Lightweight Verification of a Multi-Task Threaded Server: A Case Study With The Plural Tool

  • Néstor Cataño
  • Ijaz Ahmed
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6959)


In this case study, we used the Plural tool to verify the design of a commercial multi-task threaded application (MTTS) implemented by Novabase, which has been used for massively parallelising computational tasks. The effort undertaken in this case study has revealed several issues related with the design of the MTTS, with programming practices used in its implementation, and with domain specific properties of the MTTS. This case study has also provided insight on how the analysis done by the Plural tool can be improved. The Plural tool performs lightweight verification of Java programs. Plural specification language combines typestates and access permissions, backed by Linear Logic. The Plural specifications we wrote for the MTTS are based on its code, its informal documentation, sometimes embedded in the code, and our discussions with Novabase’s engineers, who validated our understanding of the MTTS application.


Concurrency Formal Methods Parallelism The Plural Tool Verification 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Ahmed, I., Cataño, N.: Architecture of Novabase’ MTTS application. Technical report, The University of Madeira (2010),
  2. 2.
    Barnett, M., DeLine, R., Fhndrich, M., Rustan, K., Leino, M., Schulte, W.: Verification of object-oriented programs with invariants. Journal of Object Technology 3 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bierhoff, K., Aldrich, J.: Modular typestate checking of aliased objects. In: Proceedings of the 22nd Annual ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Object-Oriented Programming Systems and Applications, OOPSLA, pp. 301–320 (2007)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bierhoff, K., Beckman, N.E., Aldrich, J.: Practical API protocol checking with access permissions. In: Drossopoulou, S. (ed.) ECOOP 2009. LNCS, vol. 5653, pp. 195–219. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bierhoff, N.B.K., Aldrich, J.: Verifying correct usage of atomic blocks and typestate. In: OOPSLA (2008)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Boyland, J.: Checking interference with fractional permissions. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Static Analysis, SAS, pp. 55–72 (2003)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Burdy, L., Cheon, Y., Cok, D., Ernst, M.D., Kiniry, J., Leavens, G.T., Rustan, K., Leino, M., Poll, E.: An overview of JML tools and applications (2003)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cataño, N., Wahls, T.: Executing JML specifications of java card applications: A case study. In: 24th ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, Software Engineering Track (SAC-SE), Honolulu, Hawaii, March 8-12, pp. 404–408 (2009)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    DeLine, R., Fähndrich, M.: Enforcing high-level protocols in low-level software. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN 2001 Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, PLDI, pp. 59–69 (2001)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    DeLine, R., Fähndrich, M.: The Fugue protocol checker: Is your software baroque (2003)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Girard, J.-Y.: Linear logic. Theoretical Computer Science 50, 1–102 (1987)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Leavens, G.T., Baker, A.L., Ruby, C.: Preliminary design of JML: A behavioral interface specification language for Java. ACM SIGSOFT (Software Engineering Symposium) 31(3), 1–38 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
  14. 14.
  15. 15.
    Roux, P., Siminiceanu, R.: Model checking with edge-valued decision diagrams. In: NASA Formal Methods Symposium (NFM), NASA/CP-2010-216215, pp. 222–226. Langley Research Center, NASA (April 2010)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Stork, S., Marques, P., Aldrich, J.: Concurrency by default: using permissions to express dataflow in stateful programs. In: Conference on Object-Oriented Programming Systems and Applications, OOPSLA, pp. 933–940 (2009)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Strom, R.E., Yemini, S.: Typestate: A programming language concept for enhancing software reliability. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 12, 157–171 (1986)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Néstor Cataño
    • 1
  • Ijaz Ahmed
    • 1
  1. 1.Madeira ITICarnegie Mellon University - PortugalFunchalPortugal

Personalised recommendations