A Logic of Reachable Patterns in Linked Data-Structures

We define a new decidable logic for expressing and checking invariants of programs that manipulate dynamically-allocated objects via pointers and destructive pointer updates. The main feature of this logic is the ability to limit the neighborhood of a node that is reachable via a regular expression from a designated node. The logic is closed under boolean operations (entailment, negation) and has a finite model property. The key technical result is the proof of decidability. We show how to express precondition, postconditions, and loop invariants for some interesting programs. It is also possible to express properties such as disjointness of data-structures, and low-level heap mutations. Moreover, our logic can express properties of arbitrary data-structures and of an arbitrary number of pointer fields. The latter provides a way to naturally specify postconditions that relate the fields on entry to a procedure to the fields on exit. Therefore, it is possible to use the logic to automatically prove partial correctness of programs performing low-level heap mutations

Model checking Branching-Time Properties of Multi-Pushdown Systems is Hard

We address the model checking problem for shared memory concurrent programs modeled as multi-pushdown systems. We consider here boolean programs with a finite number of threads and recursive procedures. It is well-known that the model checking problem is undecidable for this class of programs. In this paper, we investigate the decidability and the complexity of this problem under the assumption of bounded context-switching defined by Qadeer and Rehof, and of phase-boundedness proposed by La Torre et al. On the model checking of such systems against temporal logics and in particular branching time logics such as the modal $\mu$-calculus or CTL has received little attention. It is known that parity games, which are closely related to the modal $\mu$-calculus, are decidable for the class of bounded-phase systems (and hence for bounded-context switching as well), but with non-elementary complexity (Seth). A natural question is whether this high complexity is inevitable and what are the ways to get around it. This paper addresses these questions and unfortunately, and somewhat surprisingly, it shows that branching model checking for MPDSs is inherently an hard problem with no easy solution. We show that parity games on MPDS under phase-bounding restriction is non-elementary. Our main result shows that model checking a $k$ context bounded MPDS against a simple fragment of CTL, consisting of formulas that whose temporal operators come from the set {\EF, \EX}, has a non-elementary lower bound

Checking Linearizability of Concurrent Priority Queues

Efficient implementations of concurrent objects such as atomic collections are essential to modern computing. Programming such objects is error prone: in minimizing the synchronization overhead between concurrent object invocations, one risks the conformance to sequential specifications -- or in formal terms, one risks violating linearizability. Unfortunately, verifying linearizability is undecidable in general, even on classes of implementations where the usual control-state reachability is decidable. In this work we consider concurrent priority queues which are fundamental to many multi-threaded applications such as task scheduling or discrete event simulation, and show that verifying linearizability of such implementations can be reduced to control-state reachability. This reduction entails the first decidability results for verifying concurrent priority queues in the context of an unbounded number of threads, and it enables the application of existing safety-verification tools for establishing their correctness.Comment: An extended abstract is published in the Proceedings of CONCUR 201

Robustness Against Transactional Causal Consistency

Distributed storage systems and databases are widely used by various types of applications. Transactional access to these storage systems is an important abstraction allowing application programmers to consider blocks of actions (i.e., transactions) as executing atomically. For performance reasons, the consistency models implemented by modern databases are weaker than the standard serializability model, which corresponds to the atomicity abstraction of transactions executing over a sequentially consistent memory. Causal consistency for instance is one such model that is widely used in practice. In this paper, we investigate application-specific relationships between several variations of causal consistency and we address the issue of verifying automatically if a given transactional program is robust against causal consistency, i.e., all its behaviors when executed over an arbitrary causally consistent database are serializable. We show that programs without write-write races have the same set of behaviors under all these variations, and we show that checking robustness is polynomial time reducible to a state reachability problem in transactional programs over a sequentially consistent shared memory. A surprising corollary of the latter result is that causal consistency variations which admit incomparable sets of behaviors admit comparable sets of robust programs. This reduction also opens the door to leveraging existing methods and tools for the verification of concurrent programs (assuming sequential consistency) for reasoning about programs running over causally consistent databases. Furthermore, it allows to establish that the problem of checking robustness is decidable when the programs executed at different sites are finite-state