Formal verification of dead code elimination in Isabelle/HOL

Blech, Jan Olaf; Gesellensetter, Lars; Glesner, Sabine

doi:10.1109/sefm.2005.20

Cited by 10 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While unverified validators are already very useful to increase confidence in the compilation process, a formally verified validator provides an attractive alternative to the formal verification of the corresponding compiler pass (Leinenbach et al 2005;Klein and Nipkow 2006;Leroy 2006;Lerner et al 2003;Blech et al 2005). Several validation algorithms or frameworks use model checking or automatic theorem proving to check verification conditions produced by a run of validation (Zuck et al 2001(Zuck et al , 2003Barret et al 2005;Kanade et al 2006), but the verification condition generator itself is, generally, not formally proved correct.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Verified validation of lazy code motion

TristanJean-Baptiste

LeroyXavier

2009

SIGPLAN Not.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Translation validation establishes a posteriori the correctness of a run of a compilation pass or other program transformation. In this paper, we develop an efficient translation validation algorithm for the Lazy Code Motion (LCM) optimization. LCM is an interesting challenge for validation because it is a global optimization that moves code across loops. Consequently, care must be taken not to move computations that may fail before loops that may not terminate. Our validator includes a specific check for anticipability to rule out such incorrect moves. We present a mechanicallychecked proof of correctness of the validation algorithm, using the Coq proof assistant. Combining our validator with an unverified implementation of LCM, we obtain a LCM pass that is provably semantics-preserving and was integrated in the CompCert formally verified compiler.

show abstract

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Verified validation of lazy code motion

TristanJean-Baptiste

LeroyXavier

2009

SIGPLAN Not.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Interactive theorem proving, however, is used to show properties of code optimizations. For example, Blech et al [3] applied the higher-order theorem prover Isabelle/HOL to mechanically prove that a code optimization based on dead code elimination is semantics preserving.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reachability analysis for annotated code

Janota

Grigore

Moskal

2007

Proceedings of the 2007 Conference on Specification and Verification of Component-Based Systems 6th Joint Meeting of the Europe

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Well-specified programs enable code reuse and therefore techniques that help programmers to annotate code correctly are valuable. We devised an automated analysis that detects unreachable code in the presence of code annotations. We implemented it as an enhancement of the extended static checker ESC/Java2 where it serves as a check of coherency of specifications and code. In this article we define the notion of semantic unreachability, describe an algorithm for checking it and demonstrate on a case study that it detects a class of errors previously undetected, as well as describe different scenarios of these errors.

show abstract

“…In our own work [1] we have proved a dead code elimination algorithm as used in compilers correct using bisimulation on Kripke structures. In [5], we describe how coalgebras and coinduction may be used in compiler verification.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Coinductive Verification of Program Optimizations Using Similarity Relations

Glesner

Leitner

Blech

2007

Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Formal verification methods have gained increased importance due to their ability to guarantee system correctness and improve reliability. Nevertheless, the question how proofs are to be formalized in theorem provers is far from being trivial, yet very important as one needs to spend much more time on verification if the formalization was not cleverly chosen. In this paper, we develop and compare two different possibilities to express coinductive proofs in the theorem prover Isabelle/HOL. Coinduction is a proof method that allows for the verification of properties of also non-terminating state-transition systems. Since coinduction is not as widely used as other proof techniques as e.g. induction, there are much fewer "recipes" available how to formalize corresponding proofs and there are also fewer proof strategies implemented in theorem provers for coinduction. In this paper, we investigate formalizations for coinductive proofs of properties on state transition sequences. In particular, we compare two different possibilities for their formalization and show their equivalence. The first of these two formalizations captures the mathematical intuition, while the second can be used more easily in a theorem prover. We have formally verified the equivalence of these criteria in Isabelle/HOL, thus establishing a coalgebraic verification framework. To demonstrate that our verification framework is suitable for the verification of compiler optimizations, we have introduced three different, rather simple transformations that capture typical problems in the verification of optimizing compilers, even for non-terminating source programs.

show abstract

Formal verification of dead code elimination in Isabelle/HOL

Cited by 10 publications

References 10 publications

Verified validation of lazy code motion

Verified validation of lazy code motion

Reachability analysis for annotated code

Coinductive Verification of Program Optimizations Using Similarity Relations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About