Timed Multiparty Session Types

We propose a typing theory, based on multiparty session types, for modular verification of real-time choreographic interactions. To model real-time implementations, we introduce a simple calculus with delays and a decidable static proof system. The proof system ensures type safety and time-error freedom, namely processes respect the prescribed timing and causalities between interactions. A decidable condition on timed global types guarantees time-progress for validated processes with delays, and gives a sound and complete characterisation of a new class of CTAs with general topologies that enjoys progress and liveness

Are Lock-Free Concurrent Algorithms Practically Wait-Free?

Lock-free concurrent algorithms guarantee that some concurrent operation will always make progress in a finite number of steps. Yet programmers prefer to treat concurrent code as if it were wait-free, guaranteeing that all operations always make progress. Unfortunately, designing wait-free algorithms is generally a very complex task, and the resulting algorithms are not always efficient. While obtaining efficient wait-free algorithms has been a long-time goal for the theory community, most non-blocking commercial code is only lock-free. This paper suggests a simple solution to this problem. We show that, for a large class of lock- free algorithms, under scheduling conditions which approximate those found in commercial hardware architectures, lock-free algorithms behave as if they are wait-free. In other words, programmers can keep on designing simple lock-free algorithms instead of complex wait-free ones, and in practice, they will get wait-free progress. Our main contribution is a new way of analyzing a general class of lock-free algorithms under a stochastic scheduler. Our analysis relates the individual performance of processes with the global performance of the system using Markov chain lifting between a complex per-process chain and a simpler system progress chain. We show that lock-free algorithms are not only wait-free with probability 1, but that in fact a general subset of lock-free algorithms can be closely bounded in terms of the average number of steps required until an operation completes. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first attempt to analyze progress conditions, typically stated in relation to a worst case adversary, in a stochastic model capturing their expected asymptotic behavior.Comment: 25 page

On the Space Complexity of Set Agreement

The $k$-set agreement problem is a generalization of the classical consensus problem in which processes are permitted to output up to $k$ different input values. In a system of $n$ processes, an $m$-obstruction-free solution to the problem requires termination only in executions where the number of processes taking steps is eventually bounded by $m$. This family of progress conditions generalizes wait-freedom ($m=n$) and obstruction-freedom ($m=1$). In this paper, we prove upper and lower bounds on the number of registers required to solve $m$-obstruction-free $k$-set agreement, considering both one-shot and repeated formulations. In particular, we show that repeated $k$ set agreement can be solved using $n+2m-k$ registers and establish a nearly matching lower bound of $n+m-k$

Anonymous Obstruction-free (n,k)(n,k)-Set Agreement with n−k+1n-k+1 Atomic Read/Write Registers

The $k$-set agreement problem is a generalization of the consensus problem. Namely, assuming each process proposes a value, each non-faulty process has to decide a value such that each decided value was proposed, and no more than $k$ different values are decided. This is a hard problem in the sense that it cannot be solved in asynchronous systems as soon as $k$ or more processes may crash. One way to circumvent this impossibility consists in weakening its termination property, requiring that a process terminates (decides) only if it executes alone during a long enough period. This is the well-known obstruction-freedom progress condition. Considering a system of $n$ {\it anonymous asynchronous} processes, which communicate through atomic {\it read/write registers only}, and where {\it any number of processes may crash}, this paper addresses and solves the challenging open problem of designing an obstruction-free $k$-set agreement algorithm with $(n-k+1)$ atomic registers only. From a shared memory cost point of view, this algorithm is the best algorithm known so far, thereby establishing a new upper bound on the number of registers needed to solve the problem (its gain is $(n-k)$ with respect to the previous upper bound). The algorithm is then extended to address the repeated version of $(n,k)$-set agreement. As it is optimal in the number of atomic read/write registers, this algorithm closes the gap on previously established lower/upper bounds for both the anonymous and non-anonymous versions of the repeated $(n,k)$-set agreement problem. Finally, for 1 \leq x\leq k \textless{} n, a generalization suited to $x$-obstruction-freedom is also described, which requires $(n-k+x)$ atomic registers only

Modular termination verification for non-blocking concurrency

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016.We present Total-TaDA, a program logic for verifying the total correctness of concurrent programs: that such programs both terminate and produce the correct result. With Total-TaDA, we can specify constraints on a thread’s concurrent environment that are necessary to guarantee termination. This allows us to verify total correctness for nonblocking algorithms, e.g. a counter and a stack. Our specifications can express lock- and wait-freedom. More generally, they can express that one operation cannot impede the progress of another, a new non-blocking property we call non-impedance. Moreover, our approach is modular. We can verify the operations of a module independently, and build up modules on top of each other