717 research outputs found

    Analysing Mutual Exclusion using Process Algebra with Signals

    Get PDF
    In contrast to common belief, the Calculus of Communicating Systems (CCS) and similar process algebras lack the expressive power to accurately capture mutual exclusion protocols without enriching the language with fairness assumptions. Adding a fairness assumption to implement a mutual exclusion protocol seems counter-intuitive. We employ a signalling operator, which can be combined with CCS, or other process calculi, and show that this minimal extension is expressive enough to model mutual exclusion: we confirm the correctness of Peterson's mutual exclusion algorithm for two processes, as well as Lamport's bakery algorithm, under reasonable assumptions on the underlying memory model. The correctness of Peterson's algorithm for more than two processes requires stronger, less realistic assumptions on the underlying memory model.Comment: In Proceedings EXPRESS/SOS 2017, arXiv:1709.0004

    Fair Testing

    Get PDF
    In this paper we present a solution to the long-standing problem of characterising the coarsest liveness-preserving pre-congruence with respect to a full (TCSP-inspired) process algebra. In fact, we present two distinct characterisations, which give rise to the same relation: an operational one based on a De Nicola-Hennessy-like testing modality which we call should-testing, and a denotational one based on a refined notion of failures. One of the distinguishing characteristics of the should-testing pre-congruence is that it abstracts from divergences in the same way as Milner¿s observation congruence, and as a consequence is strictly coarser than observation congruence. In other words, should-testing has a built-in fairness assumption. This is in itself a property long sought-after; it is in notable contrast to the well-known must-testing of De Nicola and Hennessy (denotationally characterised by a combination of failures and divergences), which treats divergence as catrastrophic and hence is incompatible with observation congruence. Due to these characteristics, should-testing supports modular reasoning and allows to use the proof techniques of observation congruence, but also supports additional laws and techniques. Moreover, we show decidability of should-testing (on the basis of the denotational characterisation). Finally, we demonstrate its advantages by the application to a number of examples, including a scheduling problem, a version of the Alternating Bit-protocol, and fair lossy communication channel

    Stop It, and Be Stubborn!

    Get PDF
    A system is AG EF terminating, if and only if from every reachable state, a terminal state is reachable. This publication argues that it is beneficial for both catching non-progress errors and stubborn set state space reduction to try to make verification models AG EF terminating. An incorrect mutual exclusion algorithm is used as an example. The error does not manifest itself, unless the first action of the customers is modelled differently from other actions. An appropriate method is to add an alternative first action that models the customer stopping for good. This method typically makes the model AG EF terminating. If the model is AG EF terminating, then the basic strong stubborn set method preserves safety and some progress properties without any additional condition for solving the ignoring problem. Furthermore, whether the model is AG EF terminating can be checked efficiently from the reduced state space

    Verifying Temporal Properties of Reactive Systems by Transformation

    Full text link
    We show how program transformation techniques can be used for the verification of both safety and liveness properties of reactive systems. In particular, we show how the program transformation technique distillation can be used to transform reactive systems specified in a functional language into a simplified form that can subsequently be analysed to verify temporal properties of the systems. Example systems which are intended to model mutual exclusion are analysed using these techniques with respect to both safety (mutual exclusion) and liveness (non-starvation), with the errors they contain being correctly identified.Comment: In Proceedings VPT 2015, arXiv:1512.02215. This work was supported, in part, by Science Foundation Ireland grant 10/CE/I1855 to Lero - the Irish Software Engineering Research Centre (www.lero.ie), and by the School of Computing, Dublin City Universit
    corecore