Verification of Compilers

Goos, Gerhard; Zimmermann, Wolf

doi:10.1007/3-540-48092-7_10

Cited by 46 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The notion of correct translation that appears in [7] is similar to ours; however, the work there does not deal with optimizations. Rinard and Marinov [16] propose a comparable approach to translation validation, where an important contribution is the ability to handle pointers in the source program.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 84%

Translation and Run-Time Validation of Loop Transformations

Zuck

Pnueli

Goldberg

et al. 2005

Form Method Syst Des

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents new approaches to the validation of loop optimizations that compilers use to obtain the highest performance from modern architectures. Rather than verify the compiler, the approach of translation validation performs a validation check after every run of the compiler, producing a formal proof that the produced target code is a correct implementation of the source code.As part of an active and ongoing research project on translation validation, we have previously described approaches for validating optimizations that preserve the loop structure of the code and have presented a simulationbased general technique for validating such optimizations. In this paper, for more aggressive optimizations that alter the loop structure of the code-such as distribution, fusion, tiling, and interchange-we present a set of permutation rules which establish that the transformed code satisfies all the implied data dependencies necessary for the validity of the considered transformation. We describe the extensions to our tool VOC-64which are required to validate these structure-modifying optimizations.This paper also discusses preliminary work on run-time validation of speculative loop optimizations. This involves using run-time tests to ensure the correctness of loop optimizations whose correctness cannot be guaranteed at compile time. Unlike compiler validation, run-time validation must not only determine when an optimization has generated incorrect code, but also recover from the optimization without aborting the program or producing an incorrect result. This technique has been applied to several loop optimizations, including loop interchange and loop tiling, and appears to be quite promising.

show abstract

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 84%

Translation and Run-Time Validation of Loop Transformations

Zuck

Pnueli

Goldberg

et al. 2005

Form Method Syst Des

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The properties are verified by an automatic theorem prover which checks several necessary conditions that a program transformation has to fulfill. Important techniques and formalisms for compiler result checkers, decomposition of compilers, notions of semantical equivalence of source and target program as well as stack properties were developed in the Verifix project and are described by Goos and Zimmermann [21,44] and in the ProCoS project by Buth et al [3]. The development of a formally verified compiler for a C subset is part of the Verisoft project and its successors focussing on pervasive formal verification of computer systems and are presented by Leinenbach et al [26].…”

Section: Related Approachesmentioning

confidence: 98%

Certifying compilers using higher-order theorem provers as certificate checkers

Blech

Grégoire

2010

Form Methods Syst Des

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Correct software requires compilers to work correctly. Especially code generation can be an error prone task, since it potentially uses sophisticated algorithms to produce efficient code.In this paper we present an approach to guarantee the correctness of compiler transformations with respect to a formal notion of correctness. We certify the results of each compilation run. With the help of a compiler generated certificate and a certificate checker, we verify the results of each compilation run automatically. Thereby we ensure the correctness of the compilation run without having to look at concrete compilation algorithms.We use higher-order theorem provers to check the certificates and to formally define syntax, and semantics of the involved languages as well as a criterion under which we regard a compilation as correct. The use of higher-order theorem provers ensures a small and well understood trusted computing base. The task of efficient certificate checking is especially crucial for the acceptance of certifying compilation. We present methods to facilitate this task, most notably by using computational reflection: We present small-in an executable way specified-evaluators that solve certain properties appearing in our certificates and are used to speed up certain subtasks in the checking process.We discuss an implemented prototype performing code generation. Using Coq and Isabelle/HOL as certificate checkers we highlight typical challenges and their solutions

show abstract

“…However, such an approach is very time-consuming, especially if it should be done formally (see e.g. [GZ99] for techniques for that), and furthermore it has to be performed again whenever modifications of the compiler have been performed. An alternative to compiler validation is object code verification: each time object code is generated (by an arbitrary compiler), the generated object code is verified to be a correct implementation of the high-level software code.…”

Section: Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

A formal approach for the construction and verification of railway control systems

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper describes a complete model-based development and verification approach for railway control systems. For each control system to be generated, the user makes a description of the application-specific parameters in a domain-specific language. This description is automatically transformed into an executable control system model expressed in SystemC. This model is then compiled into object code. Verification is performed using three main methods applied to different levels. (0) The domain-specific description is validated wrt. internal consistency by static analysis. (1) The crucial safety properties are verified for the SystemC model by means of bounded model checking. (2) The object code is verified to be I/O behaviourally equivalent to the SystemC model from which it was compiled.

show abstract

Verification of Compilers

Cited by 46 publications

References 25 publications

Translation and Run-Time Validation of Loop Transformations

Translation and Run-Time Validation of Loop Transformations

Certifying compilers using higher-order theorem provers as certificate checkers

A formal approach for the construction and verification of railway control systems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About