Abstract
We consider the problem of verifying deadlock freedom for symmetric cache coherence protocols. While there are multiple definitions of deadlock in the literature, we focus on a specific form of deadlock which is useful for the cache coherence protocol domain and is consistent with the internal definition of deadlock in theMurphi model checker: we refer to this deadlock as a system-wide deadlock (s-deadlock). In s-deadlock, the entire system gets blocked and is unable to make any transition. Cache coherence protocols consist of N symmetric cache agents, where N is an unbounded parameter; thus the verification of s-deadlock freedom is naturally a parameterized verification problem.
Parametrized verification techniques work by using sound abstractions to reduce the unbounded model to a bounded model. Efficient abstractions which work well for industrial scale protocols typically bound the model by replacing the state of most of the agents by an abstract environment, while keeping just one or two agents as is. However, leveraging such efficient abstractions becomes a challenge for s-deadlock: a violation of s-deadlock is a state in which the transitions of all of the unbounded number of agents cannot occur and so a simple abstraction like the one above will not preserve this violation. Authors of a prior paper, in fact, proposed using a combination of over and under abstractions for verifying such properties. While quite promising for a large class of deadlock errors, simultaneously tuning over and under abstractions can become complex.
In this work we address this challenge by presenting a technique which leverages high-level information about the protocols, in the form of message sequence diagrams referred to as flows, for constructing invariants that are collectively stronger than s-deadlock. Further, violations of these invariants can involve only one or two interacting agents: thus they can be verified using efficient abstractions like the ones described above.We show how such invariants for the German and Flash protocols can be successfully derived using our technique and then be verified.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Abadi, M., Lamport, L.: Composing specifications. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 15(1), 73–132 (1993), http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/151646.151649
Abadi, M., Lamport, L.: Conjoining specifications. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 17(3), 507–535 (1995), http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/203095.201069
Abdulla, P., Haziza, F., Holk, L.: A model-constructing satisfiability calculus. In: Giacobazzi, R., Berdine, J., Mastroeni, I. (eds.) VMCAI 2013. LNCS, vol. 7737, pp. 1–12. Springer, Heidelberg (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-35873-9_28
Abdulla, P.A., Jonsson, B., Nilsson, M., Saksena, M.: A survey of regular model checking. In: Gardner, P., Yoshida, N. (eds.) CONCUR 2004. LNCS, vol. 3170, pp. 35–48. Springer, Heidelberg (2004), http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-28644-8_3
Arons, T., Pnueli, A., Ruah, S., Xu, J., Zuck, L.D.: Parameterized verification with automatically computed inductive assertions. In: Berry, G., Comon, H., Finkel, A. (eds.) CAV 2001. LNCS, vol. 2102, pp. 221–234. Springer, Heidelberg (2001), http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=647770.734120
Baukus, K., Lakhnech, Y., Stahl, K.: Parameterized verification of a cache coherence protocol: Safety and liveness. In: Cortesi, A. (ed.) VMCAI 2002. LNCS, vol. 2294, pp. 317–330. Springer, Heidelberg (2002), http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=646541.696180
Bingham, B., Bingham, J., Erickson, J., Greenstreet, M.: Distributed explicit state model checking of deadlock freedom. In: Sharygina, N., Veith, H. (eds.) CAV 2013. LNCS, vol. 8044, pp. 235–241. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)
Bingham, B., Greenstreet, M., Bingham, J.: Parameterized verification of deadlock freedom in symmetric cache coherence protocols. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Formal Methods in Computer-Aided Design, FMCAD 2011, pp. 186–195. FMCAD Inc, Austin (2011), http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2157654.2157683
Boigelot, B., Legay, A., Wolper, P.: Iterating transducers in the large. In: Hunt Jr., W.A., Somenzi, F. (eds.) CAV 2003. LNCS, vol. 2725, pp. 223–235. Springer, Heidelberg (2003), http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-45069-6_24
Bouajjani, A., Jonsson, B., Nilsson, M., Touili, T.: Regular model checking. In: Emerson, E.A., Sistla, A.P. (eds.) CAV 2000. LNCS, vol. 1855, pp. 403–418. Springer, Heidelberg (2000), http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=647769.734106
Chou, C.-T., Mannava, P.K., Park, S.: A simple method for parameterized verification of cache coherence protocols. In: Hu, A.J., Martin, A.K. (eds.) FMCAD 2004. LNCS, vol. 3312, pp. 382–398. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)
Clarke, E.M., Grumberg, O., Browne, M.C.: Reasoning about networks with many identical finite-state processes. In: Proceedings of the Fifth Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, PODC 1986, pp. 240–248. ACM, New York (1986), http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/10590.10611
Clarke, E., Talupur, M., Veith, H.: Proving ptolemy right: the environment abstraction framework for model checking concurrent systems. In: Ramakrishnan, C.R., Rehof, J. (eds.) TACAS 2008. LNCS, vol. 4963, pp. 33–47. Springer, Heidelberg (2008), http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1792734.1792740
Clarke, E., Talupur, M., Veith, H.: Environment abstraction for parameterized verification. In: Emerson, E.A., Namjoshi, K.S. (eds.) VMCAI 2006. LNCS, vol. 3855, pp. 126–141. Springer, Heidelberg (2006), http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/11609773_9
Conchon, S., Goel, A., Krstic, S., Mebsout, A., Zaidi, F.: Invariants for finite instances and beyond. In: Formal Methods in Computer-Aided Design (FMCAD), pp. 61–68 (October 2013)
Dams, D., Gerth, R., Grumberg, O.: Abstract interpretation of reactive systems. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 19(2), 253–291 (1997), http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/244795.244800
Das, S., Dill, D., Park, S.: Experience with predicate abstraction. In: Halbwachs, N., Peled, D.A. (eds.) CAV 1999. LNCS, vol. 1633, pp. 160–171. Springer, Heidelberg (1999), http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/3-540-48683-6_16
Emerson, E.A., Kahlon, V.: Reducing model checking of the many to the few. In: McAllester, D. (ed.) CADE 2000. LNCS, vol. 1831, pp. 236–254. Springer, Heidelberg (2000), http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=648236.753642
Emerson, E.A., Kahlon, V.: Exact and efficient verification of parameterized cache coherence protocols. In: Geist, D., Tronci, E. (eds.) CHARME 2003. LNCS, vol. 2860, pp. 247–262. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)
Emerson, E.A., Namjoshi, K.S.: Automatic verification of parameterized synchronous systems (extended abstract). In: Alur, R., Henzinger, T.A. (eds.) CAV 1996. LNCS, vol. 1102, pp. 87–98. Springer, Heidelberg (1996), http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=647765.735841
Fang, Y., Piterman, N., Pnueli, A., Zuck, L.: Liveness with invisible ranking. Int. J. Softw. Tools Technol. Transf. 8(3), 261–279 (2006), http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10009-005-0193-x
Holt, R.C.: Some deadlock properties of computer systems. ACM Comput. Surv. 4(3), 179–196 (1972), http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/356603.356607
Ip, C.N., Dill, D.L.: Better verification through symmetry. In: Proc. Conf. on Computer Hardware Description Languages and their Applications, pp. 97–111 (1993)
Kaiser, A., Kroening, D., Wahl, T.: Dynamic cutoff detection in parameterized concurrent programs. In: Touili, T., Cook, B., Jackson, P. (eds.) CAV 2010. LNCS, vol. 6174, pp. 645–659. Springer, Heidelberg (2010), http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14295-6_55
Kristic, S.: Parameterized system verification with guard strengthening and parameter abstraction. In: 4th Int. Workshop on Automatic Verification of Finite State Systems (2005)
Kuskin, J., Ofelt, D., Heinrich, M., Heinlein, J., Simoni, R., Gharachorloo, K., Chapin, J., Nakahira, D., Baxter, J., Horowitz, M., Gupta, A., Rosenblum, M., Hennessy, J.: The stanford flash multiprocessor. In: Proceedings the 21st Annual International Symposium on Computer Architecture, pp. 302–313 (1994)
Lahiri, S.K., Bryant, R.E.: Predicate abstraction with indexed predicates. ACM Trans. Comput. Logic 9(1) (2007), http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1297658.1297662
Mcmillan, K.L.: Parameterized verification of the flash cache coherence protocol by compositional model checking. In: Margaria, T., Melham, T.F. (eds.) CHARME 2001. LNCS, vol. 2144, pp. 179–195. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)
McMillan, K.L.: Circular compositional reasoning about liveness. In: Pierre, L., Kropf, T. (eds.) CHARME 1999. LNCS, vol. 1703, pp. 342–346. Springer, Heidelberg (1999), http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=646704.701881
McMillan, K.L.: Verification of infinite state systems by compositional model checking. In: Pierre, L., Kropf, T. (eds.) CHARME 1999. LNCS, vol. 1703, pp. 219–237. Springer, Heidelberg (1999), http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=646704.702020
Murphi source code, https://github.com/dsethi/ProtocolDeadlockFiles
O’Leary, J., Talupur, M., Tuttle, M.R.: Protocol verification using flows: An industrial experience. In: Formal Methods in Computer-Aided Design, FMCAD 2009, pp. 172–179 (November 2009)
Park, S., Dill, D.L.: Verification of flash cache coherence protocol by aggregation of distributed transactions. In: SPAA ’96: Proceedings of the eighth annual ACM symposium on Parallel algorithms and architectures, pp. 288–296. ACM Press (1996)
Pnueli, A., Ruah, S., Zuck, L.D.: Automatic deductive verification with invisible invariants. In: Margaria, T., Yi, W. (eds.) TACAS 2001. LNCS, vol. 2031, pp. 82–97. Springer, Heidelberg (2001), http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=646485.694452
Pnueli, A., Xu, J., Zuck, L.D.: Liveness with (0,1, ∞ )-counter abstraction. In: Brinksma, E., Larsen, K.G. (eds.) CAV 2002. LNCS, vol. 2404, pp. 107–122. Springer, Heidelberg (2002), http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=647771.734286
Resten, Y., Maler, O., Marcus, M., Pnueli, A., Shahar, E.: Symbolic model checking with rich assertional languages. In: Grumberg, O. (ed.) CAV 1997. LNCS, vol. 1254, pp. 424–435. Springer, Heidelberg (1997), http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/3-540-63166-6_41
Sethi, D., Talupur, M., Malik, S.: Using flow specifications of parameterized cache coherence protocols for verifying deadlock freedom. ArXiv:1407.7468
Talupur, M., Tuttle, M.R.: Going with the flow: Parameterized verification using message flows. In: Proceedings of the 2008 International Conference on Formal Methods in Computer-Aided Design, FMCAD 2008. FMCAD ’08, pp. 1–10. IEEE Press, Piscataway (2008), http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1517424.1517434
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Sethi, D., Talupur, M., Malik, S. (2014). Using Flow Specifications of Parameterized Cache Coherence Protocols for Verifying Deadlock Freedom. In: Cassez, F., Raskin, JF. (eds) Automated Technology for Verification and Analysis. ATVA 2014. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 8837. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11936-6_24
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11936-6_24
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-11935-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-11936-6
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)