Termination and Cost Analysis of Loops with Concurrent Interleavings

Albert, Elvira; Flores-Montoya, Antonio; Genaim, Samir; Martin-Martin, Enrique

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-02444-8_25

Cited by 15 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The approach in [AAG11a,APC12] proposes to lose the values of fields at any potential release point. A more accurate solution has been proposed later to avoid losing the values of fields [AFG13] when the tasks whose execution may interleave either do not modify the involved fields or if they do so, they modify them a finite number of times. These techniques (both the initial and the more accurate one) constitute the resource analysis framework that our work relies upon, and they have been adopted directly for the generation of the upper bounds along the article.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantified abstract configurations of distributed systems

Albert

Fernández

Puebla³

et al. 2015

Form. Asp. Comput.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. When reasoning about distributed systems, it is essential to have information about the different kinds of nodes that compose the system, how many instances of each kind exist, and how nodes communicate with other nodes. In this paper we present a static-analysis-based approach which is able to provide information about the questions above. In order to cope with an unbounded number of nodes and an unbounded number of calls among them, the analysis performs an abstraction of the system producing a graph whose nodes may represent (infinitely) many concrete nodes and arcs represent any number of (infinitely) many calls among nodes. The crux of our approach is that the abstraction is enriched with upper bounds inferred by resource analysis that limit the number of concrete instances that the nodes and arcs represent and their resource consumption. The information available in our quantified abstract configurations allows us to define performance indicators which measure the quality of the system. In particular, we present several indicators that assess the level of distribution in the system, the amount of communication among distributed nodes that it requires, and how balanced the load of the distributed nodes that compose the system is. Our performance indicators are given as functions on the input data sizes, and they can be used to automate the comparison of different distributed settings and guide towards finding the optimal configuration.

show abstract

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantified abstract configurations of distributed systems

Albert

Fernández

Puebla³

et al. 2015

Form. Asp. Comput.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…6, among other equations that were omitted, results in a solution that includes, among others, the MHF states of Ex. 4. In what follows we assume that H P has been solved, and we use Φ to refer to the MHF state at in such solution.…”

Section: An Analysis To Infer Mhf Setsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Existing MHP analyses for asynchronous programs [3,11,1] lose all information when future variables are used as parameters, as they do not handle inter-procedural synchronization. As a consequence, existing analysis for more advanced properties [9,4] that rely on the MHP relations do all lose the associated analysis information on such futures. In future work we plan to study the complexity of our analysis, which we conjuncture to be in the same complexity order as [4].…”

Section: Conclusion Implementation and Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, due to the await instruction, the MHP analysis is able to ensure that they will not run in parallel with the instructions after the await. This piece of information is fundamental to prove more complex properties: in [9], MHP pairs are used to discard unfeasible deadlock cycles; in [4], the use of MHP pairs allows proving termination and inferring the resource consumption of loops with concurrent interleavings. As a simple example, consider a procedure g that contains as unique instruction y=−1, where y is a global variable.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

May-Happen-in-Parallel Analysis for Asynchronous Programs with Inter-Procedural Synchronization

Albert¹,

Genaim²,

Gordillo³

2015

Static Analysis

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. A may-happen-in-parallel (MHP) analysis computes pairs of program points that may execute in parallel across different distributed components. This information has been proven to be essential to infer both safety properties (e.g., deadlock freedom) and liveness properties (termination and resource boundedness) of asynchronous programs. Existing MHP analyses take advantage of the synchronization points to learn that one task has finished and thus will not happen in parallel with other tasks that are still active. Our starting point is an existing MHP analysis developed for intra-procedural synchronization, i.e., it only allows synchronizing with tasks that have been spawned inside the current task. This paper leverages such MHP analysis to handle inter-procedural synchronization, i.e., a task spawned by one task can be awaited within a different task. This is challenging because task synchronization goes beyond the boundaries of methods, and thus the inference of MHP relations requires novel extensions to capture inter-procedural dependencies. The analysis has been implemented and it can be tried online.

show abstract

“…The modifications can affect the behavior of the program and change its termination behavior and its resource consumption. Inspired by the rely-guarantee principle used for compositional verification and analysis [12,5] of thread-based concurrent programs, SACO incorporates a novel termination analysis for concurrent objects [4] which assumes a property on the global state in order to prove termination of a loop and, then, proves that this property holds. The property to prove is the finiteness of the shared-data involved in the termination proof, i.e., proving that such shared-memory is updated a finite number of times.…”

Section: Advanced Analysesmentioning

confidence: 99%

SACO: Static Analyzer for Concurrent Objects

Albert

Arenas

Flores-Montoya

et al. 2014

Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. We present the main concepts, usage and implementation of SACO, a static analyzer for concurrent objects. Interestingly, SACO is able to infer both liveness (namely termination and resource boundedness) and safety properties (namely deadlock freedom) of programs based on concurrent objects. The system integrates auxiliary analyses such as points-to and may-happen-in-parallel, which are essential for increasing the accuracy of the aforementioned more complex properties. SACO provides accurate information about the dependencies which may introduce deadlocks, loops whose termination is not guaranteed, and upper bounds on the resource consumption of methods.

show abstract

Termination and Cost Analysis of Loops with Concurrent Interleavings

Cited by 15 publications

References 19 publications

Quantified abstract configurations of distributed systems

Quantified abstract configurations of distributed systems

May-Happen-in-Parallel Analysis for Asynchronous Programs with Inter-Procedural Synchronization

SACO: Static Analyzer for Concurrent Objects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About