Towards a Session Logic for Communication Protocols

Craciun, Florin; Kiss, Tibor; Costea, Andreea

doi:10.1109/iceccs.2015.33

Cited by 9 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…end where is free, which means the value of must be known at the point the protocol is created. While the previous examples could also have been type-checked and verified using the formalisms of Bocchi et al [2010] and Craciun et al [2015] the following stateful example cannot:…”

Section: Dependent Separation Protocolsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The type system by Bocchi et al [2010] cannot verify this program because it does not support mutable state, while Actris can verify the program because it is a separation logic. The logic by Craciun et al [2015] cannot verify this program because it does not support dependent protocols. Dependent protocols are crucial hereÐthey make it possible to delay picking the location ℓ used in the protocol until the send operation is performed.…”

Section: Dependent Separation Protocolsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Their language does not support higher-order functions or delegation, but since their language is restricted to structured concurrency (i.e., not fork-based) and their logic is linear (i.e., not affine), they ensure that all resources like channels and memory are properly deallocated. Craciun et al [2015] introduced łsession logicž, a variant of separation logic that includes predicates for protocol specifications similar to ours. This work includes support for mutable state, ownership transfer via message-passing, delegation through higher-order channels, branching using a special type of disjunction operator on the protocol level, and a sketch of an approach to verify deadlock freedom of programs.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Message passing in concurrent separation logic. Over the last decade, there has been much work on extensions of concurrent separation logic with reasoning principles for message passing [Oortwijn et al 2016;Francalanza et al 2011;Lozes and Villard 2012;Craciun et al 2015]. These logics typically include some form of mechanism for writing protocol specifications in a high-level manner.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Actris: session-type based reasoning in separation logic

Hinrichsen

Bengtson

Krebbers

2019

Proc. ACM Program. Lang.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Message passing is a useful abstraction to implement concurrent programs. For real-world systems, however, it is often combined with other programming and concurrency paradigms, such as higher-order functions, mutable state, shared-memory concurrency, and locks. We present Actris: a logic for proving functional correctness of programs that use a combination of the aforementioned features. Actris combines the power of modern concurrent separation logics with a first-class protocol mechanismÐbased on session typesÐfor reasoning about message passing in the presence of other concurrency paradigms. We show that Actris provides a suitable level of abstraction by proving functional correctness of a variety of examples, including a distributed merge sort, a distributed load-balancing mapper, and a variant of the map-reduce model, using relatively simple specifications. Soundness of Actris is proved using a model of its protocol mechanism in the Iris framework. We mechanised the theory of Actris, together with tactics for symbolic execution of programs, as well as all examples in the paper, in the Coq proof assistant.

show abstract

Section: Dependent Separation Protocolsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Dependent Separation Protocolsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Actris: session-type based reasoning in separation logic

Hinrichsen

Bengtson

Krebbers

2019

Proc. ACM Program. Lang.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The refined protocol is then automatically projected onto a per party specification, followed by a per channel endpoint basis. Using such a modular approach where we provide a specification for each channel endpoint adds natural support for delegation, where a channel (as well as its specification) could be delegated to a third party in the style of binary session logic [14]. These communication specifications are made available in the program abstract state using a combination of ghost assertions and release lemmas (detailed in the subsequent).…”

Section: Verification Of C-like Programsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Automated Modular Verification for Relaxed Communication Protocols

Costea

Chin

Qin

et al. 2018

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ensuring software correctness and safety for communicationcentric programs is important but challenging. In this paper we introduce a solution for writing communication protocols, for checking protocol conformance and for verifying implementation safety. This work draws on ideas from both multiparty session types, which provide a concise way to express communication protocols, as well as from separationstyle logics for shared-memory concurrency, which provide strong safety guarantees for resource sharing. On the one hand, our proposal improves the expressiveness and precision of session types, without sacrificing their conciseness. On the other hand, it increases the applicability of software verification as well as its precision, by making it protocol aware. We also show how to perform the verification of such programs in a modular and automatic fashion. one of the communicating entities requires the re-validation of the entire system. Since validation might be expensive, or difficult to achieve if the source code of certain components is not available, it is desirable for the developer to be able to only validate her changes locally, rather than at the global level. Over the last decades, behavioral types [35,26] have been studied as specifications of the interactions in communicating systems. In particular, multiparty session types [23], or MPSTs, provide a user-friendly syntax for writing choreographic specifications of distributed systems, and a lightweight mechanism for enforcing communication safety. Communication is considered correct when the system's constituent processes are statically type-checked against the end-point projections of the MPST. This formalism and its numerous extensions are attractive in checking if the implementation follows the intended communication pattern, but it lacks the strong safety and correctness guarantees normally provided by the resource-aware verification systems. Specifically, the MPST approach checks if a transmission's exchanged type is the expected one. However, in their most common form, MPSTs are unable to assert something about the message's numerical properties, and even less so about its carried resources in the case of tightly coupled systems. All these, while numerical properties and resource sharing constitute the pièce de résistance for separation logic [38], a logic for reasoning about resource sharing. In this work, we attach a communication logic in the user-friendly style of MPST, to a separation logic for program verification. Even though we draw on ideas from MPST, the proposed logic differs from MPST in a number of features which yield a more expressive communication specification-without compromising its friendly syntax. The current proposal ultimately leads to stronger guarantees w.r.t. the safety and correctness of distributed system. We shall next highlight these differences. Writing Multiparty Communication Protocols. The language we propose for writing communication protocols is described in Fig. 1a. Similar to MPST, the language contains the te...

show abstract

Developing railway interlocking systems with session types and Event-B

Kiss

Jánosi-Rancz

2016

2016 IEEE 11th International Symposium on Applied Computational Intelligence and Informatics (SACI)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Towards a Session Logic for Communication Protocols

Cited by 9 publications

References 26 publications

Actris: session-type based reasoning in separation logic

Actris: session-type based reasoning in separation logic

Automated Modular Verification for Relaxed Communication Protocols

Developing railway interlocking systems with session types and Event-B

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About