Types for Deadlock-Free Higher-Order Programs

Padovani, Luca; Novara, Luca

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-19195-9_1

Cited by 11 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In general, the structure of a program may prevent the type checker from knowing the behavior of the program beyond a certain horizon, which is in contrast with the rightmost premise of rule [T-IN]. In [32] we have shown how to adapt the type system for deadlock freedom to a higher-order concurrent programming language based on linear channels. The basic idea is to use an effect system to keep track of the channels occurring in, and used by, functions so as to enable a compositional analysis of programs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Deadlock and lock freedom in the linear π-calculus

Padovani

2014

Proceedings of the Joint Meeting of the Twenty-Third EACSL Annual Conference on Computer Science Logic (CSL) and the Twenty-Nin

Self Cite

124

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We study two refinements of the linear π-calculus that ensure deadlock freedom (the absence of stable states with pending linear communications) and lock freedom (the eventual completion of pending linear communications). The main feature of both type systems is a new form of channel polymorphism that affects their accuracy in a significant way: they are the first of their kind that can deal with recursive processes connected by cyclic networks.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Deadlock and lock freedom in the linear π-calculus

Padovani

2014

Proceedings of the Joint Meeting of the Twenty-Third EACSL Annual Conference on Computer Science Logic (CSL) and the Twenty-Nin

Self Cite

124

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We present Priority GV (PGV), a session-typed functional language based on GV [54,39] which uses prioritiesà la Kobayashi and Padovani [34,45] to enforce deadlock freedom. Priority GV o↵ers a more fine-grained analysis of communication structures, and by separating channel creation form thread spawning it allows cyclic structures.…”

Section: Priority Gvmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Priorities are based on obligations/capabilities used by Kobayashi [34], and simplified to single priorities following Padovani [44]. The integration of priorities into GV is adapted from Padovani and Novara [45]. Paraphrasing Dardha and Gay [20], priorities obey the following two laws: (i) an action with lower priority happens before an action with higher priority; and (ii) communication requires equal priorities for dual actions.…”

Section: Priority Gvmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prioritise the Best Variation

Kokke

Dardha

2021

Formal Techniques for Distributed Objects, Components, and Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Binary session types guarantee communication safety and session fidelity, but alone they cannot rule out deadlocks arising from the interleaving of di↵erent sessions. In Classical Processes (CP) [53]-a process calculus based on classical linear logic-deadlock freedom is guaranteed by combining channel creation and parallel composition under the same logical cut rule. Similarly, in Good Variation (GV) [54,39]-a linear concurrent -calculus-deadlock freedom is guaranteed by combining channel creation and thread spawning under the same operation, called fork. In both CP and GV, deadlock freedom is achieved at the expense of expressivity, as the only processes allowed are tree-structured. Dardha and Gay [19] define Priority CP (PCP), which allows cyclic-structured processes and restores deadlock freedom by using priorities, in line with Kobayashi and Padovani [34,44]. Following PCP, we present Priority GV (PGV), a variant of GV which decouples channel creation from thread spawning. Consequently, we type cyclic-structured processes and restore deadlock freedom by using priorities. We show that our type system is sound by proving subject reduction and progress. We define an encoding from PCP to PGV and prove that the encoding preserves typing and is sound and complete with respect to the operational semantics.

show abstract

“…Recursion. We could implement recursive session via priority-polymorphic types, or via priority-shifting [53]. For instance, we could give the summation service from section 2.2 the following type:…”

Section: Deadlock Freedom Via Prioritiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recent works by Padovani and Novara [53] and Kokke and Dardha [PGV,35] integrate priorities [32,51] into functional languages. Priorities are natural numbers that abstractly represent the time at which a communication action happens.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Deadlock-free session types in linear Haskell

Kokke

Dardha

2021

Proceedings of the 14th ACM SIGPLAN International Symposium on Haskell

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Priority Sesh is a library for session-typed communication in Linear Haskell which offers strong compile-time correctness guarantees. Priority Sesh offers two deadlock-free APIs for session-typed communication. The first guarantees deadlock freedom by restricting the process structure to trees and forests. It is simple and composable, but rules out cyclic structures. The second guarantees deadlock freedom via priorities, which allows the programmer to safely use cyclic structures as well.Our library relies on Linear Haskell to guarantee linearity, which leads to easy-to-write session types and more idiomatic code, and lets us avoid the complex encodings of linearity in the Haskell type system that made previous libraries difficult to use.

show abstract

Types for Deadlock-Free Higher-Order Programs

Cited by 11 publications

References 17 publications

Deadlock and lock freedom in the linear π-calculus

Deadlock and lock freedom in the linear π-calculus

Prioritise the Best Variation

Deadlock-free session types in linear Haskell

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About