Abstract verification and debugging of constraint logic programs

The technique of Abstract Interpretation [13] has allowed the development of sophisticated program analyses which are provably correct and practical. The semantic approximations produced by such analyses have been traditionally applied to optimization during program compilation. However, recently, novel and promising applications of semantic approximations have been proposed in the more general context of program verification and debugging [3],[10],[7]

Program development using abstract interpretation (and the ciao system preprocessor)

The technique of Abstract Interpretation has allowed the development of very sophisticated global program analyses which are at the same time provably correct and practical. We present in a tutorial fashion a novel program development framework which uses abstract interpretation as a fundamental tool. The framework uses modular, incremental abstract interpretation to obtain information about the program. This information is used to validate programs, to detect bugs with respect to partial specifications written using assertions (in the program itself and/or in system librarles), to genérate and simplify run-time tests, and to perform high-level program transformations such as múltiple abstract specialization, parallelization, and resource usage control, all in a provably correct way. In the case of validation and debugging, the assertions can refer to a variety of program points such as procedure entry, procedure exit, points within procedures, or global computations. The system can reason with much richer information than, for example, traditional types. This includes data structure shape (including pointer sharing), bounds on data structure sizes, and other operational variable instantiation properties, as well as procedure-level properties such as determinacy, termination, non-failure, and bounds on resource consumption (time or space cost). CiaoPP, the preprocessor of the Ciao multi-paradigm programming system, which implements the described functionality, will be used to illustrate the fundamental ideas

Towards Energy Consumption Verification via Static Analysis

In this paper we leverage an existing general framework for resource usage verification and specialize it for verifying energy consumption specifications of embedded programs. Such specifications can include both lower and upper bounds on energy usage, and they can express intervals within which energy usage is to be certified to be within such bounds. The bounds of the intervals can be given in general as functions on input data sizes. Our verification system can prove whether such energy usage specifications are met or not. It can also infer the particular conditions under which the specifications hold. To this end, these conditions are also expressed as intervals of functions of input data sizes, such that a given specification can be proved for some intervals but disproved for others. The specifications themselves can also include preconditions expressing intervals for input data sizes. We report on a prototype implementation of our approach within the CiaoPP system for the XC language and XS1-L architecture, and illustrate with an example how embedded software developers can use this tool, and in particular for determining values for program parameters that ensure meeting a given energy budget while minimizing the loss in quality of service.Comment: Presented at HIP3ES, 2015 (arXiv: 1501.03064

An assertion language for constraint logic programs

In an advanced program development environment, such as that discussed in the introduction of this book, several tools may coexist which handle both the program and information on the program in different ways. Also, these tools may interact among themselves and with the user. Thus, the different tools and the user need some way to communicate. It is our design principie that such communication be performed in terms of assertions. Assertions are syntactic objects which allow expressing properties of programs. Several assertion languages have been used in the past in different contexts, mainly related to program debugging. In this chapter we propose a general language of assertions which is used in different tools for validation and debugging of constraint logic programs in the context of the DiSCiPl project. The assertion language proposed is parametric w.r.t. the particular constraint domain and properties of interest being used in each different tool. The language proposed is quite general in that it poses few restrictions on the kind of properties which may be expressed. We believe the assertion language we propose is of practical relevance and appropriate for the different uses required in the tools considered

Programming with global analysis

Global data-flow analysis of (constraint) logic programs, which is generally based on abstract interpretation [7], is reaching a comparatively high level of maturity. A natural question is whether it is time for its routine incorporation in standard compilers, something which, beyond a few experimental systems, has not happened to date. Such incorporation arguably makes good sense only if: • the range of applications of global analysis is large enough to justify the additional complication in the compiler, and • global analysis technology can deal with all the features of "practical" languages (e.g., the ISO-Prolog built-ins) and "scales up" for large programs. We present a tutorial overview of a number of concepts and techniques directly related to the issues above, with special emphasis on the first one. In particular, we concéntrate on novel uses of global analysis during program development and debugging, rather than on the more traditional application área of program optimization. The idea of using abstract interpretation for validation and diagnosis has been studied in the context of imperative programming [2] and also of logic programming. The latter work includes issues such as using approximations to reduce the burden posed on programmers by declarative debuggers [6, 3] and automatically generating and checking assertions [4, 5] (which includes the more traditional type checking of strongly typed languages, such as Gódel or Mercury [1, 8, 9]) We also review some solutions for scalability including modular analysis, incremental analysis, and widening. Finally, we discuss solutions for dealing with meta-predicates, side-effects, delay declarations, constraints, dynamic predicates, and other such features which may appear in practical languages. In the discussion we will draw both from the literature and from our experience and that of others in the development and use of the CIAO system analyzer. In order to emphasize the practical aspects of the solutions discussed, the presentation of several concepts will be illustrated by examples run on the CIAO system, which makes extensive use of global analysis and assertions

Using global analysis, partial specifications, and an extensible assertion language for program validation and debugging

We discuss a framework for the application of abstract interpretation as an aid during program development, rather than in the more traditional application of program optimization. Program validation and detection of errors is first performed statically by comparing (partial) specifications written in terms of assertions against information obtained from (global) static analysis of the program. The results of this process are expressed in the user assertion language. Assertions (or parts of assertions) which cannot be checked statically are translated into run-time tests. The framework allows the use of assertions to be optional. It also allows using very general properties in assertions, beyond the predefined set understandable by the static analyzer and including properties defined by user programs. We also report briefly on an implementation of the framework. The resulting tool generates and checks assertions for Prolog, CLP(R), and CHIP/CLP(fd) programs, and integrates compile-time and run-time checking in a uniform way. The tool allows using properties such as types, modes, non-failure, determinacy, and computational cost, and can treat modules separately, performing incremental analysis

An Approach to Static Performance Guarantees for Programs with Run-time Checks

Instrumenting programs for performing run-time checking of properties, such as regular shapes, is a common and useful technique that helps programmers detect incorrect program behaviors. This is specially true in dynamic languages such as Prolog. However, such run-time checks inevitably introduce run-time overhead (in execution time, memory, energy, etc.). Several approaches have been proposed for reducing such overhead, such as eliminating the checks that can statically be proved to always succeed, and/or optimizing the way in which the (remaining) checks are performed. However, there are cases in which it is not possible to remove all checks statically (e.g., open libraries which must check their interfaces, complex properties, unknown code, etc.) and in which, even after optimizations, these remaining checks still may introduce an unacceptable level of overhead. It is thus important for programmers to be able to determine the additional cost due to the run-time checks and compare it to some notion of admissible cost. The common practice used for estimating run-time checking overhead is profiling, which is not exhaustive by nature. Instead, we propose a method that uses static analysis to estimate such overhead, with the advantage that the estimations are functions parameterized by input data sizes. Unlike profiling, this approach can provide guarantees for all possible execution traces, and allows assessing how the overhead grows as the size of the input grows. Our method also extends an existing assertion verification framework to express "admissible" overheads, and statically and automatically checks whether the instrumented program conforms with such specifications. Finally, we present an experimental evaluation of our approach that suggests that our method is feasible and promising.Comment: 15 pages, 3 tables; submitted to ICLP'18, accepted as technical communicatio