Efficient Synthesis for Concurrency by Semantics-Preserving Transformations

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8044)


We develop program synthesis techniques that can help programmers fix concurrency-related bugs. We make two new contributions to synthesis for concurrency, the first improving the efficiency of the synthesized code, and the second improving the efficiency of the synthesis procedure itself. The first contribution is to have the synthesis procedure explore a variety of (sequential) semantics-preserving program transformations. Classically, only one such transformation has been considered, namely, the insertion of synchronization primitives (such as locks). Based on common manual bug-fixing techniques used by Linux device-driver developers, we explore additional, more efficient transformations, such as the reordering of independent instructions. The second contribution is to speed up the counterexample-guided removal of concurrency bugs within the synthesis procedure by considering partial-order traces (instead of linear traces) as counterexamples. A partial-order error trace represents a set of linear (interleaved) traces of a concurrent program all of which lead to the same error. By eliminating a partial-order error trace, we eliminate in a single iteration of the synthesis procedure all linearizations of the partial-order trace. We evaluated our techniques on several simplified examples of real concurrency bugs that occurred in Linux device drivers.


Horn Clause State Assertion Atomicity Constraint Error Invariant Atomic Section 
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.


  1. 1.
  2. 2.
    Beyer, D., Keremoglu, M.E.: CPAchecker: A tool for configurable software verification. In: Gopalakrishnan, G., Qadeer, S. (eds.) CAV 2011. LNCS, vol. 6806, pp. 184–190. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cherem, S., Chilimbi, T., Gulwani, S.: Inferring locks for atomic sections. In: PLDI, pp. 304–315 (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chou, A., Yang, J., Chelf, B., Hallem, S., Engler, D.: An empirical study of operating systems errors. In: SOSP, pp. 73–88 (2001)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    de Moura, L., Bjørner, N.S.: Z3: An efficient SMT solver. In: Ramakrishnan, C.R., Rehof, J. (eds.) TACAS 2008. LNCS, vol. 4963, pp. 337–340. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ermis, E., Schäf, M., Wies, T.: Error invariants. In: Giannakopoulou, D., Méry, D. (eds.) FM 2012. LNCS, vol. 7436, pp. 187–201. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gupta, A., Popeea, C., Rybalchenko, A.: Solving recursion-free horn clauses over LI+UIF. In: Yang, H. (ed.) APLAS 2011. LNCS, vol. 7078, pp. 188–203. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gupta, A., Popeea, C., Rybalchenko, A.: Threader: A constraint-based verifier for multi-threaded programs. In: Gopalakrishnan, G., Qadeer, S. (eds.) CAV 2011. LNCS, vol. 6806, pp. 412–417. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lipton, R.: Reduction: A method of proving properties of parallel programs. Commun. ACM 18(12), 717–721 (1975)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mazurkiewicz, A.: Trace theory. In: Brauer, W., Reisig, W., Rozenberg, G. (eds.) APN 1986. LNCS, vol. 255, pp. 278–324. Springer, Heidelberg (1987)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nielson, F., Nielson, H., Hankin, C.: Principles of program analysis (2. corr. print). Springer (2005)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ryzhyk, L., Chubb, P., Kuz, I., Heiser, G.: Dingo: Taming device drivers. In: Eurosys (2009)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Solar-Lezama, A., Jones, C., Bodík, R.: Sketching concurrent data structures. In: PLDI, pp. 136–148 (2008)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Vechev, M., Yahav, E.: Deriving linearizable fine-grained concurrent objects. In: PLDI, pp. 125–135 (2008)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Vechev, M., Yahav, E., Yorsh, G.: Abstraction-guided synthesis of synchronization. In: POPL, pp. 327–338 (2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Colorado BoulderUSA
  2. 2.IST AustriaAustria
  3. 3.NICTAAustralia

Personalised recommendations