A Verification Technique for Deterministic Parallel Programs

Darabi, Saeed; Blom, Stefan; Huisman, Marieke

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-57288-8_17

Cited by 9 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To reason about loop parallelisations, and to show that the parallelisation of a loop does not change its behaviour, we introduced the notion of iteration contracts [4,11]: an iteration contract specifies a contract that should hold for every iteration of the loop. This iteration contract should specify at least which variables are read and written by one iteration of the loop, but it can be extended with functional properties.…”

Section: Iteration Contractmentioning

confidence: 99%

Program Correctness by Transformation

Huisman

Blom²,

Darabi

et al. 2018

Leveraging Applications of Formal Methods, Verification and Validation. Modeling

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Deductive program verification can be used effectively to verify high-level programs, but can be challenging for low-level, highperformance code. In this paper, we argue that compilation and program transformations should be made annotation-aware, i.e. during compilation and program transformation, not only the code should be changed, but also the corresponding annotations. As a result, if the original highlevel program could be verified, also the resulting low-level program can be verified. We illustrate this approach on a concrete case, where loop annotations that capture possible loop parallelisations are translated into specifications of an OpenCL kernel that corresponds to the parallel loop. We also sketch how several commonly used OpenCL kernel transformations can be adapted to also transform the corresponding program annotations. Finally, we conclude the paper with a list of research challenges that need to be addressed to further develop this approach.

show abstract

Section: Iteration Contractmentioning

confidence: 99%

Program Correctness by Transformation

Huisman

Blom²,

Darabi

et al. 2018

Leveraging Applications of Formal Methods, Verification and Validation. Modeling

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…When this approach is used, a programmer is greatly helped by automated verification of these compiler directives. For basic compiler directives, we developed verification techniques to prove the correctness of these parallelisations, i.e., to prove that if the program is parallelised, its behaviour will be equivalent to the behaviour of the sequential program [11,22], but this approach is still in its early stages, and needs to be developed further, allowing for more advanced compilation patterns.…”

Section: Verification Of Programs Using Different Concurrency Paradigmsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards Reliable Concurrent Software

Huisman

Joosten

2018

Principled Software Development

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As the use of concurrent software is increasing, we urgently need techniques to establish the correctness of such applications. Over the last years, significant progress has been made in the area of software verification, making verification techniques usable for realistic applications. However, much of this work concentrates on sequential software, and a next step is necessary to apply these results also on realistic concurrent software. In this paper, we outline a research agenda to realise this goal. We argue that current techniques for verification of concurrent software need to be further developed in multiple directions: extending the class of properties that can be established, improving the level of automation that is available for this kind of verification, and enlarging the class of concurrent programs that can be verified.

show abstract

“…More verified OpenMP examples are available online 1 . In Section 4.3, we precisely identified a commonly used subset of OpenMP programs that can be encoded into PPL programs, that also identifies the subset of OpenMP programs that can be verified with our approach.…”

Section: Verification Of Openmp Programsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This chapter is based on the papers "Verification of Loop Parallelisations" and "Verifying Parallel Loops with Separation Logic", which were published at FASE 2015 [BDH] and PLACES 2014 [BDH14] respectively. Deterministic Parallel Programs", which was published at NFM 2017 [DBH17a] and its extended version [DBH17b].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Verification of Program Parallelization

Darabi¹

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Second, we propose a novel technique to reason about deterministic parallel programs. We first formally define the Parallel Programming Language (PPL), a simple core language that captures the main forms of deterministic parallel programs. This language distinguishes three kinds of basic blocks: parallel, vectorized and sequential blocks, which can be composed using three different composition operators: sequential, parallel and fusion composition. We show that it is sufficient to have contracts for the basic blocks to prove the correctness of the PPL program, and moreover that the functional correctness of the sequential program implies the correctness of the parallelized program. We formally prove the correctness of our approach. In addition, we define a widelyused subset of OpenMP that can be encoded into our core language, thus effectively enabling verification of OpenMP compiler directives, and we discuss automated tool support for this verification process. Third, we propose a specification and verification technique to reason about data race freedom and functional correctness of GPGPU kernels that use atomic operations as a synchronization mechanism. We exploit the notion of resource invariant from Concurrent Separation Logic to specify the behaviour of atomic operations. To capture the GPGPU memory model, we adapt this notion of resource invariant such that group resource invariants capture the behaviour of atomic operations that access locations in local memory, which are accessible only to the threads in the same work group, while kernel resource invariants capture the behaviour of atomic operations that access locations in global memory, which are accessible to all threads in all work groups. We show the soundness of our approach and we demonstrate the application of the technique in our toolset. This thesis presents a set of verification techniques based on permissionbased separation logic to reason about the data race freedom and functional correctness of program parallelizations. Our reasoning techniques address different forms of high-level and low-level parallelization. For high-level parallel programs, we first formalize the main features of deterministic parallel programming in PPL and discuss how PPL programs and consequently, real-world deterministic parallel programs (e.g. OpenMP programs) are verified. For low-level parallel programs, we specifically focus on reasoning about GPGPU kernels. At the end we discuss how the presented verification techniques are chained together to reason about the semantical equivalence of high-level parallel programs where they are automatically transformed into low-level

show abstract

A Verification Technique for Deterministic Parallel Programs

Cited by 9 publications

References 22 publications

Program Correctness by Transformation

Program Correctness by Transformation

Towards Reliable Concurrent Software

Verification of Program Parallelization

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About