.) CONCUR 1992. LNCS, vol. 630, pp. 123–137. Springer, Heidelberg (1992)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Burkart, O., Steffen, B.: Pushdown processes: Parallel composition and model checking. In: Jonsson, B., Parrow, J. (eds.) CONCUR 1994. LNCS, vol. 836, pp. 98–113. Springer, Heidelberg (1994)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. Chaki, S., Clarke, E.M., Kidd, N., Reps, T.W., Touili, T.: Verifying concurrent message-passing c programs with recursive calls. In: Hermanns, H., Palsberg, J. (eds.) TACAS 2006. LNCS, vol. 3920, pp. 334–349. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Chambers, C.: Predicate classes. In: Nierstrasz, O. (ed.) ECOOP 1993. LNCS, vol. 707, pp. 268–296. Springer, Heidelberg (1993)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. Esparza, J., Hansel, D., Rossmanith, P., Schwoon, S.: Efficient algorithms for model checking pushdown systems. In: Emerson, E.A., Sistla, A.P. (eds.) CAV 2000. LNCS, vol. 1855, pp. 232–247. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Freudig, J., Löwe, W., Neumann, R., Trapp, M.: Subtyping of context-free classes. In: Proceedings 3rd White Object Oriented Nights (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Schmidt, H.W., Krämer, B.J., Poernemo, I., Reussner, R.: Predictable component architectures using dependent finite state machines. In: Wirsing, M., Knapp, A., Balsamo, S. (eds.) RISSEF 2002. LNCS, vol. 2941, pp. 310–324. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Hopcroft, J.E., Ullman, J.D.: Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages and Computation. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1979)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Lal, A., Touili, T., Kidd, N., Reps, T.: Interprocedural analysis of concurrent programs under a context bound. In: Ramakrishnan, C., Rehof, J. (eds.) TACAS 2008. LNCS, vol. 4963, pp. 282–298. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Löwe, W., Neumann, R., Trapp, M., Zimmermann, W.: Robust dynamic exchange of implementation aspects. In: TOOLS 29 – Technology of Object-Oriented Languages and Systems, pp. 351–360. IEEE, Los Alamitos (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Mayr, R.: Process rewrite systems. Information and Computation 156(1-2), 264–286 (2000)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Mayr, R.: Decidability of model checking with the temporal logic ef. Theor. Comput. Sci. 256(1-2), 31–62 (2001)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Nierstrasz, O.: Regular types for active objects. In: Nierstrasz, O., Tsichritzis, D. (eds.) Object-Oriented Software Composition, pp. 99–121. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Qadeer, S., Rehof, J.: Context-bounded model checking of concurrent software. In: TACAS, pp. 93–107 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Ramalingam, G., Warshavsky, A., Field, J., Goyal, D., Sagiv, M.: Deriving specialized program analyses for certifying component-client conformance. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN 2002 Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, pp. 83–94. ACM, New York (2002)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. Reussner, R.H.: Counter-constraint finite state machines: A new model for resource-bounded component protocols. In: Grosky, W.I., Plášil, F. (eds.) SOFSEM 2002. LNCS, vol. 2540, pp. 20–40. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  22. Schmidt, H.W., Krämer, B.J., Poernomo, I., Reussner, R.: Predictable component architectures using dependent finite state machines. In: Wirsing, M., Knapp, A., Balsamo, S. (eds.) RISSEF 2002. LNCS, vol. 2941, pp. 310–324. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  23. Tenzer, J., Stevens, P.: Modelling recursive calls with uml state diagrams. In: Pezzé, M. (ed.) FASE 2003. LNCS, vol. 2621, pp. 135–149. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  24. Torre, S.L., Madhusudan, P., Parlato, G.: Context-bounded analysis of concurrent queue systems. In: Ramakrishnan, C.R., Rehof, J. (eds.) TACAS 2008. LNCS, vol. 4963, pp. 299–314. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  25. Yellin, D.M., Strom, R.E.: Protocol specifications and component adaptors. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 19(2), 292–333 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Zimmermann, W., Schaarschmidt, M.: Model checking of client-component conformance. In: 2nd Nordic Conference on Web-Services. Mathematical Modelling in Physics, Engineering and Cognitive Sciences, vol. 008, pp. 63–74 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Zimmermann, W., Schaarschmidt, M.: Automatic checking of component protocols in component-based systems. In: Löwe, W., Südholt, M. (eds.) SC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4089, pp. 1–17. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Computer Science, University of Halle, 06099, Halle/Saale, Germany

    Andreas Both & Wolf Zimmermann

Authors
  1. Andreas Both
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Wolf Zimmermann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Technische Universiteit Eindhoven, Den Dolech 2, 5600MB, Eindhoven, The Netherlands

    Michel R. V. Chaudron

  2. Microsoft, USA

    Clemens Szyperski

  3. Chair for Software Design and Quality, University of Karlsruhe (TH),, Am Fasanengarten 5, 76131, Karlsruhe, Germany

    Ralf Reussner

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2008 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Both, A., Zimmermann, W. (2008). Automatic Protocol Conformance Checking of Recursive and Parallel Component-Based Systems. In: Chaudron, M.R.V., Szyperski, C., Reussner, R. (eds) Component-Based Software Engineering. CBSE 2008. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 5282. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-87891-9_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-87891-9_11

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-87890-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-87891-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation