Abstract
We present thread-modular model checking, a novel technique for verifying correctness properties of loosely-coupled multithreaded software systems. Thread-modular model checking verifies each thread separately using an automatically inferred environment assumption that abstracts the possible steps of other threads. Separate verification of each thread yields significant space and time savings. Suppose there are n threads, each with a local store of size L, where the threads communicate via a shared global store of size G. If each thread is finite-state (without a stack), the naive model checking algorithm requires O(G. L n) space, whereas thread-modular model checking requires only O(n.G.(G + L)) space. If each thread has a stack, the general model checking problem is undecidable, but thread-modular model checking terminates in polynomial time.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
A. Bouajjani, J. Esparza, and T. Touili. A generic approach to the static analysis of concurrent programs with procedures. In POPL 03: Principles of Programming Languages, pages 62–73. ACM Press, 2003.
E. M. Clarke and E. A. Emerson. Design and synthesis of synchronization skeletons using branching-time temporal logic. In Workshop on Logic of Programs, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 131, pages 52–71. Springer-Verlag, 1981.
J. M. Cobleigh, D. Giannakopoulou, and C. S. Păsăreanu. Learning assumptions for compositional verification. In TACAS 03: Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems, 2003. To appear.
C. Flanagan, S. N. Freund, and S. Qadeer. Thread-modular verification for shared-memory programs. In ESOP 02: European Symposium on Programming, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2305, pages 262–277. Springer-Verlag, 2002.
C. Flanagan, S. Qadeer, and S. A. Seshia. A modular checker for multithreaded programs. In CAV 02: Computer Aided Verification, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2404, pages 180–194. Springer-Verlag, 2002.
D. Giannakopoulou, C. S. Păsăreanu, and H. Barringer. Assumption generation for software component verification. In ASE 02: Automated Software Engineering, pages 3–12. IEEE Computer Society, 2002.
J. E. Hopcroft and J. D. Ullman. Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages, and Computation. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1979.
C. N. Ip and D. L. Dill. Better verification through symmetry. Formal Methods in System Design, 9(1–2):41–75, 1996.
C. B. Jones. Tentative steps toward a development method for interfering programs. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, 5(4):596–619, 1983.
J. Queille and J. Sifakis. Specification and verification of concurrent systems in CESAR. In Fifth International Symposium on Programming, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 137, pages 337–351. Springer-Verlag, 1981.
G. Ramalingam. Context-sensitive synchronization-sensitive analysis is undecidable. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, 22(2):416–430, 2000.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2003 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Flanagan, C., Qadeer, S. (2003). Thread-Modular Model Checking. In: Ball, T., Rajamani, S.K. (eds) Model Checking Software. SPIN 2003. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 2648. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44829-2_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44829-2_14
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-40117-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-44829-7
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive