Automated program verification made SYMPLAR: symbolic permissions for lightweight automated reasoning

ABSTRACT

Research in automated program verification against specifications written in first-order logic has come a long way. Ever-faster Satisfiability Modulo Theories (SMT) solvers [Barrett et al. 2010] promise to verify program instructions quickly against specifications. Unfortunately, aliasing still prevents automated program verification tools from easily and soundly verifying interesting programs. This paper introduces the use of symbolic permissions as the basis for sound automated program verification. Symbolic permissions provide a simple alias control mechanism with expressiveness similar to the well-known fractional permissions [Boyland 2003]. The paper shows that symbolic permissions can be enforced with a linear refinement typechecking procedure. Once permissions are checked, aliasing can essentially be ignored for the purposes of program verification, which allows taking full advantage of SMT solvers for doing the heavy verification lifting. The paper shows that a verification tool based on symbolic permissions can easily verify a design pattern with inherent aliasing challenges.

References

1. J. Aldrich, V. Kostadinov, and C. Chambers. Alias annotations for program understanding. In ACM Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages & Applications, pages 311--330, Nov. 2002.
2. M. Barnett and D. A. Naumann. Friends need a bit more: Maintaining object invariants over shared state. In Mathematics of Program Construction, pages 54--84. Springer, 2004.
3. drich, Leino, and Schulte}barnett04invariantsM. Barnett, R. DeLine, M. Fahndrich, K. R. M. Leino, and W. Schulte. Verification of object-oriented programs with invariants. Journal of Object Technology, 3 (6): 27--56, June 2004.
4. C. Barrett, A. Stump, and C. Tinelli. The SMT-LIB Standard, Version 2.0, Mar. 2010. URL http://goedel.cs.uiowa.edu/smtlib/.
5. N. E. Beckman. Types for Correct Concurrent API Usage. PhD thesis, Carnegie Mellon University, Dec. 2010.
6. N. E. Beckman, K. Bierhoff, and J. Aldrich. Verifying correct usage of Atomic blocks and typestate. In ACM Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages & Applications, pages 227--244, Oct. 2008.
7. K. Bierhoff. API Protocol Compliance in Object-Oriented Software. PhD thesis, Carnegie Mellon University, Apr. 2009.
8. K. Bierhoff and J. Aldrich. Modular typestate checking of aliased objects. In ACM Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages & Applications, pages 301--320, Oct. 2007.
9. K. Bierhoff and J. Aldrich. Permissions to specify the composite design pattern. In 7th International Workshop on Specification and Verification of Component-Based Systems, Nov. 2008.
10. K. Bierhoff and C. Hawblitzel. Checking the hardware-software interface in Spec. In 4th Workshop on Programming Languages and Operating Systems. ACM Digital Library, Oct. 2007. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1376789.1376802.
11. K. Bierhoff, N. E. Beckman, and J. Aldrich. Practical API protocol checking with Access Permissions. In European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, pages 195--219. Springer, July 2009.
12. }bodden07stagedE. Bodden, L. Hendren, and O. Lhoták. A staged static program analysis to improve the performance of runtime monitoring. In European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, pages 525--549. Springer, 2007.
13. R. Bornat, C. Calcagno, P. O'Hearn, and M. Parkinson. Permission accounting in separation logic. In ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, pages 259--270, Jan. 2005. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1047659.1040327.
14. J. Boyland. Checking interference with fractional permissions. In International Symposium on Static Analysis, pages 55--72. Springer, 2003.
15. J. T. Boyland and W. Retert. Connecting effects and uniqueness with adoption. In ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, pages 283--295, Jan. 2005.
16. C. Calcagno, D. Distefano, P. O'Hearn, and H. Yang. Compositional shape analysis by means of bi-abduction. In ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, pages 289--300. ACM, Jan. 2009. ISBN 978--1--60558--379--2. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1480881.1480917.
17. L. de Moura and N. Bjørner. Z3: An efficient SMT solver. In Conference on Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems, 2008.
18. W. Dietl and P. Müller. Universes: Lightweight ownership for JML. Journal of Object Technology, 4 (8): 5--32, 2005. URL http://www.jot.fm/issues/issues 2005 10/article1.
19. M. Fahndrich and R. DeLine. Adoption and focus: Practical linear types for imperative programming. In ACM Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, pages 13--24, June 2002.
20. M. Fahndrich and S. Xia. Establishing object invariants with delayed types. In ACM Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages & Applications, pages 337--350, Oct. 2007. ISBN 978--1--59593--786--5. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1297027.1297052.
21. C. Flanagan, K. R. M. Leino, M. Lillibridge, G. Nelson, J. Saxe, and R. Stata. Extended static checking for Java. In ACM Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, pages 234--245, May 2002.
22. C. Haack and C. Hurlin. Resource usage protocols for iterators. In International Workshop on Aliasing, Confinement and Ownership, July 2008.
23. S. Heule, K. R. M. Leino, P. Müller, and A. J. Summers. Fractional permissions without the fractions. In Workshop on Formal Techniques for Java-like Programs, July 2011.
24. A. Igarashi, B. Pierce, and P. Wadler. Featherweight Java: A minimal core calculus for Java and GJ. In ACM Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages & Applications, pages 132--146, 1999.
25. B. Jacobs and F. Piessens. The VeriFast program verifier. Technical Report CW-520, Department of Computer Science, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Aug. 2008.
26. N. Krishnaswami. Reasoning about iterators with separation logic. In 5th International Workshop on Specification and Verification of Component-Based Systems, pages 83--86. ACM Press, Nov. 2006.
27. G. T. Leavens, A. L. Baker, and C. Ruby. JML: A notation for detailed design. In H. Kilov, B. Rumpe, and I. Simmonds, editors, Behavioral Specifications of Businesses and Systems, pages 175--188. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, 1999.
28. B. H. Liskov and J. M. Wing. A behavioral notion of subtyping. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, 16 (6): 1811--1841, Nov. 1994.
29. P. Müller. Modular Specification and Verification of Object-Oriented Programs. Springer, 2002.
30. P. Müller and A. Rudich. Ownership transfer in Universe types. In ACM Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages & Applications, pages 461--478, Oct. 2007. ISBN 978--1--59593--786--5. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1297027.1297061.
31. M. J. Parkinson and G. M. Bierman. Separation logic, abstraction and inheritance. In ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, pages 75--86, Jan. 2008.
32. G. Ramalingam, A. Warshavsky, J. Field, D. Goyal, and M. Sagiv. Deriving specialized program analyses for certifying component-client conformance. In ACM Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, pages 83--94, 2002. ISBN 1--58113--463-0. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/512529.512540.
33. J. C. Reynolds. Separation logic: A logic for shared mutable data structures. In IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, pages 55--74, 2002.
34. D. Saini, J. Sunshine, and J. Aldrich. A theory of Typestate oriented programming. In Workshop on Formal Techniques for Java-like Programs (FTfJP), 2010.
35. J. Smans, B. Jacobs, and F. Piessens. Implicit dynamic frames: Combining dynamic frames and separation logic. In European Conference on Object-oriented Programming, pages 148--172. Springer, July 2009.
36. T. Terauchi. Checking race freedom via linear programming. In ACM Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, pages 1--10, June 2008.
37. T. Terauchi and A. Aiken. A capability calculus for concurrency and determinism. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems (TOPLAS), 30 (5): 1--30, Aug. 2008. ISSN 0164-0925. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1387673.1387676.
38. Y. Zhao. Concurrency Analysis Based on Fractional Permission System. PhD thesis, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Aug. 2007.

Index Terms

• General and reference

  • Cross-computing tools and techniques

    • Verification

• Software and its engineering

  • Software creation and management

    • Software development process management

    • Software verification and validation

      • Formal software verification

  • Software organization and properties

    • Software functional properties

      • Formal methods

        • Software verification

• Theory of computation

  • Semantics and reasoning

    • Program reasoning

      • Program verification