| 1 | \part{Language}
|
|---|
| 2 | \label{part:lang}
|
|---|
| 3 |
|
|---|
| 4 | \chapter{Overview of CIVL-C}
|
|---|
| 5 |
|
|---|
| 6 | \section{Main Concepts}
|
|---|
| 7 |
|
|---|
| 8 | CIVL-C is an extension of a subset of the C11 dialect of C. It
|
|---|
| 9 | includes the most commonly-used elements of C, including most of the
|
|---|
| 10 | syntax, types, expressions, and statements. Missing are some of the
|
|---|
| 11 | more esoteric type qualifiers, bitwise operations (at least for now),
|
|---|
| 12 | and much of the standard library. Moreover, none of the C11 language
|
|---|
| 13 | elements dealing with concurrency are included, as CIVL-C has its own
|
|---|
| 14 | concurrency primitives.
|
|---|
| 15 |
|
|---|
| 16 | The keywords in CIVL-C not already in C begin with the symbol \cckey.
|
|---|
| 17 | This makes them readily identifiable and also prevents any naming
|
|---|
| 18 | conflicts with identifiers in C programs. This means that most legal
|
|---|
| 19 | C programs will also be legal CIVL-C programs.
|
|---|
| 20 |
|
|---|
| 21 | One of the most important features of CIVL-C not found in standard C
|
|---|
| 22 | is the ability to define functions in any scope. (Standard C allows
|
|---|
| 23 | function definitions only in the file scope.) This feature is also
|
|---|
| 24 | found in GNU C, the GNU extension of C.
|
|---|
| 25 |
|
|---|
| 26 | Another central CIVL-C feature is the ability to \emph{spawn}
|
|---|
| 27 | functions, i.e., run the function in a new \emph{process} (thread).
|
|---|
| 28 |
|
|---|
| 29 | \emph{Scopes} and \emph{processes} are the two central themes of
|
|---|
| 30 | CIVL-C. Each has a static and a dynamic aspect. The static scopes
|
|---|
| 31 | correspond to the lexical scopes in the program---typically, regions
|
|---|
| 32 | delimited by curly braces \lb \ldots \rb. At runtime, these scopes
|
|---|
| 33 | are \emph{instantiated} when control in a process reaches the
|
|---|
| 34 | beginning of the scope. Processes are created dynamically by
|
|---|
| 35 | \emph{spawning} functions; hence the functions are the static
|
|---|
| 36 | representation of processes.
|
|---|
| 37 |
|
|---|
| 38 | \section{Example Illustrating Scopes and Processes}
|
|---|
| 39 |
|
|---|
| 40 | To understand the static and dynamic nature of scopes and processes,
|
|---|
| 41 | and the relations between them, we consider the (artificial) example
|
|---|
| 42 | code of Figure \ref{fig:scopecodeex}. The static scopes in the scope
|
|---|
| 43 | are numbered from $0$ to $6$.
|
|---|
| 44 |
|
|---|
| 45 | \begin{figure}[t]
|
|---|
| 46 | \centering
|
|---|
| 47 | \includegraphics[scale=1.2]{scopeCodeExample}
|
|---|
| 48 | \caption{CIVL-C code skeleton to illustrate scope hierarchy}
|
|---|
| 49 | \label{fig:scopecodeex}
|
|---|
| 50 | \end{figure}
|
|---|
| 51 |
|
|---|
| 52 | \begin{figure}
|
|---|
| 53 | \centering
|
|---|
| 54 | \includegraphics[scale=1.2]{scopeStateExample}
|
|---|
| 55 | \caption{Static scope tree and a state for example program}
|
|---|
| 56 | \label{fig:scopestateex}
|
|---|
| 57 | \end{figure}
|
|---|
| 58 |
|
|---|
| 59 | The static scopes have a tree structure: one scope is a child of
|
|---|
| 60 | another if the first is immediately contained in the second. Scope 0,
|
|---|
| 61 | which is the file scope (or \emph{root} scope) is the root of this
|
|---|
| 62 | tree. The static scope tree is depicted in Figure
|
|---|
| 63 | \ref{fig:scopestateex} (left). Each scope is identified by its
|
|---|
| 64 | integer ID. Additionally, if the scope happens to be the scope of a
|
|---|
| 65 | function definition, the name of the function is included in this
|
|---|
| 66 | identifier. A node in this tree also shows the variables and
|
|---|
| 67 | functions declared in the scope. For brevity, we omit the \emph{proc}
|
|---|
| 68 | variables.
|
|---|
| 69 |
|
|---|
| 70 | We now look at what happens when this program executes. Figure
|
|---|
| 71 | \ref{fig:scopestateex} (right) illustrates a possible state of the
|
|---|
| 72 | program at one point in an execution. We now explain how
|
|---|
| 73 | this state is arrived at.
|
|---|
| 74 |
|
|---|
| 75 | First, there is an implicit \emph{root function} placed around the
|
|---|
| 76 | entire code. The body of the \emph{main} function becomes the body
|
|---|
| 77 | of the root function, and the \emph{main} function itself disappears.
|
|---|
| 78 | This minor transformation does not change the structure of the scope
|
|---|
| 79 | tree.
|
|---|
| 80 |
|
|---|
| 81 | Execution begins by spawning a process $p_0$ to execute the root
|
|---|
| 82 | function. This causes scope $0$ to be instantiated. An instance of a
|
|---|
| 83 | static scope is known as a \emph{dynamic scope}, or \emph{dyscopes}
|
|---|
| 84 | for short. The dynamic scopes are represented by the ovals with
|
|---|
| 85 | double borders on the right side of Figure \ref{fig:scopestateex}.
|
|---|
| 86 | Each dyscope specifies a value for every variable declared in the
|
|---|
| 87 | corresponding static scope. In this case, the value $3$ has been
|
|---|
| 88 | assigned to variable \texttt{x}.
|
|---|
| 89 |
|
|---|
| 90 | The state of process $p_0$ is represented by a \emph{call stack}
|
|---|
| 91 | (green). The entries on this stack are \emph{activation frames}.
|
|---|
| 92 | Each frame contains two data: a reference to a dyscope (indicated by
|
|---|
| 93 | blue arrows) and a current location (or programmer counter vaule) in
|
|---|
| 94 | the static scope corresponding to that dyscope (not shown). The
|
|---|
| 95 | dyscope defines the environment in which the process evaluates
|
|---|
| 96 | expressions and executes statements. The currently executing function
|
|---|
| 97 | of a process, corresponding to the top frame in the call stack, can
|
|---|
| 98 | ``see'' only the variables in its dyscope and those of all the
|
|---|
| 99 | ancestors of its dyscope in the dyscope tree.
|
|---|
| 100 |
|
|---|
| 101 | Returning to the example, $p_0$ enters scope 6, instanitating that
|
|---|
| 102 | scope, and then spawns procedure \texttt{f}. This creates process
|
|---|
| 103 | $p_1$, with a new stack with a frame pointing to a dyscope
|
|---|
| 104 | corresponding to static scope 1. The new process proceed to run
|
|---|
| 105 | concurrently with $p_0$. Meanwhile, $p_0$ calls procedure \texttt{g},
|
|---|
| 106 | which pushes a new entry onto its call stack, and instantiates scope
|
|---|
| 107 | 5. Hence $p_0$ has two entries on its stack: the bottom one pointing
|
|---|
| 108 | to the instance of scope 6, the top one pointing to the instance of
|
|---|
| 109 | scope 5.
|
|---|
| 110 |
|
|---|
| 111 | Meanwhile, assume $\texttt{x}>0$, so that $p_1$ takes the \emph{true}
|
|---|
| 112 | branch of the \texttt{if} statement, instantiating scope 3 under the
|
|---|
| 113 | instance of scope 1. It then spawns two copies of procedure
|
|---|
| 114 | \texttt{f1}, creating processes $p_2$ and $p_3$ and two instances of
|
|---|
| 115 | scope 2. Then $p_1$ spawns \texttt{f2}, creating process $p_4$ and an
|
|---|
| 116 | instance of scope 4. Note that the instance of scope 4 is a child of
|
|---|
| 117 | the instance of scope 3, since the (static) scope 4 is a child of
|
|---|
| 118 | scope 3. Finally, $p_1$ calls \texttt{f2}, pushing a new entry on its
|
|---|
| 119 | stack and creating another instance of scope 4. The final state
|
|---|
| 120 | arrived at is the one shown.
|
|---|
| 121 |
|
|---|
| 122 | There are few key points to understand:
|
|---|
| 123 | \begin{itemize}
|
|---|
| 124 | \item In any state, there is a mapping from the dyscope tree to the
|
|---|
| 125 | static scope tree which maps a dyscope to the static scope of which
|
|---|
| 126 | it is an instance. This mapping is a \emph{tree homomorphism},
|
|---|
| 127 | i.e., if dyscope $u$ is a child of dyscope $v$, then the static
|
|---|
| 128 | scope corresponding to $u$ is a child of the static scope
|
|---|
| 129 | corresponding to $v$.
|
|---|
| 130 | \item A static scope may have any number of instances, including 0.
|
|---|
| 131 | \item Dynamic scopes are created when control enters the corresponding
|
|---|
| 132 | static scope; they disappear from the state when they become
|
|---|
| 133 | unreachable. A dyscope $v$ is ``reachable'' if some process has a
|
|---|
| 134 | frame pointing to a dyscope $u$ and there is a path from $u$ up to
|
|---|
| 135 | $v$ that follows the parent edges in the dyscope tree.
|
|---|
| 136 | \item Processes are created when functions are spawned; they disappear
|
|---|
| 137 | from the state when their stack becomes empty (either because the
|
|---|
| 138 | process terminates normally or invokes the \emph{exit} system
|
|---|
| 139 | function).
|
|---|
| 140 | \end{itemize}
|
|---|
| 141 |
|
|---|
| 142 | \section{Structure of a CIVL-C program}
|
|---|
| 143 |
|
|---|
| 144 | A CIVL-C program is structured very much like a standard C program.
|
|---|
| 145 | In particular, a CIVL-C program may use the preprocessor directives
|
|---|
| 146 | specified in the C Standard, and with the same meaning. A source
|
|---|
| 147 | program is preprocessed, then parsed, resulting in a translation unit,
|
|---|
| 148 | just as with standard C. The main differences are the nesting of
|
|---|
| 149 | function definitions and the new primitives beginning with
|
|---|
| 150 | \texttt{\$}, which are described in detail in the remainder of this
|
|---|
| 151 | part of the manual.
|
|---|
| 152 |
|
|---|
| 153 | A CIVL-C program must begin with the line
|
|---|
| 154 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 155 | #include <civlc.h>
|
|---|
| 156 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 157 | which includes the main CIVL-C header file, which declares all the
|
|---|
| 158 | types and other CIVL primitives.
|
|---|
| 159 |
|
|---|
| 160 | As usual, a translation unit consists of a sequence of variable
|
|---|
| 161 | declarations, function prototypes, and function definitions in file
|
|---|
| 162 | scope. In addition, \emph{assume} statements may occur in the file
|
|---|
| 163 | scope. These are used to state assumptions on the input values
|
|---|
| 164 | to a program.
|
|---|
| 165 |
|
|---|
| 166 | \chapter{Sequential Elements}
|
|---|
| 167 |
|
|---|
| 168 | In this chapter we describe the main sequential elements of the
|
|---|
| 169 | language. For the most part these are the same as in C.
|
|---|
| 170 | Primitives dealing with concurrency are introduced in Chapter
|
|---|
| 171 | \ref{chap:concurrency}.
|
|---|
| 172 |
|
|---|
| 173 | \section{Types}
|
|---|
| 174 |
|
|---|
| 175 | \subsection{Standard types inherited from C}
|
|---|
| 176 |
|
|---|
| 177 | The boolean type is denoted \verb!_Bool!, as in C. Its values are $0$
|
|---|
| 178 | and $1$, which are also denoted by $\cfalse$ and $\ctrue$,
|
|---|
| 179 | respectively.
|
|---|
| 180 |
|
|---|
| 181 | There is one integer type, corresponding to the mathematical integers.
|
|---|
| 182 | Currently, all of the C integer types \texttt{int}, \texttt{long},
|
|---|
| 183 | \texttt{unsigned\ int}, \texttt{short}, etc., are mapped to the CIVL
|
|---|
| 184 | integer type.
|
|---|
| 185 |
|
|---|
| 186 | There is one real type, corresponding to the mathematical real
|
|---|
| 187 | numbers. Currently, all of the C real types \texttt{double},
|
|---|
| 188 | \texttt{float}, etc., are mapped to the CIVL real type.
|
|---|
| 189 |
|
|---|
| 190 | Array types, \texttt{struct} and \texttt{union} types, \texttt{char},
|
|---|
| 191 | and pointer types (including pointers to functions) are all exactly as
|
|---|
| 192 | in C.
|
|---|
| 193 |
|
|---|
| 194 | % \subsection{The heap type $\cheap$ and handles}
|
|---|
| 195 |
|
|---|
| 196 | % Unlike C, a CIVL-C program does not necessarily have access to a
|
|---|
| 197 | % single, global heap. Instead, there is a $\cheap$ type, and heaps may
|
|---|
| 198 | % be declared explicitly wherever they are needed. Hence a CIVL-C
|
|---|
| 199 | % program may have several heaps, and these may exist in different
|
|---|
| 200 | % scopes.
|
|---|
| 201 |
|
|---|
| 202 | % A heap is declared and created as follows:
|
|---|
| 203 | % \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 204 | % $heap h = $heap_create();
|
|---|
| 205 | % \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 206 | % The function \verb!$heap_create()! creates a new empty heap in the
|
|---|
| 207 | % current scope and returns a \emph{handle} to that heap. A handle is
|
|---|
| 208 | % like a pointer: it is a reference to another object. However, a handle
|
|---|
| 209 | % is much more restricted than a general pointer. In particular, it
|
|---|
| 210 | % cannot be dereferenced (by the \ct{*} operator). The underlying heap
|
|---|
| 211 | % object can only be accessed by using a handle to it as an argument to
|
|---|
| 212 | % a system function.
|
|---|
| 213 |
|
|---|
| 214 | % Handles can be used in assignments and passed as arguments to functions.
|
|---|
| 215 | % For example, this declaration could follow the one above:
|
|---|
| 216 | % \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 217 | % $heap h2=h;
|
|---|
| 218 | % \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 219 | % After executing this code, \ct{h2} and \ct{h} will be aliased, i.e., the two
|
|---|
| 220 | % handles will refer to the same heap object.
|
|---|
| 221 |
|
|---|
| 222 | % The heap object exists in the scope in which it is created. In
|
|---|
| 223 | % particular, it will disappear when that scope disappears, i.e., when
|
|---|
| 224 | % control reaches the right curly brace that defines the end of the
|
|---|
| 225 | % scope. At that point, any references into the heap become invalid.
|
|---|
| 226 |
|
|---|
| 227 | % The following system functions deal with heaps:
|
|---|
| 228 | % \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 229 | % void* $malloc($heap h, int size);
|
|---|
| 230 | % void free(void *p)
|
|---|
| 231 | % \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 232 | % The first function is like C's \texttt{malloc}, except that you
|
|---|
| 233 | % specify the heap in which the allocation takes place.
|
|---|
| 234 | % This modifies the specified heap and returns a pointer to the new object.
|
|---|
| 235 | % The function can only occur in a context in which the type of the object is
|
|---|
| 236 | % specified, as in:
|
|---|
| 237 | % \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 238 | % $heap h;
|
|---|
| 239 | % int n = 10;
|
|---|
| 240 | % double *p = (double*)$malloc(h, n*sizeof(double));
|
|---|
| 241 | % \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 242 | % The function \ct{free} is exactly the same as in C. Note that
|
|---|
| 243 | % \texttt{free} modifies the heap which was used to allocate \texttt{p}.
|
|---|
| 244 |
|
|---|
| 245 |
|
|---|
| 246 | \subsection{The bundle type: \cbundle}
|
|---|
| 247 |
|
|---|
| 248 | CIVL-C includes a type named \cbundle. A bundle is basically a
|
|---|
| 249 | sequence of data, wrapped into an atomic package. A bundle is created
|
|---|
| 250 | using a function that specifies a region of memory. One can create a
|
|---|
| 251 | bundle from an array of integers, and another bundle from an array of
|
|---|
| 252 | reals. Both bundles have the same type, \cbundle. They can therefore
|
|---|
| 253 | be entered into an array of \cbundle, for example. Hence bundles are
|
|---|
| 254 | useful for mixing objects of different (even statically unknown) types
|
|---|
| 255 | into a single data structure. Later, the contents of a bundle can be
|
|---|
| 256 | extracted with another function that specifies a region of memory into
|
|---|
| 257 | which to unpack the bundle; if that memory does not have the right
|
|---|
| 258 | type to receive the contents of the bundle, a runtime error is
|
|---|
| 259 | generated.
|
|---|
| 260 |
|
|---|
| 261 | \begin{figure}
|
|---|
| 262 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 263 | /* Creates a bundle from the memory region specified by ptr and size,
|
|---|
| 264 | * copying the data into the new bundle */
|
|---|
| 265 | $bundle $bundle_pack(void *ptr, int size);
|
|---|
| 266 |
|
|---|
| 267 | /* Returns the size (number of bytes) of the bundle */
|
|---|
| 268 | int $bundle_size($bundle b);
|
|---|
| 269 |
|
|---|
| 270 | /* Copies the data out of the bundle into the region specified */
|
|---|
| 271 | void $bundle_unpack($bundle bundle, void *ptr);
|
|---|
| 272 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 273 | \caption{The \emph{bundle} abstract data type}
|
|---|
| 274 | \label{fig:bundle}
|
|---|
| 275 | \end{figure}
|
|---|
| 276 |
|
|---|
| 277 | The relevant functions for creating and manipulating bundles
|
|---|
| 278 | are given in Figure \ref{fig:bundle}.
|
|---|
| 279 |
|
|---|
| 280 | \subsection{The \cscope{} type}
|
|---|
| 281 | \label{sec:scopetype}
|
|---|
| 282 |
|
|---|
| 283 | An object of type $\cscope$ is a reference to a dynamic scope. It may
|
|---|
| 284 | be thought of as a ``dynamic scope ID, '' but it is not an integer and
|
|---|
| 285 | cannot be converted to an integer. Operations defined on scopes are
|
|---|
| 286 | discussed in Section \ref{sec:scopeexpr}.
|
|---|
| 287 |
|
|---|
| 288 | \section{Expressions}
|
|---|
| 289 |
|
|---|
| 290 | \subsection{Expressions inherited from C}
|
|---|
| 291 |
|
|---|
| 292 | The following C expressions are included in CIVL:
|
|---|
| 293 | \begin{itemize}
|
|---|
| 294 | \item \emph{constant} expressions
|
|---|
| 295 | \item \emph{identifier} expressions (\texttt{x})
|
|---|
| 296 | \item parenthetical expressions (\verb!(e)!)
|
|---|
| 297 | \item numerical \emph{addition} (\verb!a+b!), \emph{subtraction} (\verb!a-b!),
|
|---|
| 298 | \emph{multiplication} (\verb!a*b!), \emph{division} (\verb!a/b!),
|
|---|
| 299 | \emph{unary plus} (\verb!+a!), \emph{unary minus} (\verb!-a!),
|
|---|
| 300 | \emph{integer division} (\verb!a/b!) and \emph{modulus} (\verb!a%b!),
|
|---|
| 301 | all with their ideal mathematical interpretations
|
|---|
| 302 | \item array \emph{index} expressions (\verb!a[e]!) and struct or union
|
|---|
| 303 | \emph{navigation} expressions (\verb!x.f!, \verb!p->f!)
|
|---|
| 304 | \item \emph{address-of} (\verb!&e!), pointer \emph{dereference} (\verb!*p!),
|
|---|
| 305 | pointer \emph{addition} (\verb!p+i!) and \emph{subtraction} (\verb!p-q!)
|
|---|
| 306 | expressions
|
|---|
| 307 | \item relational expressions (\verb!a==b!, \verb~a!=b~, \verb!a>=b!,
|
|---|
| 308 | \verb!a<=b!, \verb!a<b!, \verb!a>b!)
|
|---|
| 309 | \item logical \emph{not} (\verb~!p~), \emph{and} (\verb!p&&q!), and
|
|---|
| 310 | \emph{or} (\verb!p||q!)
|
|---|
| 311 | \item \emph{sizeof} a type (\verb!sizeof(t)!) or expression (\verb!sizeof(e)!)
|
|---|
| 312 | \item \emph{assignment} expressions (\verb!a=b!, \verb!a+=b!, \verb!a-=b!,
|
|---|
| 313 | \verb!a*=b!, \verb!a/=b!, \verb!a%=b!, \verb!a++!, \verb!a--!)
|
|---|
| 314 | \item function \emph{calls} \verb!f(e1,...,en)!
|
|---|
| 315 | \item \emph{conditional} expressions (\verb!b ? e : f!).
|
|---|
| 316 | \item \emph{cast} expressions (\verb!(t)e!)
|
|---|
| 317 | \end{itemize}
|
|---|
| 318 |
|
|---|
| 319 | Bit-wise operations are not yet supported.
|
|---|
| 320 |
|
|---|
| 321 | \subsection{Scope expressions}
|
|---|
| 322 | \label{sec:scopeexpr}
|
|---|
| 323 |
|
|---|
| 324 | As mentioned in Section \ref{sec:scopetype}, CIVL-C provides a type
|
|---|
| 325 | \cscope. An object of this type is a reference to a dynamic scope.
|
|---|
| 326 | Several constants, expressions, and functions dealing with the
|
|---|
| 327 | \cscope{} type are also provided.
|
|---|
| 328 |
|
|---|
| 329 | The $\cscope$ type is like any other object type. It may be used as
|
|---|
| 330 | the element type of an array, a field in a structure or union, and so
|
|---|
| 331 | on. Expressions of type $\cscope$ may occur on the left or right-hand
|
|---|
| 332 | sides of assignments and as arguments in function calls just like any
|
|---|
| 333 | other expression. Two different variables of type $\cscope$ may be
|
|---|
| 334 | aliased, i.e., they may refer to the same dynamic scope.
|
|---|
| 335 |
|
|---|
| 336 | A dynamic scope $\delta$ is \emph{reachable} if there exists a path
|
|---|
| 337 | which starts from the dyscope referenced by some frame on the call
|
|---|
| 338 | stack of a process, follows the parent edges in the dyscope tree, and
|
|---|
| 339 | terminates in $\delta$. If a dyscope is not reachable, it can never
|
|---|
| 340 | become reachable, and it cannot have any effect on the subsequent
|
|---|
| 341 | execution of the program.
|
|---|
| 342 |
|
|---|
| 343 | Normally, a dynamic scope will eventually become unreachable. At some
|
|---|
| 344 | point after it becomes unreachable, it will be collected in a
|
|---|
| 345 | garbage-collection-like sweep, and any existing references to that
|
|---|
| 346 | scope will become \emph{undefined}. An object of type $\cscope$ is
|
|---|
| 347 | also undefined before it is initialized. Any use of an undefined
|
|---|
| 348 | value is reported as an error by CIVL, so it is important to be sure
|
|---|
| 349 | that a scope variable is defined before using it.
|
|---|
| 350 |
|
|---|
| 351 |
|
|---|
| 352 | \subsubsection{Checking if a dyscope is defined: \cscopedefined}
|
|---|
| 353 |
|
|---|
| 354 | The system function \cscopedefined{} has signature
|
|---|
| 355 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 356 | _Bool $scope_defined($scope s);
|
|---|
| 357 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 358 | It returns \emph{true} if the dynamic scope specified by \texttt{s} is
|
|---|
| 359 | defined, else it returns \emph{false}.
|
|---|
| 360 |
|
|---|
| 361 | \subsubsection{The constant \chere}
|
|---|
| 362 |
|
|---|
| 363 | A constant \chere{} exists in every scope. This constant has
|
|---|
| 364 | type \cscope{} and refers to the dynamic scope in which it is
|
|---|
| 365 | contained. For example,
|
|---|
| 366 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 367 | { // scope s
|
|---|
| 368 | int *p = (int*)$malloc($here, n*sizeof(int));
|
|---|
| 369 | }
|
|---|
| 370 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 371 | allocates an object consisting of $n$ ints in the scope $s$.
|
|---|
| 372 |
|
|---|
| 373 | \subsubsection{The constant \cscoperoot{}}
|
|---|
| 374 |
|
|---|
| 375 | There is a global constant \cscoperoot{} of type $\cscope$ which
|
|---|
| 376 | refers to the root dynamic scope.
|
|---|
| 377 |
|
|---|
| 378 |
|
|---|
| 379 | \subsubsection{Scope relational operators}
|
|---|
| 380 |
|
|---|
| 381 | Let $s_1$ and $s_2$ be expressions of type \cscope. The following are
|
|---|
| 382 | all CIVL-C expressions of boolean type:
|
|---|
| 383 | \begin{itemize}
|
|---|
| 384 | \item $s_1$ \ct{==} $s_2$. This is \emph{true} iff $s_1$ and $s_2$
|
|---|
| 385 | refer to the same dynamic scope.
|
|---|
| 386 | \item $s_1$ \ct{!=} $s_2$. This is \emph{true} iff $s_1$ and $s_2$
|
|---|
| 387 | refer to different dynamic scopes.
|
|---|
| 388 | \item $s_1$ \ct{<=} $s_2$. This is \emph{true} iff $s_1$ is equal to
|
|---|
| 389 | or a descendant of $s_2$, i.e., $s_1$ is equal to or contained in $s_2$.
|
|---|
| 390 | \item $s_1$ \ct{<} $s_2$. This is \emph{true} iff $s_1$ is a strict
|
|---|
| 391 | descendant of $s_2$, i.e., $s_1$ is contained in $s_2$ and is not
|
|---|
| 392 | equal to $s_2$.
|
|---|
| 393 | \item $s_1$ \ct{>} $s_2$. This is equivalent to $s_2$ \ct{<} $s_1$.
|
|---|
| 394 | \item $s_1$ \ct{>=} $s_2$. This is equivalent to $s_2$ \ct{<=} $s_1$.
|
|---|
| 395 | \end{itemize}
|
|---|
| 396 | If $s_1$ or $s_2$ is undefined in any of these expressions, an error
|
|---|
| 397 | will be reported.
|
|---|
| 398 |
|
|---|
| 399 | \subsubsection{Scope parent function \texorpdfstring{\cscopeparent}{\$scope\_parent}}
|
|---|
| 400 |
|
|---|
| 401 | The system function
|
|---|
| 402 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 403 | $scope $scope_parent($scope s);
|
|---|
| 404 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 405 | returns the parent dynamic scope of the dynamic scope referenced by
|
|---|
| 406 | \ct{s}. If \ct{s} is the root dynamic scope, it returns the undefined
|
|---|
| 407 | value of type $\cscope$.
|
|---|
| 408 |
|
|---|
| 409 | \subsubsection{Lowest Common Ancestor: \ct{+}}
|
|---|
| 410 |
|
|---|
| 411 | The expression $s_1$ \ct{+} $s_2$, where $s_1$ and $s_2$ are
|
|---|
| 412 | expressions of type \cscope, evaluates to the lowest common ancestor
|
|---|
| 413 | of $s_1$ and $s_2$ in the dynamic scope tree. This is the smallest
|
|---|
| 414 | dynamic scope containing both $s_1$ and $s_2$.
|
|---|
| 415 |
|
|---|
| 416 | \subsubsection{The \cscopeof{} expression}
|
|---|
| 417 |
|
|---|
| 418 | Given any left-hand-side expression \ct{expr}, the expression
|
|---|
| 419 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 420 | $scopeof(expr)
|
|---|
| 421 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 422 | evaluates to the dynamic scope containing the object specified by
|
|---|
| 423 | \ct{expr}.
|
|---|
| 424 |
|
|---|
| 425 | The following example illustrates the semantics of the \cscopeof{}
|
|---|
| 426 | operator. All of the assertions hold:
|
|---|
| 427 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 428 | {
|
|---|
| 429 | $scope s1 = $here;
|
|---|
| 430 | int x;
|
|---|
| 431 | double a[10];
|
|---|
| 432 |
|
|---|
| 433 | {
|
|---|
| 434 | $scope s2 = $here;
|
|---|
| 435 | int *p = &x;
|
|---|
| 436 | double *q = &a[4];
|
|---|
| 437 |
|
|---|
| 438 | assert($scopeof(x)==s1);
|
|---|
| 439 | assert($scopeof(p)==s2);
|
|---|
| 440 | assert($scopeof(*p)==s1);
|
|---|
| 441 | assert($scopeof(a)==s1);
|
|---|
| 442 | assert($scopeof(a[5])==s1);
|
|---|
| 443 | assert($scopeof(q)==s2);
|
|---|
| 444 | assert($scopeof(*q)==s1);
|
|---|
| 445 | }
|
|---|
| 446 | }
|
|---|
| 447 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 448 |
|
|---|
| 449 | \section{Statements}
|
|---|
| 450 |
|
|---|
| 451 | The usual C statements are supported:
|
|---|
| 452 | \begin{itemize}
|
|---|
| 453 | \item \emph{no-op} (\ct{;})
|
|---|
| 454 | \item expression statements (\ct{e;})
|
|---|
| 455 | \item labeled statements, including \ct{case} and \ct{default} labels
|
|---|
| 456 | (\ct{l: s})
|
|---|
| 457 | \item \emph{for} (\ct{for (init; cond; inc) s}), \emph{while}
|
|---|
| 458 | (\ct{while (cond) s}) and \emph{do} (\ct{do s while (cond)})
|
|---|
| 459 | loops
|
|---|
| 460 | \item compound statements (\lb \ct{s1;s2;} \ldots \rb)
|
|---|
| 461 | \item \texttt{if} and \verb!if! \ldots \verb!else!
|
|---|
| 462 | \item \verb!goto!
|
|---|
| 463 | \item \verb!switch!
|
|---|
| 464 | \item \verb!break!
|
|---|
| 465 | \item \verb!continue!
|
|---|
| 466 | \item \verb!return!
|
|---|
| 467 | \end{itemize}
|
|---|
| 468 |
|
|---|
| 469 | \section{Guards and nondeterminism}
|
|---|
| 470 |
|
|---|
| 471 | \subsection{Guarded commands: \cwhen}
|
|---|
| 472 |
|
|---|
| 473 | A guarded command is encoded in CIVL-C using a $\cwhen$ statement:
|
|---|
| 474 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 475 | $when (expr) stmt;
|
|---|
| 476 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 477 | All statements have a guard, either implicit or explicit. For most
|
|---|
| 478 | statements, the guard is \ctrue. The \cwhen{} statement allows one to
|
|---|
| 479 | attach an explicit guard to a statement.
|
|---|
| 480 |
|
|---|
| 481 | When \texttt{expr} is \emph{true}, the statement is enabled, otherwise
|
|---|
| 482 | it is disabled. A disabled statement is \emph{blocked}---it will not
|
|---|
| 483 | be scheduled for execution. When it is enabled, it may execute by
|
|---|
| 484 | moving control to the \texttt{stmt} and executing the first atomic
|
|---|
| 485 | action in the \texttt{stmt}.
|
|---|
| 486 |
|
|---|
| 487 | If \texttt{stmt} itself has a non-trivial guard, the guard of the
|
|---|
| 488 | \cwhen{} statement is effectively the conjunction of the \texttt{expr}
|
|---|
| 489 | and the guard of \texttt{stmt}.
|
|---|
| 490 |
|
|---|
| 491 | The evaluation of \texttt{expr} and the first atomic action of
|
|---|
| 492 | \texttt{stmt} effectively occur as a single atomic action. There is
|
|---|
| 493 | no guarantee that execution of \texttt{stmt} will continue atomically
|
|---|
| 494 | if it contains more than one atomic action, i.e., other processes may
|
|---|
| 495 | be scheduled.
|
|---|
| 496 |
|
|---|
| 497 | Examples:
|
|---|
| 498 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 499 | $when (s>0) s--;
|
|---|
| 500 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 501 | This will block until \texttt{s} is positive and then decrement
|
|---|
| 502 | \texttt{s}. The execution of \texttt{s--} is guaranteed to take place
|
|---|
| 503 | in an environment in which \texttt{s} is positive.
|
|---|
| 504 |
|
|---|
| 505 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 506 | $when (s>0) {s--; t++}
|
|---|
| 507 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 508 | The execution of \texttt{s--} must happen when \texttt{s>0}, but
|
|---|
| 509 | between \texttt{s--} and \texttt{t++}, other processes may execute.
|
|---|
| 510 |
|
|---|
| 511 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 512 | $when (s>0) $when (t>0) x=y*t;
|
|---|
| 513 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 514 | This blocks until both \texttt{x} and \texttt{t} are positive then
|
|---|
| 515 | executes the assignment in that state. It is equivalent to
|
|---|
| 516 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 517 | $when (s>0 && t>0) x=y*t;
|
|---|
| 518 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 519 |
|
|---|
| 520 | \subsection{Nondeterministic selection statement: \cchoose}
|
|---|
| 521 |
|
|---|
| 522 | A \cchoose{} statement has the form
|
|---|
| 523 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 524 | $choose {
|
|---|
| 525 | stmt1;
|
|---|
| 526 | stmt2;
|
|---|
| 527 | ...
|
|---|
| 528 | default: stmt
|
|---|
| 529 | }
|
|---|
| 530 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 531 | The \texttt{default} clause is optional.
|
|---|
| 532 |
|
|---|
| 533 | The guards of the statements are evaluated and among those that are
|
|---|
| 534 | \emph{true}, one is chosen nondeterministically and executed. If none
|
|---|
| 535 | are \emph{true} and the \texttt{default} clause is present, it is
|
|---|
| 536 | chosen. The \texttt{default} clause will only be selected if all
|
|---|
| 537 | guards are \emph{false}. If no \texttt{default} clause is present and
|
|---|
| 538 | all guards are \emph{false}, the statement blocks. Hence the implicit
|
|---|
| 539 | guard of the \cchoose{} statement without a \texttt{default} clause is
|
|---|
| 540 | the disjunction of the guards of its sub-statements. The implicit
|
|---|
| 541 | guard of the \cchoose{} statement with a default clause is
|
|---|
| 542 | \emph{true}.
|
|---|
| 543 |
|
|---|
| 544 | Example: this shows how to encode a ``low-level'' CIVL guarded
|
|---|
| 545 | transition system:
|
|---|
| 546 |
|
|---|
| 547 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 548 | l1: $choose {
|
|---|
| 549 | $when (x>0) {x--; goto l2;}
|
|---|
| 550 | $when (x==0) {y=1; goto l3;}
|
|---|
| 551 | default: {z=1; goto l4;}
|
|---|
| 552 | }
|
|---|
| 553 | l2: $choose {
|
|---|
| 554 | ...
|
|---|
| 555 | }
|
|---|
| 556 | l3: $choose {
|
|---|
| 557 | ...
|
|---|
| 558 | }
|
|---|
| 559 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 560 |
|
|---|
| 561 |
|
|---|
| 562 | \subsection{Nondeterministic choice of integer:
|
|---|
| 563 | \texorpdfstring{\cchooseint}{\$choose\_int}}
|
|---|
| 564 |
|
|---|
| 565 | The system function \cchooseint{} has the following signature:
|
|---|
| 566 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 567 | int $choose_int(int n);
|
|---|
| 568 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 569 | This function takes as input a positive integer \texttt{n} and
|
|---|
| 570 | nondeterministicaly returns an integer in the range
|
|---|
| 571 | $[0,\texttt{n}-1]$.
|
|---|
| 572 |
|
|---|
| 573 |
|
|---|
| 574 | \chapter{Concurrency}
|
|---|
| 575 | \label{chap:concurrency}
|
|---|
| 576 |
|
|---|
| 577 | \section{Process creation and management}
|
|---|
| 578 |
|
|---|
| 579 | \subsection{The process type: \cproc}
|
|---|
| 580 |
|
|---|
| 581 | This is a primitive object type and functions like any other primitive
|
|---|
| 582 | C type (e.g., \texttt{int}). An object of this type refers to a
|
|---|
| 583 | process. It can be thought of as a process ID, but it is not an
|
|---|
| 584 | integer and cannot be cast to one. It is analogous to the $\cscope$
|
|---|
| 585 | type for dynamic scopes.
|
|---|
| 586 |
|
|---|
| 587 | Certain expressions take an argument of \cproc{} type and some return
|
|---|
| 588 | something of \cproc{} type. The operators \verb!==! and \verb~!=~ may
|
|---|
| 589 | be used with two arguments of type \cproc{} to determine whether the
|
|---|
| 590 | two arguments refer to the same process.
|
|---|
| 591 |
|
|---|
| 592 | \subsection{Checking if a process is defined: \cprocdefined}
|
|---|
| 593 |
|
|---|
| 594 | An object of type \cproc{} is initially undefined, so a use of that
|
|---|
| 595 | object would result in an error. One can check whether a \cproc{}
|
|---|
| 596 | object is defined using the method \cprocdefined:
|
|---|
| 597 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 598 | _Bool $proc_defined($proc p);
|
|---|
| 599 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 600 |
|
|---|
| 601 | \subsection{Obtaining the null process reference: \cprocNull}
|
|---|
| 602 |
|
|---|
| 603 | This function takes a pointer to an object of \cproc{} type as a parameter:
|
|---|
| 604 |
|
|---|
| 605 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 606 | void $proc_null($proc *p);
|
|---|
| 607 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 608 |
|
|---|
| 609 | It updates the corresponding object with the default null value of the \cproc{} type.
|
|---|
| 610 | The null value of \cproc{} type is considered as defined, i.e., there will be no
|
|---|
| 611 | error to use an \cproc{} object with null value.
|
|---|
| 612 |
|
|---|
| 613 | \subsection{The \emph{self} process constant: \cself}
|
|---|
| 614 |
|
|---|
| 615 | This is a constant of type \cproc. It can be used wherever an argument
|
|---|
| 616 | of type \cproc{} is called for. It refers to the process that is
|
|---|
| 617 | evaluating the expression containing \cself.
|
|---|
| 618 |
|
|---|
| 619 | \subsection{Spawning a new process: \cspawn}
|
|---|
| 620 |
|
|---|
| 621 | A \emph{spawn} expression is an expression with side-effects. It
|
|---|
| 622 | spawns a new process and returns a reference to the new process, i.e.,
|
|---|
| 623 | an object of type \cproc. The syntax is the same as a procedure
|
|---|
| 624 | invocation with the keyword \cspawn{} inserted in front:
|
|---|
| 625 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 626 | $spawn f(expr1, ..., exprn)
|
|---|
| 627 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 628 | Typically the returned value is assigned to a variable, e.g.,
|
|---|
| 629 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 630 | $proc p = $spawn f(i);
|
|---|
| 631 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 632 | If the invoked function \texttt{f} returns a value, that value is
|
|---|
| 633 | simply ignored.
|
|---|
| 634 |
|
|---|
| 635 | \subsection{Waiting for another process to terminate: \cwait}
|
|---|
| 636 |
|
|---|
| 637 | The system function $\cwait$ has signature
|
|---|
| 638 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 639 | void $wait($proc p);
|
|---|
| 640 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 641 | When invoked, this function will not return until the process
|
|---|
| 642 | referenced by \ct{p} has terminated. Note that $p$ can be any
|
|---|
| 643 | expression of type \cproc{}, not just a variable.
|
|---|
| 644 |
|
|---|
| 645 | \subsection{Terminating a process immediately: \cexit}
|
|---|
| 646 |
|
|---|
| 647 | This function takes no arguments. It causes the
|
|---|
| 648 | calling process to terminate immediately, regardless of the state of
|
|---|
| 649 | its call stack:
|
|---|
| 650 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 651 | void $exit(void);
|
|---|
| 652 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 653 |
|
|---|
| 654 | \section{Atomicity}
|
|---|
| 655 |
|
|---|
| 656 | \subsection{Atom blocks: \catom} This defines a number of statements
|
|---|
| 657 | to be executed as a single atomic transition. An \catom~block has the
|
|---|
| 658 | following form:
|
|---|
| 659 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 660 | $atom {
|
|---|
| 661 | stmt1;
|
|---|
| 662 | stmt2;
|
|---|
| 663 | ...
|
|---|
| 664 | }
|
|---|
| 665 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 666 |
|
|---|
| 667 | The statements inside an \catom\ block are to be executed as one
|
|---|
| 668 | transition. It is required that the execution of the statements in an
|
|---|
| 669 | \catom\ block satisfy all of the following properties:
|
|---|
| 670 | \begin{enumerate}
|
|---|
| 671 | \item \emph{deterministic}: at each step in the execution of the atom
|
|---|
| 672 | block, there must be at most one enabled statement;
|
|---|
| 673 | \item \emph{nonblocking}: at each step in the execution, there must be
|
|---|
| 674 | at least one enabled statement, hence, together with (1), there must
|
|---|
| 675 | be exactly one enabled statement;
|
|---|
| 676 | \item \emph{finite}: the execution of the atom block must terminate
|
|---|
| 677 | after a finite number of steps; and
|
|---|
| 678 | \item \emph{isolated}: there are no jumps from outside the atom block
|
|---|
| 679 | to inside the atom block, or from inside the atomc block to outside
|
|---|
| 680 | of it.
|
|---|
| 681 | \end{enumerate}
|
|---|
| 682 |
|
|---|
| 683 | Violations of the \emph{deterministic}, \emph{nonblocking}, or
|
|---|
| 684 | \emph{isolated} properties will be reported either statically or
|
|---|
| 685 | dynamically. If the \emph{finite} property is violated, the
|
|---|
| 686 | verification may just run forever.
|
|---|
| 687 |
|
|---|
| 688 | Once the process enters an \catom\ block is said to be \emph{executing
|
|---|
| 689 | atomly}. The process remains executing atomly until it reaches the
|
|---|
| 690 | terminating right brace of the block. Hence \emph{executing atomly}
|
|---|
| 691 | is a dynamic, not static condition. For example, the block might
|
|---|
| 692 | contain a function call which takes the process to a point in code
|
|---|
| 693 | which is not statically contained in an atom block; that process is
|
|---|
| 694 | nevertheless still executing atomly and is subject to the rules above.
|
|---|
| 695 | The process only stops executing atomly when that function call
|
|---|
| 696 | returns and control finally reaches the right curly brace at the end
|
|---|
| 697 | of the atom block (assuming the block is not contained in another atom
|
|---|
| 698 | block).
|
|---|
| 699 |
|
|---|
| 700 | \emph{Note:} \cwait\ statements are not allowed in \catom\ blocks.
|
|---|
| 701 | The rationale for this is that there is never a way to know for
|
|---|
| 702 | certain that another process has terminated (until \cwait\ has
|
|---|
| 703 | returned) so there is never a way to be certain the \cwait\ statement
|
|---|
| 704 | will not block. If one does occur in an \catom\ block, an error will
|
|---|
| 705 | be reported statically (if it can be detected statically) or
|
|---|
| 706 | dynamically (otherwise). Note that it is not always possible to
|
|---|
| 707 | detect this statically because the \catom\ block may contain a
|
|---|
| 708 | function call, and the function may contain the \cwait\ statement.
|
|---|
| 709 |
|
|---|
| 710 | \subsection{Atomic blocks: \catomic}
|
|---|
| 711 |
|
|---|
| 712 | The statements in an \emph{atomic} block will be executed without
|
|---|
| 713 | other processes interleaving, to the extent possible. It has the
|
|---|
| 714 | form:
|
|---|
| 715 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 716 | $atomic {
|
|---|
| 717 | stmt1;
|
|---|
| 718 | stmt2;
|
|---|
| 719 | ...
|
|---|
| 720 | }
|
|---|
| 721 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 722 | It is essentially a weaker form of \catom. Unlike \catom, there are
|
|---|
| 723 | no restrictions on the statements that can go inside an \catomic\
|
|---|
| 724 | block. A process executing an \catomic~block will try to execute the
|
|---|
| 725 | statements without interleaving with other processes, unless it
|
|---|
| 726 | becomes blocked. Unlike an \catom, the statements in an atomic block
|
|---|
| 727 | do not necessarily execute as a single transition; they may be spread
|
|---|
| 728 | out over multiple transitions.
|
|---|
| 729 |
|
|---|
| 730 | When no statement is enabled, the execution of the \catomic\ block
|
|---|
| 731 | will be interrupted. At this point, other processes are allowed to
|
|---|
| 732 | execute. Eventually, if the original process becomes enabled due to
|
|---|
| 733 | the actions of other processes, it may be scheduled again, in which
|
|---|
| 734 | case it regains atomicity and continues where it left off. For
|
|---|
| 735 | example, after executing the first loop, the process executing the
|
|---|
| 736 | following code will become blocked at the first \cwait\ statement:
|
|---|
| 737 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 738 | $atomic{
|
|---|
| 739 | for(int i = 0; i < 5; i++) p[i] = $spawn foo(i);
|
|---|
| 740 | for(int i = 0; i < 5; i++) $wait p[i];
|
|---|
| 741 | }
|
|---|
| 742 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 743 | Other processes will then execute. Eventually, if the process being
|
|---|
| 744 | waited on terminates, the original process becomes enabled and may be
|
|---|
| 745 | scheduled, in which case it regain atomicity, increments \texttt{i}
|
|---|
| 746 | and proceeds to the next $\cwait$ statement. This is in fact a common
|
|---|
| 747 | idiom for spawning and waiting on a set of processes.
|
|---|
| 748 |
|
|---|
| 749 | A process that enters an $\catomic$ block is said to be
|
|---|
| 750 | \emph{executing atomically}; it remains executing atomically until it
|
|---|
| 751 | reaches the closing curly brace.
|
|---|
| 752 |
|
|---|
| 753 | Both $\catom$ and $\catomic$ blocks can be nested arbitrarily, but
|
|---|
| 754 | $\catom$ overrides $\catomic$: a process that is executing atomly will
|
|---|
| 755 | continue executing atomly if it encounters an $\catomic$ statement;
|
|---|
| 756 | but a process executing atomically that encounters an $\catom$ will
|
|---|
| 757 | begin executing atomly.
|
|---|
| 758 |
|
|---|
| 759 | The atomic semantics are defined more precisely as follows: there is a
|
|---|
| 760 | single global variable called the \emph{atomic lock}. This variable
|
|---|
| 761 | can either be null (meaning the atomic lock is ``free''), or it can
|
|---|
| 762 | hold the PID of a process; that process is said to ``hold'' the atomic
|
|---|
| 763 | lock. Moreover, each process contains a special integer variable, its
|
|---|
| 764 | \emph{atomic counter}, which is initially 0. Every time a process
|
|---|
| 765 | enters an atomic block, it increments its atomic counter; every time
|
|---|
| 766 | it exits an atomic block, it decrements its counter. In order to
|
|---|
| 767 | increment its counter from $0$ to $1$, it must first wait for the
|
|---|
| 768 | atomic lock to become free, and then take the lock. When it
|
|---|
| 769 | decrements its counter from $1$ to $0$, it releases the atomic lock.
|
|---|
| 770 | When a process executing atomically becomes blocked, it releases the
|
|---|
| 771 | lock (without changing the value of its atomic counter).
|
|---|
| 772 |
|
|---|
| 773 |
|
|---|
| 774 | \section{Message-Passing}
|
|---|
| 775 |
|
|---|
| 776 | CIVL-C provides a number of additional primitives that can be used to
|
|---|
| 777 | model message-passing systems. This part of the language is built in
|
|---|
| 778 | two layers: the lower layer defines an abstract data type for
|
|---|
| 779 | representing messages; the higher layer defines an abstract data type
|
|---|
| 780 | of \emph{communicators} for managing sets of messages being
|
|---|
| 781 | transferred among some set of processes.
|
|---|
| 782 |
|
|---|
| 783 | \subsection{Messages: \cmessage}
|
|---|
| 784 |
|
|---|
| 785 | Messages are similar to bundles, but with some additional meta-data.
|
|---|
| 786 | The \emph{data} component of the message is the ``contents'' of the
|
|---|
| 787 | message and is formed and extracted much like a bundle. The meta-data
|
|---|
| 788 | consists of an integer identifier for the \emph{source} place of the
|
|---|
| 789 | message, an integer identifier for the message \emph{destination}
|
|---|
| 790 | place, and an integer \emph{tag} which can be used by a process to
|
|---|
| 791 | discriminate among messages for reception. This is very similar to
|
|---|
| 792 | MPI.
|
|---|
| 793 |
|
|---|
| 794 | \begin{figure}
|
|---|
| 795 | \begin{small}
|
|---|
| 796 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 797 | /* creates a new message, copying data from the specified buffer */
|
|---|
| 798 | $message $message_pack(int source, int dest, int tag, void *data, int size);
|
|---|
| 799 |
|
|---|
| 800 | /* returns the message source */
|
|---|
| 801 | int $message_source($message message);
|
|---|
| 802 |
|
|---|
| 803 | /* returns the message tag */
|
|---|
| 804 | int $message_tag($message message);
|
|---|
| 805 |
|
|---|
| 806 | /* returns the message destination */
|
|---|
| 807 | int $message_dest($message message);
|
|---|
| 808 |
|
|---|
| 809 | /* returns the message size */
|
|---|
| 810 | int $message_size($message message);
|
|---|
| 811 |
|
|---|
| 812 | /* transfers message data to buf, throwing exception if message
|
|---|
| 813 | * size exceeds specified size */
|
|---|
| 814 | void $message_unpack($message message, void *buf, int size);
|
|---|
| 815 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 816 | \end{small}
|
|---|
| 817 | \caption{The \emph{message} abstract data type}
|
|---|
| 818 | \label{fig:message}
|
|---|
| 819 | \end{figure}
|
|---|
| 820 |
|
|---|
| 821 | The functions for creating, and extracting information from, messages
|
|---|
| 822 | are given in Figure \ref{fig:message}.
|
|---|
| 823 |
|
|---|
| 824 | \subsection{Communicators: \cgcomm{} and \ccomm}
|
|---|
| 825 | \label{sec:communicators}
|
|---|
| 826 |
|
|---|
| 827 | CIVL-C defines a \emph{global communicator} type $\cgcomm$ and a
|
|---|
| 828 | \emph{local communicator} type $\ccomm$. The global communicator is an
|
|---|
| 829 | abstraction for a ``communication universe'' that stores buffered
|
|---|
| 830 | messages and perhaps other data. The local communicator wraps
|
|---|
| 831 | together a reference to a global communicator and an integer
|
|---|
| 832 | \emph{place}. Most of the message-passing commands take a local
|
|---|
| 833 | communicator as an argument to specify the communication universe used
|
|---|
| 834 | for that operation and the place from which that operation will be
|
|---|
| 835 | executed. The communication universes are isolated from one
|
|---|
| 836 | another---a message sent on one can never be received using a
|
|---|
| 837 | different communicator, for example.
|
|---|
| 838 |
|
|---|
| 839 | The global communicator is the shared object that must be declared in
|
|---|
| 840 | a scope containing all scopes in which communication in that universe
|
|---|
| 841 | will take place. It is created by specifying the number of
|
|---|
| 842 | \emph{places} that will comprise the communicator. A place is an
|
|---|
| 843 | address to which messages may be sent or where they may be received.
|
|---|
| 844 | There is not necessarily a one-to-one correspondence between places and
|
|---|
| 845 | processes: many processes can use the same place.
|
|---|
| 846 |
|
|---|
| 847 | Local communicators are created (typically in some child scope of the
|
|---|
| 848 | scope in which the global communicator is declared) by specifying the
|
|---|
| 849 | gobal communicator to which the local one will be associated and the
|
|---|
| 850 | place ID. The local communicator will be used in most of the
|
|---|
| 851 | message-passing functions; it may be thought of as an ordered pair
|
|---|
| 852 | consisting of a reference to the global communicator and the integer
|
|---|
| 853 | place ID. The place ID must be in $[0,\texttt{size}-1]$, where
|
|---|
| 854 | \texttt{size} is the size of the global communicator. The place ID
|
|---|
| 855 | specifies the place in the global communication universe that will be
|
|---|
| 856 | occupied by the local communicator. The local communicator handle may
|
|---|
| 857 | be used by more than one process, but all of those processes will be
|
|---|
| 858 | viewed as occupying the same place. Only one call to \ccommcreate{}
|
|---|
| 859 | may occur for each gcomm-place pair.
|
|---|
| 860 |
|
|---|
| 861 |
|
|---|
| 862 | Both types ($\cgcomm$ and $\ccomm$) are handle types. When declared
|
|---|
| 863 | with a call to the corresponding creation function, they create an
|
|---|
| 864 | object in the specified scope and return a handle to that object. The
|
|---|
| 865 | object can only be accessed through the specified system functions
|
|---|
| 866 | that take this handle as an argument.
|
|---|
| 867 |
|
|---|
| 868 | % This local communicator handle will be used as an
|
|---|
| 869 | % * argument in most message-passing functions. The place must be in
|
|---|
| 870 | % * [0,size-1] and specifies the place in the global communication universe
|
|---|
| 871 | % * that will be occupied by the local communicator. The local communicator
|
|---|
| 872 | % * handle may be used by more than one process, but all of those
|
|---|
| 873 | % * processes will be viewed as occupying the same place.
|
|---|
| 874 | % * Only one call to $comm_create may occur for each gcomm-place pair.
|
|---|
| 875 |
|
|---|
| 876 | \begin{figure}
|
|---|
| 877 | \begin{small}
|
|---|
| 878 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 879 | /* Creates a new global communicator object and returns a handle to it.
|
|---|
| 880 | * The global communicator will have size communication places. The
|
|---|
| 881 | * global communicator defines a communication "universe" and encompasses
|
|---|
| 882 | * message buffers and all other components of the state associated to
|
|---|
| 883 | * message-passing. The new object will be allocated in the given scope. */
|
|---|
| 884 | $gcomm $gcomm_create($scope s, int size);
|
|---|
| 885 |
|
|---|
| 886 | void $gcomm_destroy($gcomm gcomm); // Destroys the gcomm
|
|---|
| 887 |
|
|---|
| 888 | _Bool $gcomm_defined($gcomm gcomm); // Is the gcomm object defined?
|
|---|
| 889 |
|
|---|
| 890 | /* Creates a new local communicator object and returns a handle to it.
|
|---|
| 891 | * The new communicator will be affiliated with the specified global
|
|---|
| 892 | * communicator. The new object will be allocated in the given scope. */
|
|---|
| 893 | $comm $comm_create($scope s, $gcomm gcomm, int place);
|
|---|
| 894 |
|
|---|
| 895 | void $comm_destroy($comm comm); // Destroys the comm
|
|---|
| 896 |
|
|---|
| 897 | _Bool $comm_defined($comm comm); // Is the comm object defined?
|
|---|
| 898 |
|
|---|
| 899 | /* Returns the size (number of places) in the global communicator associated
|
|---|
| 900 | * to the given comm. */
|
|---|
| 901 | int $comm_size($comm comm);
|
|---|
| 902 |
|
|---|
| 903 | /* Returns the place of the local communicator. This is the same as the
|
|---|
| 904 | * place argument used to create the local communicator. */
|
|---|
| 905 | int $comm_place($comm comm);
|
|---|
| 906 |
|
|---|
| 907 | /* Adds the message to the appropriate message queue in the communication
|
|---|
| 908 | * universe specified by the comm. The source of the message must equal
|
|---|
| 909 | * the place of the comm. */
|
|---|
| 910 | void $comm_enqueue($comm comm, $message message);
|
|---|
| 911 |
|
|---|
| 912 | /* Returns true iff a matching message exists in the communication universe
|
|---|
| 913 | * specified by the comm. A message matches the arguments if the destination
|
|---|
| 914 | * of the message is the place of the comm, and the sources and tags match. */
|
|---|
| 915 | _Bool $comm_probe($comm comm, int source, int tag);
|
|---|
| 916 |
|
|---|
| 917 | /* Finds the first matching message and returns it without modifying
|
|---|
| 918 | * the communication universe. If no matching message exists, returns a message
|
|---|
| 919 | * with source, dest, and tag all negative. */
|
|---|
| 920 | $message $comm_seek($comm comm, int source, int tag);
|
|---|
| 921 |
|
|---|
| 922 | /* Finds the first matching message, removes it from the communicator,
|
|---|
| 923 | * and returns the message */
|
|---|
| 924 | $message $comm_dequeue($comm comm, int source, int tag);
|
|---|
| 925 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 926 | \end{small}
|
|---|
| 927 | \caption{The \emph{communicator} interface specifies handle
|
|---|
| 928 | types $\cgcomm$ and $\ccomm$ and the functions above}
|
|---|
| 929 | \label{fig:comm}
|
|---|
| 930 | \end{figure}
|
|---|
| 931 |
|
|---|
| 932 | The communicator interface is given in Figure \ref{fig:comm}.
|
|---|
| 933 |
|
|---|
| 934 | Certain restrictions are enforced on some relations between the
|
|---|
| 935 | objects involved in a communication universe.
|
|---|
| 936 |
|
|---|
| 937 | Fix a \cgcomm{} object. This object corresponds to a single
|
|---|
| 938 | communication universe with, say, $n$ places. At any time, there can
|
|---|
| 939 | be \emph{at most one} \ccomm{} object associated to a given place. If
|
|---|
| 940 | a program attempts to create a \ccomm{} object with the same \cgcomm{}
|
|---|
| 941 | and place as an earlier created \ccomm{} object, a runtime error will
|
|---|
| 942 | occur. In particular, there can be at most $n$ \ccomm{} objects
|
|---|
| 943 | associated to the \cgcomm.
|
|---|
| 944 |
|
|---|
| 945 | The relation between processes and \ccomm{} objects is unconstrained.
|
|---|
| 946 | One process may use any number of \ccomm{} objects. (Of course, the
|
|---|
| 947 | process must have access to handles for those \ccomm{} objects.)
|
|---|
| 948 | Dually, a single \ccomm{} object may be used by any number of
|
|---|
| 949 | processes; this situation arises naturally when modeling a
|
|---|
| 950 | multi-threaded MPI program.
|
|---|
| 951 |
|
|---|
| 952 | \begin{figure}
|
|---|
| 953 | \begin{small}
|
|---|
| 954 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 955 | $gcomm gcomm = $gcomm_create($here, nprocs);
|
|---|
| 956 | void Process(int rank) {
|
|---|
| 957 | $comm comm = $comm_create($here, gcomm, rank);
|
|---|
| 958 |
|
|---|
| 959 | void Thread(int tid) {
|
|---|
| 960 | ...$comm_enqueue(comm, msg)...
|
|---|
| 961 | ...$comm_dequeue(comm, source, tag)...
|
|---|
| 962 | }
|
|---|
| 963 |
|
|---|
| 964 | for (int i=0; i<nthreads; i++) $spawn Thread(i);
|
|---|
| 965 | ...
|
|---|
| 966 | $comm_destroy(comm);
|
|---|
| 967 | }
|
|---|
| 968 | for (int i=0; i<nprocs; i++) $spawn Process(i);
|
|---|
| 969 | ...
|
|---|
| 970 | $gcomm_destroy(gcomm);
|
|---|
| 971 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 972 | \end{small}
|
|---|
| 973 | \caption{Code skeleton for model of multithreaded MPI program
|
|---|
| 974 | showing placement of global and local communicator objects}
|
|---|
| 975 | \label{fig:mpi-threads-comm}
|
|---|
| 976 | \end{figure}
|
|---|
| 977 |
|
|---|
| 978 | There is no special status given to the process which creates the
|
|---|
| 979 | \ccomm{} object of a given place. Any process which can access a
|
|---|
| 980 | handle for that \ccomm{} object can use it to send or receive
|
|---|
| 981 | messages, regardless of whether that process was the one that created
|
|---|
| 982 | the \ccomm{} object. However, users should be aware that verification
|
|---|
| 983 | is likely to be most efficient when variables are declared as locally
|
|---|
| 984 | as possible, so it is best to declare the \ccomm{} object in the
|
|---|
| 985 | innermost scope possible. Figure \ref{fig:mpi-threads-comm}
|
|---|
| 986 | illustrates an effective way to do this in the context of modeling a
|
|---|
| 987 | multithreaded MPI program. In the code skeleton, each thread can
|
|---|
| 988 | access the local communicator object of its process, but not that of
|
|---|
| 989 | any other process.
|
|---|
| 990 |
|
|---|
| 991 | \subsection{Barriers: \cgbarrier{} and \cbarrier}
|
|---|
| 992 | \label{sec:barriers}
|
|---|
| 993 |
|
|---|
| 994 | CIVL-C defines a \emph{global barrier} type $\cgbarrier$ and a
|
|---|
| 995 | \emph{local barrier} type $\cbarrier$. They provide an implementation of
|
|---|
| 996 | a barrier for concurrent programs.
|
|---|
| 997 |
|
|---|
| 998 | The global barrier is a shared object that must be declared in
|
|---|
| 999 | a scope containing all scopes in which the barrier will be called.
|
|---|
| 1000 | It is created by specifying the number of
|
|---|
| 1001 | \emph{places} that will comprise the barrier.
|
|---|
| 1002 |
|
|---|
| 1003 | Local barriers are created (typically in some child scope of the
|
|---|
| 1004 | scope in which the global barrier is declared) by specifying the
|
|---|
| 1005 | gobal barrier to which the local one will be associated and the
|
|---|
| 1006 | place ID. The local barrier will be used in the call to the barrier;
|
|---|
| 1007 | it may be thought of as an ordered pair
|
|---|
| 1008 | consisting of a reference to the global barrier and the integer
|
|---|
| 1009 | place ID. The place ID must be in $[0,\texttt{size}-1]$, where
|
|---|
| 1010 | \texttt{size} is the size of the global barrier.
|
|---|
| 1011 | Only one call to \cbarriercreate{}
|
|---|
| 1012 | may occur for each gbarrier-place pair.
|
|---|
| 1013 |
|
|---|
| 1014 |
|
|---|
| 1015 | Both types ($\cgbarrier$ and $\cbarrier$) are handle types. When declared
|
|---|
| 1016 | with a call to the corresponding creation function, they create an
|
|---|
| 1017 | object in the specified scope and return a handle to that object. The
|
|---|
| 1018 | object can only be accessed through the specified system functions
|
|---|
| 1019 | that take this handle as an argument.
|
|---|
| 1020 |
|
|---|
| 1021 |
|
|---|
| 1022 | \begin{figure}
|
|---|
| 1023 | \begin{small}
|
|---|
| 1024 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1025 | /* Creates a new barrier object and returns a handle to it.
|
|---|
| 1026 | * The barrier has the specified size.
|
|---|
| 1027 | * The new object will be allocated in the given scope. */
|
|---|
| 1028 | $gbarrier $gbarrier_create($scope scope, int size);
|
|---|
| 1029 |
|
|---|
| 1030 | /* Destroys the gbarrier */
|
|---|
| 1031 | void $gbarrier_destroy($gbarrier barrier);
|
|---|
| 1032 |
|
|---|
| 1033 | /* Creates a new local barrier object and returns a handle to it.
|
|---|
| 1034 | * The new barrier will be affiliated with the specified global
|
|---|
| 1035 | * barrier. This local barrier handle will be used as an
|
|---|
| 1036 | * argument in most barrier functions. The place must be in
|
|---|
| 1037 | * [0,size-1] and specifies the place in the global barrier
|
|---|
| 1038 | * that will be occupied by the local barrier.
|
|---|
| 1039 | * Only one call to $barrier_create may occur for each barrier-place pair.
|
|---|
| 1040 | * The new object will be allocated in the given scope. */
|
|---|
| 1041 | $barrier $barrier_create($scope scope, $gbarrier gbarrier, int place);
|
|---|
| 1042 |
|
|---|
| 1043 | /* Calls the barrier associated with this local barrier object.*/
|
|---|
| 1044 | void $barrier_call($barrier barrier);
|
|---|
| 1045 |
|
|---|
| 1046 | /* Destroys the barrier. */
|
|---|
| 1047 | void $barrier_destroy($barrier barrier);
|
|---|
| 1048 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1049 | \end{small}
|
|---|
| 1050 | \caption{The \emph{barrier} interface specifies handle
|
|---|
| 1051 | types $\cgbarrier$ and $\cbarrier$ and the functions above}
|
|---|
| 1052 | \label{fig:barrier}
|
|---|
| 1053 | \end{figure}
|
|---|
| 1054 |
|
|---|
| 1055 | The barrier interface is given in Fig.\ \ref{fig:barrier}.
|
|---|
| 1056 |
|
|---|
| 1057 | \chapter{Specification}
|
|---|
| 1058 |
|
|---|
| 1059 | \section{Overview}
|
|---|
| 1060 |
|
|---|
| 1061 | Specification is the means by which one expresses what a program is
|
|---|
| 1062 | supposed to do, i.e., what it means for it to be correct.
|
|---|
| 1063 |
|
|---|
| 1064 | There are several specification mechanisms in CIVL-C. First, there are
|
|---|
| 1065 | the default properties: these are generic properties which are checked
|
|---|
| 1066 | by default in any program, and require no additional specification
|
|---|
| 1067 | effort. These properties include absence of deadlocks, division by 0,
|
|---|
| 1068 | illegal pointer dereferences, and out of bounds array indexes.
|
|---|
| 1069 |
|
|---|
| 1070 | Many more program-specific properties can be specified using
|
|---|
| 1071 | assertions. CIVL-C has a rich assertion language which extends the
|
|---|
| 1072 | language of boolean-valued C expressions. Assumptions are a
|
|---|
| 1073 | specification dual to assertions in that they restrict the set
|
|---|
| 1074 | of executions on which the assertions are checked.
|
|---|
| 1075 |
|
|---|
| 1076 | Functional equivalence is a power specification mechanism. In this
|
|---|
| 1077 | approach, two programs are provided, one playing the role of the
|
|---|
| 1078 | specification, the other the role of the implementation. The
|
|---|
| 1079 | implementation is correct if, for all inputs $x$, it produces the same
|
|---|
| 1080 | output as that produced by the specification on input $x$. In other
|
|---|
| 1081 | words, the two programs define the same function; this is sometimes
|
|---|
| 1082 | known as \emph{input-output equivalence}. In order to take this
|
|---|
| 1083 | approach, one must first have a way to specify what the inputs and
|
|---|
| 1084 | outputs of a programs are; CIVL-C provides special keywords for this.
|
|---|
| 1085 |
|
|---|
| 1086 | Procedure contracts are another powerful specification mechanisms.
|
|---|
| 1087 | These typically involve specifying preconditions and postconditions
|
|---|
| 1088 | for a function. The function is correct if, whenever it is called in a
|
|---|
| 1089 | state satisfying the precondition, when it returns the state will
|
|---|
| 1090 | satsify the postcondition. A program is correct if all its functions
|
|---|
| 1091 | satsify their contract.
|
|---|
| 1092 |
|
|---|
| 1093 | \section{Input-output signature}
|
|---|
| 1094 |
|
|---|
| 1095 | \subsection{Input type qualifier: \cinput}
|
|---|
| 1096 |
|
|---|
| 1097 | The declaration of a variable in the root scope may
|
|---|
| 1098 | include the type qualifier \cinput, e.g.,
|
|---|
| 1099 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1100 | $input int n;
|
|---|
| 1101 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1102 | This declares the variable to be an input variable, i.e., one which is
|
|---|
| 1103 | considered to be an input to the program. Such a variable is
|
|---|
| 1104 | initialized with an arbitrary (unconstrained) value of its type. When
|
|---|
| 1105 | using symbolic execution to verify a program, such a variable will be
|
|---|
| 1106 | assigned a unique symbolic constant of its type.
|
|---|
| 1107 |
|
|---|
| 1108 | In contrast, variables in the root scope which are not input variables
|
|---|
| 1109 | will instead be initialized with the ``undefined'' value. If an
|
|---|
| 1110 | undefined value is used in some way (such as in an argument to an
|
|---|
| 1111 | operator), an error occurs.
|
|---|
| 1112 |
|
|---|
| 1113 | In addition, input variables may only be read, never written to.
|
|---|
| 1114 |
|
|---|
| 1115 | Alternatively, it is also possible to specify a particular concrete
|
|---|
| 1116 | initial value for an input variable. This is done using a command
|
|---|
| 1117 | line argument when verifying or running the program.
|
|---|
| 1118 |
|
|---|
| 1119 | Input (and output) variables also play a key role when determining
|
|---|
| 1120 | whether two programs are functionally equivalent. Two programs are
|
|---|
| 1121 | considered functionally equivalent if, whenever they are given the
|
|---|
| 1122 | same inputs (i.e., corresponding \cinput{} variables are initialized
|
|---|
| 1123 | with the same values) they will produce the same outputs (i.e.,
|
|---|
| 1124 | corresponding \coutput{} variables will end up with the same values at
|
|---|
| 1125 | termination).
|
|---|
| 1126 |
|
|---|
| 1127 | \subsection{Output type qualifier: \coutput}
|
|---|
| 1128 |
|
|---|
| 1129 | A variable in the root scope may be declared with this type qualifier
|
|---|
| 1130 | to declare it to be an output variable. Output variables are ``dual''
|
|---|
| 1131 | to input variables. They may only be written to, never read. They
|
|---|
| 1132 | are used primarily in functional equivalence checking.
|
|---|
| 1133 |
|
|---|
| 1134 | \section{Assertions and assumptions}
|
|---|
| 1135 |
|
|---|
| 1136 | \subsection{Assertions: \cassert}
|
|---|
| 1137 |
|
|---|
| 1138 | The system function \cassert{} takes an argument of boolean type:
|
|---|
| 1139 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1140 | void $assert (_Bool expr);
|
|---|
| 1141 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1142 | During verification, the assertion is checked. If it cannot be proved
|
|---|
| 1143 | that it must hold, a violation is reported.
|
|---|
| 1144 |
|
|---|
| 1145 | Note that CIVL-C boolean expressions have a richer syntax than C
|
|---|
| 1146 | expressions, and may include universal or existential quantifiers
|
|---|
| 1147 | (see below), and the boolean values \ctrue{} and \cfalse{}.
|
|---|
| 1148 |
|
|---|
| 1149 | The assertion function may take additional optional arguments used to
|
|---|
| 1150 | print a specific message if the assertion is violated. These
|
|---|
| 1151 | additional arguments are similar in form to those used in C's
|
|---|
| 1152 | \texttt{printf} statement: a format string, followed by some number of
|
|---|
| 1153 | arguments which are evaluated and substituted for successive codes in
|
|---|
| 1154 | the format string. For example,
|
|---|
| 1155 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1156 | $assert(x<=B, "x-coordinate %f exceeds bound %f", x, B);
|
|---|
| 1157 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1158 |
|
|---|
| 1159 | The C function \texttt{assert}, included in the standard library
|
|---|
| 1160 | \texttt{assert.h}, is identical to \cassert. Programmers are
|
|---|
| 1161 | free to use either one.
|
|---|
| 1162 |
|
|---|
| 1163 |
|
|---|
| 1164 | \subsection{Assume statements: \cassume}
|
|---|
| 1165 |
|
|---|
| 1166 | As \emph{assume statement} has the form
|
|---|
| 1167 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1168 | $assume expr;
|
|---|
| 1169 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1170 | During verification, the assumed expression is assumed to hold. If
|
|---|
| 1171 | this leads to a contradiction on some execution, that execution is
|
|---|
| 1172 | simply ignored. It never reports a violation, it only restricts the
|
|---|
| 1173 | set of possible executions that will be explored by the verification
|
|---|
| 1174 | algorithm.
|
|---|
| 1175 |
|
|---|
| 1176 | Like as assertion statement, as assume statement can be used any place
|
|---|
| 1177 | a statement is expected. In addition, as assume statement can be used
|
|---|
| 1178 | in file scope to place restrictions on the global variables of the
|
|---|
| 1179 | programs. For example,
|
|---|
| 1180 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1181 | $input int B;
|
|---|
| 1182 | $input int N;
|
|---|
| 1183 | $assume 0<=N && N<=B;
|
|---|
| 1184 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1185 | declares \texttt{N} and \texttt{B} to be integer inputs and restricts
|
|---|
| 1186 | consideration to inputs satisfying $0\leq\texttt{N}\leq\texttt{B}$.
|
|---|
| 1187 |
|
|---|
| 1188 |
|
|---|
| 1189 | \section{Formulas}
|
|---|
| 1190 |
|
|---|
| 1191 | A formula is a boolean expression that can be used in an assert
|
|---|
| 1192 | statement, assume statement, procedure contract (below), or invariant.
|
|---|
| 1193 | Any ordinary C boolean expression is a formula. CIVL-C provides some
|
|---|
| 1194 | additional kinds of formulas, described below.
|
|---|
| 1195 |
|
|---|
| 1196 | \subsection{Implication: \cimplies}
|
|---|
| 1197 |
|
|---|
| 1198 | The binary operation \cimplies{} represents logical implication.
|
|---|
| 1199 | The expression \verb!p=>q! is equivalent to \verb~(!p)||q~.
|
|---|
| 1200 |
|
|---|
| 1201 | \subsection{Universal quantifier: \cforall}
|
|---|
| 1202 |
|
|---|
| 1203 | The universally qunatified formula has the form
|
|---|
| 1204 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1205 | $forall { type identifier | restriction} expr
|
|---|
| 1206 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1207 | where \verb!type! is a type name (e.g., \texttt{int} or
|
|---|
| 1208 | \texttt{double}), \verb!identifier! is the name of the bound variable,
|
|---|
| 1209 | \verb!restriction! is a boolean expression which expresses some
|
|---|
| 1210 | restriction on the values that the bound variable can take, and
|
|---|
| 1211 | \verb!expr! is a formula. The universally quantified formula
|
|---|
| 1212 | holds iff for all values assignable to the bound variable
|
|---|
| 1213 | for which the restriction holds, the formula \ct{expr} holds.
|
|---|
| 1214 |
|
|---|
| 1215 | A variation on the construct above can be used in the special case
|
|---|
| 1216 | where the bound variable is to range over a finite interval
|
|---|
| 1217 | of integers. In this case the quantified formula may be written:
|
|---|
| 1218 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1219 | $forall { type identifier=lower .. upper } expr
|
|---|
| 1220 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1221 | where \ct{lower} and \ct{upper} are integer expressions.
|
|---|
| 1222 |
|
|---|
| 1223 | \subsection{Existential quantifier: \cexists}
|
|---|
| 1224 |
|
|---|
| 1225 | The syntax for existentially quantified expressions is exactly the
|
|---|
| 1226 | same as for universally quantified expressions, with \cexists{} in
|
|---|
| 1227 | place of \cforall{}.
|
|---|
| 1228 |
|
|---|
| 1229 | \section{Contracts}
|
|---|
| 1230 |
|
|---|
| 1231 | \subsection{Procedure contracts: \crequires{} and \censures{}}
|
|---|
| 1232 | The \crequires{} and \censures{} primitives are used to encode
|
|---|
| 1233 | procedure contracts. There are optional
|
|---|
| 1234 | elements that may occur in a procedure declaration or definition,
|
|---|
| 1235 | as follows. For a function prototype:
|
|---|
| 1236 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1237 | T f(...)
|
|---|
| 1238 | $requires expr;
|
|---|
| 1239 | $ensures expr;
|
|---|
| 1240 | ;
|
|---|
| 1241 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1242 | For a function definition:
|
|---|
| 1243 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1244 | T f(...)
|
|---|
| 1245 | $requires expr;
|
|---|
| 1246 | $ensures expr;
|
|---|
| 1247 | {
|
|---|
| 1248 | ...
|
|---|
| 1249 | }
|
|---|
| 1250 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1251 | The value \cresult{} may be used in post-conditions to refer
|
|---|
| 1252 | to the result returned by a procedure.
|
|---|
| 1253 |
|
|---|
| 1254 | \emph{Status}: parsed, but nothing is currently done with this
|
|---|
| 1255 | information.
|
|---|
| 1256 |
|
|---|
| 1257 | \subsection{Loop invariants: \cinvariant}
|
|---|
| 1258 |
|
|---|
| 1259 | This indicates a loop invariant. Each C loop
|
|---|
| 1260 | construct has an optional invariant clause as follows:
|
|---|
| 1261 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1262 | while (expr) $invariant (expr) stmt
|
|---|
| 1263 | for (e1; e2; e3) $invariant (expr) stmt
|
|---|
| 1264 | do stmt while (expr) $invariant (expr) ;
|
|---|
| 1265 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1266 | The invariant encodes the claim that if \texttt{expr} holds upon
|
|---|
| 1267 | entering the loop and the loop condition holds, then it will hold
|
|---|
| 1268 | after completion of execution of the loop body. The invariant is used
|
|---|
| 1269 | by certain verification techniques.
|
|---|
| 1270 |
|
|---|
| 1271 | \emph{Status:} parsed, but nothing is currently done with this
|
|---|
| 1272 | information.
|
|---|
| 1273 |
|
|---|
| 1274 | \section{Concurrency specification}
|
|---|
| 1275 |
|
|---|
| 1276 | \subsection{Remote expressions: \texttt{e@x}}.
|
|---|
| 1277 |
|
|---|
| 1278 | These have the form \verb!expr@x! and refer to a variable in another
|
|---|
| 1279 | process, e.g., \verb!procs[i]@x!. This special kind of expression is
|
|---|
| 1280 | used in collective expressions, which are used to formulate collective
|
|---|
| 1281 | assertions and invariants.
|
|---|
| 1282 |
|
|---|
| 1283 | The expression \verb!expr! must have \cproc{} type. The variable
|
|---|
| 1284 | \texttt{x} must be a statically visible variable in the context in
|
|---|
| 1285 | which it is occurs. When this expression is evaluated, the evaluation
|
|---|
| 1286 | context will be shifted to the process referred to by \texttt{expr}.
|
|---|
| 1287 |
|
|---|
| 1288 | \emph{Status}: not implemented.
|
|---|
| 1289 |
|
|---|
| 1290 | \subsection{Collective expressions: \ccollective}. These have the form
|
|---|
| 1291 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1292 | $collective(proc_expr, int_expr) expr
|
|---|
| 1293 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1294 | This is a collective expression over a set of processes. The
|
|---|
| 1295 | expression \texttt{proc{\U}expr} yields a pointer to the first element
|
|---|
| 1296 | of an array of \cproc. The expression \texttt{int{\U}expr} gives the
|
|---|
| 1297 | length of that array, i.e., the number of processes. Expression
|
|---|
| 1298 | \texttt{expr} is a boolean-valued expression; it may use remote
|
|---|
| 1299 | expressions to refer to variables in the processes specified in the
|
|---|
| 1300 | array. Example:
|
|---|
| 1301 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1302 | $proc procs[N];
|
|---|
| 1303 | ...
|
|---|
| 1304 | $assert $collective(procs, N) i==procs[(pid+1)%N]@i ;
|
|---|
| 1305 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1306 |
|
|---|
| 1307 | \emph{Status}: not implemented.
|
|---|
| 1308 |
|
|---|
| 1309 | \chapter{Pointers and Heaps}
|
|---|
| 1310 | \label{chap:pointers}
|
|---|
| 1311 |
|
|---|
| 1312 | CIVL-C supports pointers, using the same operators with the same
|
|---|
| 1313 | meanings as C (\texttt{\&}, \texttt{*}, pointer arithmetic). There is
|
|---|
| 1314 | also a heap in every scope, and system functions to allocate and
|
|---|
| 1315 | deallocate objects in the specified scope.
|
|---|
| 1316 |
|
|---|
| 1317 | \section{Memory functions: \texttt{memcpy}}
|
|---|
| 1318 |
|
|---|
| 1319 | The function \texttt{memcpy} is defined in the standard C library
|
|---|
| 1320 | \texttt{string.h} and works exactly the same in CIVL-C: it copies
|
|---|
| 1321 | data from the region pointed to by \ct{q} to that pointed to by
|
|---|
| 1322 | \ct{p}. The signature is
|
|---|
| 1323 |
|
|---|
| 1324 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1325 | void memcpy(void *p, void *q, size_t size);
|
|---|
| 1326 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1327 |
|
|---|
| 1328 | \section{Heaps, \cmalloc{} and \cfree}
|
|---|
| 1329 |
|
|---|
| 1330 | As mentioned above, each dynamic scope has an implicit heap on which
|
|---|
| 1331 | objects can be allocated and deallocated dynamically. To allocate an
|
|---|
| 1332 | object, one first needs a reference to the dynamic scope to be used.
|
|---|
| 1333 | The system function $\cmalloc$ is like C's \texttt{malloc}, but takes
|
|---|
| 1334 | this extra scope argument:
|
|---|
| 1335 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1336 | void * $malloc($scope scope, int size);
|
|---|
| 1337 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1338 | The standard C function
|
|---|
| 1339 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1340 | void * malloc(int size);
|
|---|
| 1341 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1342 | declared in \texttt{stdlib.h}, is equivalent to \verb!$malloc($root, size)!.
|
|---|
| 1343 |
|
|---|
| 1344 | The system function \cfree{} is used to deallocate a heap object;
|
|---|
| 1345 | it is just like C's \texttt{free}:
|
|---|
| 1346 | \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1347 | void $free(void *p);
|
|---|
| 1348 | \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1349 | An error is generated if the pointer is not one that was returned by
|
|---|
| 1350 | \cmalloc, or if it was already freed. The standard C function
|
|---|
| 1351 | \texttt{free}, declared in \texttt{stdlib.h} is identical to \cfree.
|
|---|
| 1352 | The two functions are interchangeable.
|
|---|
| 1353 |
|
|---|
| 1354 | % \section{Pointer types}
|
|---|
| 1355 |
|
|---|
| 1356 | % Given any object type $T$ and a static scope $s$ in a CIVL-C program,
|
|---|
| 1357 | % there is a type \emph{pointer-to-$T$-in-$s$}. The type is used to
|
|---|
| 1358 | % represent a pointer to a memory location of type $T$ in scope $s$ or a
|
|---|
| 1359 | % descendant of $s$ (i.e., some scope contained in $s$).
|
|---|
| 1360 |
|
|---|
| 1361 | % If scope $s_1$ is a descendant of $s_2$ (i.e., $s_1$ is lexically
|
|---|
| 1362 | % contained in $s_2$), the type \emph{pointer-to-$T$-in-$s_1$} is a
|
|---|
| 1363 | % subtype of \emph{pointer-to-$T$-in-$s_2$}. This means that any
|
|---|
| 1364 | % expression of the first type can be used wherever an object of the
|
|---|
| 1365 | % second type is expected. In particular, any expression $e$ of the
|
|---|
| 1366 | % subtype can be assigned to a left-hand-side expression of the
|
|---|
| 1367 | % supertype without explicit casts; also $e$ can be used as an argument
|
|---|
| 1368 | % to a function for which the corresponding parameter has the supertype.
|
|---|
| 1369 |
|
|---|
| 1370 | % The syntax for denoting this type adheres to the usual C syntax for
|
|---|
| 1371 | % denoting the type \emph{pointer-to-$T$} with the addition of a scope
|
|---|
| 1372 | % parameter within angular brackets immediately following the \texttt{*}
|
|---|
| 1373 | % token. For example, to declare a variable \texttt{p} of type
|
|---|
| 1374 | % \emph{pointer-to-$T$-in-$s$}, one writes
|
|---|
| 1375 | % \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1376 | % int *<s> p;
|
|---|
| 1377 | % \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1378 | % If the scope modifier \texttt{<...>} is absent, the scope is taken to
|
|---|
| 1379 | % be the root scope $s_0$. The object has type
|
|---|
| 1380 | % \emph{pointer-to-$T$-in-$s_0$}, which is abreviated as
|
|---|
| 1381 | % \emph{pointer-to-$T$}. In this way, stanard C programs can be
|
|---|
| 1382 | % interpreted as CIVL-C programs.
|
|---|
| 1383 |
|
|---|
| 1384 | % \section{Address-of operator}
|
|---|
| 1385 |
|
|---|
| 1386 | % The address-of operator \texttt{\&} returns a pointer of the
|
|---|
| 1387 | % appropriate subtype using the innermost scope in which its left-hand-side
|
|---|
| 1388 | % argument is declared. For example
|
|---|
| 1389 |
|
|---|
| 1390 | % \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1391 | % {
|
|---|
| 1392 | % $scope s1 = $here();
|
|---|
| 1393 | % int x;
|
|---|
| 1394 | % double a[N];
|
|---|
| 1395 | % int *<s1> p = &x;
|
|---|
| 1396 | % double *<s1> q = &a[2];
|
|---|
| 1397 | % }
|
|---|
| 1398 | % \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1399 | % is correct (in particular, it is type-correct) because \texttt{\&x}
|
|---|
| 1400 | % has type \emph{pointer-to-\texttt{int}-in-\texttt{s1}}, since
|
|---|
| 1401 | % \texttt{s1} is the scope in which \texttt{x} is declared.
|
|---|
| 1402 |
|
|---|
| 1403 | % Another pointer example:
|
|---|
| 1404 | % \begin{small}
|
|---|
| 1405 | % \begin{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1406 | % { $scope s0 = $here();
|
|---|
| 1407 | % { $scope s1 = $here();
|
|---|
| 1408 | % double x;
|
|---|
| 1409 | % { $scope s2 = $here();
|
|---|
| 1410 | % double y;
|
|---|
| 1411 | % double *<s1> p;
|
|---|
| 1412 | % /* p can only point to something in s1 or descendant, for example, s2 */
|
|---|
| 1413 | % p = &x; // fine
|
|---|
| 1414 | % p = &y; // fine
|
|---|
| 1415 | % p = (double*)$malloc(s0, 10*sizeof(double)); // static type error
|
|---|
| 1416 | % }
|
|---|
| 1417 | % }
|
|---|
| 1418 | % }
|
|---|
| 1419 | % \end{verbatim}
|
|---|
| 1420 | % \end{small}
|
|---|
| 1421 |
|
|---|
| 1422 | % \section{Pointer addition and subtractions}
|
|---|
| 1423 |
|
|---|
| 1424 | % If \texttt{e} is an expression of type \emph{pointer-to-$T$-in-$s$}
|
|---|
| 1425 | % and \texttt{i} is an expression of integer type then \texttt{e+i} also
|
|---|
| 1426 | % has type \emph{pointer-to-$T$-in-$s$}. In other words, pointer
|
|---|
| 1427 | % addition cannot leave the scope of the original pointer. This
|
|---|
| 1428 | % reflects the fact that every object is contained in one scope, and
|
|---|
| 1429 | % pointer addition cannot leave the object.
|
|---|
| 1430 |
|
|---|
| 1431 | % Pointer subtraction is defined on two pointers of the same type, where
|
|---|
| 1432 | % ``same'' includes the scope. That is checked statically. As in C, it
|
|---|
| 1433 | % is only defined if the two pointers point to the same object. In
|
|---|
| 1434 | % CIVL-C, a runtime error will be thrown if they do not point to the
|
|---|
| 1435 | % same object.
|
|---|
| 1436 |
|
|---|
| 1437 | % \section{Semantics of scopes and pointer types}
|
|---|
| 1438 |
|
|---|
| 1439 | % A variable of type \cscope{} is treated like any other variable.
|
|---|
| 1440 | % It becomes part of the state when the scope in which it is declared
|
|---|
| 1441 | % is instantiated to form a dynamic scope. The variable is
|
|---|
| 1442 | % initialized at that time and its value cannot change.
|
|---|
| 1443 |
|
|---|
| 1444 | % Each time a dynamic scope is instantiated, it is assigned a unique ID
|
|---|
| 1445 | % number. The exactly value of the ID number is not relevant, it just
|
|---|
| 1446 | % has to be distince from any other scope ID number that currently
|
|---|
| 1447 | % exists in the state. This is the value that is assigned to the scope
|
|---|
| 1448 | % variable. Therefore, if a static scope contains a scope variable, and
|
|---|
| 1449 | % that scope is instantiated twice to form two distinct dynamic scopes,
|
|---|
| 1450 | % the values assigned to the two variables will be distinct.
|
|---|
| 1451 |
|
|---|
| 1452 | % A pointer value is an ordered pair $\langle \delta,r \rangle$, where
|
|---|
| 1453 | % $\delta$ is a dynamic scope ID and $r$ is a reference to a memory
|
|---|
| 1454 | % location in the static scope associated to $\delta$. (We will define
|
|---|
| 1455 | % the exact form of a reference later.)
|
|---|
| 1456 |
|
|---|
| 1457 | % When a dynamic scope is instantiated, each new variable created is
|
|---|
| 1458 | % assigned a \emph{dynamic type}. This is a refinement of the static
|
|---|
| 1459 | % type associated to the static variable. Every dynamic type
|
|---|
| 1460 | % is an instance of exactly one static type. The dynamic
|
|---|
| 1461 | % type of the newly instantiated variable is an instance of the
|
|---|
| 1462 | % static type of the static variable.
|
|---|
| 1463 |
|
|---|
| 1464 | % The dynamic pointer types have the form
|
|---|
| 1465 | % \emph{pointer-to-$t$-in-$\delta$}, where $t$ is a dynamic type and
|
|---|
| 1466 | % $\delta$ is a dynamic scope ID. For a program to be dynamically type
|
|---|
| 1467 | % safe, such a variable should hold only values of the form $\langle
|
|---|
| 1468 | % \delta, r\rangle$. In particular, the variable should never be
|
|---|
| 1469 | % assigned a value where the dynamic scope component is a different
|
|---|
| 1470 | % instance of the static scope $s$ associated to $\delta$.
|
|---|
| 1471 |
|
|---|
| 1472 | % \section{Pointer casts}
|
|---|
| 1473 |
|
|---|
| 1474 | % If scope $s_1$ is contained in scope $s_2$, an expression of type
|
|---|
| 1475 | % \emph{pointer-to-$T$-in-$s_1$} can always be cast to
|
|---|
| 1476 | % \emph{pointer-to-$T$-in-$s_2$},
|
|---|
| 1477 | % because the first is a subtype of the second. (As described above,
|
|---|
| 1478 | % the cast is unnecessary.)
|
|---|
| 1479 |
|
|---|
| 1480 | % The cast in the other direction is also allowed, but the dynamic type
|
|---|
| 1481 | % safety of that cast will only be checked at runtime. In particular, a
|
|---|
| 1482 | % runtime error will result if the cast attempts to cast the pointer
|
|---|
| 1483 | % value to a dynamic scope which does not contain (is an ancestor of)
|
|---|
| 1484 | % the dynamic scope component of the pointer value.
|
|---|
| 1485 |
|
|---|
| 1486 | % A type \emph{pointer-to-$T_1$-in-$s$} can be cast to a type
|
|---|
| 1487 | % \emph{pointer-to-$T_2$-in-$s$} according to the usual rules of C. In
|
|---|
| 1488 | % other words, usual casting rules apply as long as you don't change the
|
|---|
| 1489 | % scope.
|
|---|
| 1490 |
|
|---|
| 1491 | % \section{Scope-Parameterized Functions}
|
|---|
| 1492 |
|
|---|
| 1493 | % Coming soon. (Parsed, type checked, not currently used otherwise.)
|
|---|
| 1494 |
|
|---|
| 1495 | % \section{Scope-Parameterized Type Definitions}
|
|---|
| 1496 |
|
|---|
| 1497 | % Coming soon. (Ditto.)
|
|---|
| 1498 |
|
|---|
| 1499 | \chapter{Libraries}
|
|---|
| 1500 |
|
|---|
| 1501 | Each of the following libraries is at least partially implemented and can
|
|---|
| 1502 | be included in a CIVL-C program:
|
|---|
| 1503 | \begin{itemize}
|
|---|
| 1504 | \item \ct{assert}
|
|---|
| 1505 | \begin{itemize}
|
|---|
| 1506 | \item \verb!void assert(_Bool expr);!
|
|---|
| 1507 | \end{itemize}
|
|---|
| 1508 | \item \ct{math}
|
|---|
| 1509 | \begin{itemize}
|
|---|
| 1510 | \item \verb!double sqrt(double x);!
|
|---|
| 1511 | \item \verb!double ceil(double x);!
|
|---|
| 1512 | \item \verb!double exp(double x);!
|
|---|
| 1513 | \end{itemize}
|
|---|
| 1514 | \item \ct{stdlib}
|
|---|
| 1515 | \begin{itemize}
|
|---|
| 1516 | \item \verb!size_t!
|
|---|
| 1517 | \item \verb!void * malloc(size_t size);!
|
|---|
| 1518 | \item \verb!void free(void * ptr);!
|
|---|
| 1519 | \end{itemize}
|
|---|
| 1520 | \item \ct{stdbool}
|
|---|
| 1521 | \begin{itemize}
|
|---|
| 1522 | \item \verb!true!
|
|---|
| 1523 | \item \verb!false!
|
|---|
| 1524 | \end{itemize}
|
|---|
| 1525 | \item \ct{stddef}
|
|---|
| 1526 | \begin{itemize}
|
|---|
| 1527 | \item \verb!size_t!
|
|---|
| 1528 | \item \verb!NULL!
|
|---|
| 1529 | \end{itemize}
|
|---|
| 1530 | \item \ct{stdio}
|
|---|
| 1531 | \begin{itemize}
|
|---|
| 1532 | \item \verb!int printf(const char * restrict format, ...);!
|
|---|
| 1533 | \end{itemize}
|
|---|
| 1534 | \item \ct{string}
|
|---|
| 1535 | \begin{itemize}
|
|---|
| 1536 | \item \verb!size_t!
|
|---|
| 1537 | \item \verb!NULL!
|
|---|
| 1538 | \item \verb!void memcpy(void * restrict dst, const void * restrict src, size_t n);!
|
|---|
| 1539 | \end{itemize}
|
|---|
| 1540 | \end{itemize}
|
|---|