Runtime Verification of Temporal Patterns for Dynamic Reconfigurations of Components

Abstract

Dynamic reconfigurations increase the availability and the reliability of component-based systems by allowing their architectures to evolve at runtime. Recently we have proposed a temporal pattern logic, called FTPL, to characterize the correct reconfigurations of componentbased systems under some temporal and architectural constraints. As component-based architectures evolve at runtime, there is a need to check these FTPL constraints on the fly, even if only a partial information is expected. Firstly, given a generic component-based model, we review FTPL from a runtime verification point of view. To this end we introduce a new four-valued logic, called RV-FTPL (Runtime Verification for FTPL), characterizing the "potential" (un)satisfiability of the architectural constraints in addition to the basic FTPL semantics. Potential true and potential false values are chosen whenever an observed behaviour has not yet lead to a violation or satisfiability of the property under consideration. Secondly, we present a prototype developed to check at runtime the satisfiability of RV-FTPL formulas when reconfiguring a Fractal component-based system. The feasability of a runtime property enforcement is also shown. It consists in supervising on the fly the reconfiguration execution against desired RV-FTPL properties. The main contributions are illustrated on the example of a HTTP server architecture.

Decentralised Evaluation of Temporal Patterns over Component-Based Systems at Runtime

“…In this section we recall the component-based model and the temporal patterns introduced, respectively, in [15] and [16].…”

“…In general, a system configuration is the specific definition of the elements that define or prescribe what a system is composed of. As in [15], we define below a configuration to be a set of architectural elements (components, required or provided interfaces, and parameters) together with relations (binding, delegation, state, etc.) to structure and to link them, as depicted in Fig.…”

“…}, let CP be a set of configuration properties on the architectural elements and the relations between them specified using first-order logic formulae. The interpretation of functions, relations, and predicates is done according to basic definitions in [17] and in [15]. A configuration interpretation function l : C → CP gives the largest conjunction of cp ∈ CP evaluated to true on c ∈ C 4 .…”

Checking Properties along Multiple Reconfiguration Paths for Component-Based Systems

“…Section 2 gives some recalls about the component model we use, our operations of reconfiguration, and the temporal logic for dynamic reconfigurations. Of course, most definitions presented in this section come from [9,10,11,17]. Section 3 precisely introduces our notion of multiple reconfiguration path and Section 4 recalls the organisation of our framework.…”

Component-based Systems Reconfigurations Using Graph Grammars

“…Для определения свойств поведения компонентно-ориентированных систем тем-поральная логика линейного времени, основанная на работе Двайера над шаблона-ми и рамками их применения [2], была предложена в [3]. Эта логика является рас-ширением JML-спецификаций временными шаблонами, введенными в [4].…”