Abstract. This paper presents a new HOL4 formalization of the current ARM instruction set architecture, ARMv7. This is a modern RISC architecture with many advanced features. The formalization is detailed and extensive. Considerable tool support has been developed, with the goal of making the model accessible and easy to work with. The model and supporting tools are publicly available -we wish to encourage others to make use of this resource. This paper explains our monadic specification approach and gives some details of the endeavours that have been made to ensure that the sizeable model is valid and trustworthy. A novel and efficient testing approach has been developed, based on automated forward proof and communication with ARM development boards.

No abstract

Abstract. When doing an interactive proof about a piece of software, it is important that the underlying programming language's semantics does not make the proof unnecessarily difficult or unwieldy. Both smallstep and big-step semantics are commonly used, and the latter is typically given by an inductively defined relation. In this paper, we consider an alternative: using a recursive function akin to an interpreter for the language. The advantages include a better induction theorem, less duplication, accessibility to ordinary functional programmers, and the ease of doing symbolic simulation in proofs via rewriting. We believe that this style of semantics is well suited for compiler verification, including proofs of divergence preservation. We do not claim the invention of this style of semantics: our contribution here is to clarify its value, and to explain how it supports several language features that might appear to require a relational or small-step approach. We illustrate the technique on a simple imperative language with C-like for-loops and a break statement, and compare it to a variety of other approaches. We also provide ML and lambda-calculus based examples to illustrate its generality.

We have developed and mechanically verified an ML system called CakeML, which supports a substantial subset of Standard ML. CakeML is implemented as an interactive read-eval-print loop (REPL) in x86-64 machine code. Our correctness theorem ensures that this REPL implementation prints only those results permitted by the semantics of CakeML. Our verification effort touches on a breadth of topics including lexing, parsing, type checking, incremental and dynamic compilation, garbage collection, arbitraryprecision arithmetic, and compiler bootstrapping.Our contributions are twofold. The first is simply in building a system that is end-to-end verified, demonstrating that each piece of such a verification effort can in practice be composed with the others, and ensuring that none of the pieces rely on any over-simplifying assumptions. The second is developing novel approaches to some of the more challenging aspects of the verification. In particular, our formally verified compiler can bootstrap itself: we apply the verified compiler to itself to produce a verified machine-code implementation of the compiler. Additionally, our compiler proof handles diverging input programs with a lightweight approach based on logical timeout exceptions. The entire development was carried out in the HOL4 theorem prover.

We extend the existing formal verification of the seL4 operating system microkernel from 9 500 lines of C source code to the binary level. We handle all functions that were part of the previous verification. Like the original verification, we currently omit the assembly routines and volatile accesses used to control system hardware.More generally, we present an approach for proving refinement between the formal semantics of a program on the C source level and its formal semantics on the binary level, thus checking the validity of compilation, including some optimisations, and linking, and extending static properties proved of the source code to the executable. We make use of recent improvements in SMT solvers to almost fully automate this process.We handle binaries generated by unmodified gcc 4.5.1 at optimisation level 1, and can handle most of seL4 even at optimisation level 2.

Exploiting the multiprocessors that have recently become ubiquitous requires high-performance and reliable concurrent systems code, for concurrent data structures, operating system kernels, synchronization libraries, compilers, and so on. However, concurrent programming, which is always challenging, is made much more so by two problems. First, real multiprocessors typically do not provide the sequentially consistent memory that is assumed by most work on semantics and verification. Instead, they have relaxed memory models, varying in subtle ways between processor families, in which different hardware threads may have only loosely consistent views of a shared memory. Second, the public vendor architectures, supposedly specifying what programmers can rely on, are often in ambiguous informal prose (a particularly poor medium for loose specifications), leading to widespread confusion.In this paper we focus on x86 processors. We review several recent Intel and AMD specifications, showing that all contain serious ambiguities, some are arguably too weak to program above, and some are simply unsound with respect to actual hardware. We present a new x86-TSO programmer's model that, to the best of our knowledge, suffers from none of these problems. It is mathematically precise (rigorously defined in HOL4) but can be presented as an intuitive abstract machine which should be widely accessible to working programmers. We illustrate how this can be used to reason about the correctness of a Linux spinlock implementation and describe a general theory of data-race freedom for x86-TSO. This should put x86 multiprocessor system building on a more solid foundation; it should also provide a basis for future work on verification of such systems. SBProc 0 Proc 1 Mov [x]¬1 Mov eAX¬[y] Mov [y]¬1 Mov ebX¬[x] Allowed Final State: Proc 0:eAX=0 ∧ Proc 1:ebX=0

Abstract-Realistic formal specifications of machine languages for commercial processors consist of thousands of lines of definitions. Current methods support trustworthy proofs of the correctness of programs for one such specification. However, these methods provide little or no support for reusing proofs of the same algorithm implemented in different machine languages. We describe an approach, based on proof-producing decompilation, which both makes machine-code verification tractable and supports proof reuse between different languages. We briefly present examples based on detailed models of machine code for ARM, PowerPC and x86. The theories and tools have been implemented in the HOL4 system.

Abstract. This paper presents a mechanised Hoare-style programming logic framework for assembly level programs. The framework has been designed to fit on top of operational semantics of realistically modelled machine code. Many ad hoc restrictions and features present in real machine-code are handled, including finite memory, data and code in the same memory space, the behavior of status registers and hazards of corrupting special purpose registers (e.g. the program counter, procedure return register and stack pointer). Despite accurately modeling such low level details, the approach yields concise specifications for machinecode programs without using common simplifying assumptions (like an unbounded state space). The framework is based on a flexible state representation in which functional and resource usage specifications are written in a style inspired by separation logic. The presented work has been formalised in higher-order logic, mechanised in the HOL4 system and is currently being used to verify ARM machine-code implementations of arithmetic and cryptographic operations.