Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A monadic approach to automated reasoning for Bluespec SystemVerilog

  • SI: NFM 2010
  • Published:
Innovations in Systems and Software Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We embed a non-trivial subset of Bluespec SystemVerilog (BSV) in the higher order logic of the PVS theorem prover. Owing to the clean semantics of BSV, application of monadic techniques leads to a surprisingly elegant embedding, in which hardware designs are translated into logic almost verbatim, preserving types and language constructs. The resulting specifications are compatible with the built-in model checker of PVS, which can automatically prove an important class of temporal logic theorems, and can also be used in conjunction with the powerful proof strategies of PVS, including automatic predicate abstraction, to verify a broader class of properties than can be achieved with model checking alone. Bluespec SystemVerilog is a hardware description language based on the guarded action model of concurrency. It has an elegant semantics, which has previously been shown to support design verification by hand proof: to date, however, little work has been conducted on the application of automated reasoning to BSV designs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Aagaard M et al (1998) Combining theorem proving and trajectory evaluation in an industrial environment. In: Proc. DAC

  2. Amjad H (2006) Verification of AMBA using a combination of model checking and theorem proving. Electron Notes Theor Comput Sci 145: 45–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Arvind, Dave N, Katelman M (2008) Getting formal verification into design flow. In: Proc. FM

  4. Arvind Shen X (1999) Using term rewriting systems to design and verify processors. IEEE Micro 19(3): 36–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bensalem S, Lakhnech Y, Owre S (1998) InVeST: a tool for the verification of invariants. In: Proc. CAV

  6. Bhadra J et al (2007) A survey of hybrid techniques for functional verification. IEEE Des Test 24(2): 112–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bluespec Inc. BSV training. http://www.demosondemand.com/dod/proddemos/vendors/pd_bluespec.aspx

  8. Bluespec, Inc. (2008) Bluespec SystemVerilog Reference Guide

  9. Börger E (2010) The abstract state machines method for high-level system design and analysis. In: Formal methods: state of the art and new directions. Springer, Berlin, pp 79–116

  10. Boulton R et al (1992) Experience with embedding hardware description languages in HOL. In: Proc. TPCD

  11. Bulwahn L et al (2008) Imperative functional programming with Isabelle/HOL. In Proc. TPHOLs

  12. Clarke E, Grumberg O, Peled D (2000) Model checking. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  13. Cousot P, Cousot R (1977) Abstract interpretation. In: Proc. POPL

  14. de Moura, L: SAL: Tutorial. Technical report, SRI

  15. Gordon M et al (2006) Automatic formal synthesis of hardware from higher order logic. Electron Notes Theor Comput Sci 145: 27–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Bishop S et al (2006) Engineering with logic. In: Proc. POPL

  17. Erkök L, Matthews J (2009) Pragmatic equivalence and safety checking in Cryptol. In: Proc. PLPV

  18. Filliâtre J-C (2003) Verification of non-functional programs using interpretations in type theory. J Funct Program 13(4): 709–745

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Fox A (2003) Formal specification and verification of ARM6. In: Proc. TPHOLs

  20. Fox A, Myreen M (2010) A trustworthy monadic formalization of the ARMv7 instruction set architecture. In: Proc. ITP

  21. Gordon, M, Melham, T, editors (1993) Introduction to HOL. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. Gordon M (1995) The semantic challenge of Verilog HDL. In: Proc. LICS

  23. Susanne Graf, Hassen Saïdi (1997) Construction of abstract state graphs with PVS. In: Proc. CAV

  24. Grotker T (2002) System design with systemc. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht

    Google Scholar 

  25. Gruian F, Westmijze M (2008) VHDL vs. Bluespec SystemVerilog: a case study on a Java embedded architecture. In: Proc. SAC

  26. Grundy J, Melham T, O’leary J (2006) A reflective functional language for hardware design and theorem proving. J Funct Program 16(2): 157–196

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. Halbwachs N et al (1991) The synchronous data flow programming language lustre. Proc IEEE 79(9): 1305–1320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Hoe J, Arvind (1999) Hardware synthesis from term rewriting systems. In: Proc. VLSI

  29. Huffman B, Matthews J, White P (2005) Axiomatic constructor classes in Isabelle/HOLCF. In: Proc. TPHOLS

  30. Huisman M et al (2001) A case study in class library verification. Int J Softw Tool Technol Tranf 3: 332–352

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  31. Hunt W (2009) Centaur technology media unit verification. In: Proc. CAV

  32. Hunt W, Reeber E (2005) Formalization of the DE2 language. In: Proc. CHARME

  33. IEEE (1994) IEEE standard VHDL language reference manual: ANSI/IEEE std 1076-1993. Technical report

  34. ITRS (2009) International Technology Roadmap for Semiconductors, 2009 edn, chapter Design

  35. Jacobs B, Poll E (2000) A monad for basic Java semantics. In: Proc. AMAST

  36. Joyce J, Seger C-J (1993) Linking BDD-based symbolic evaluation to interactive theorem-proving. In: Proc. DAC

  37. Kaivola R, Aagaard M (2000) Divider circuit verification with model checking and theorem proving. In: Proc. TPHOLs

  38. Kaufmann M, Strother Moore J (1996) ACL2. In: Proc. COMPASS

  39. Kloos CD (1995) Formal semantics for VHDL. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  40. Krstic S, Matthews J (2002) Verifying BDD algorithms through monadic interpretation. In: Proc. VMCAI ’02

  41. Lamport L (1994) The temporal logic of actions. ACM Trans Program Lang Syst 16: 872–923

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Moggi E (1991) Notions of computation and monads. Inform Comput 93(1): 55–92

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  43. Mueller W et al (2001) The simulation semantics of SystemC. In: Proc. DATE

  44. Nikhil R (2004) Bluespec SystemVerilog. In: Proc. MEMOCODE

  45. Oberman S (1999) Floating point division and square root algorithms and implementation in the AMD-K7 microprocessor. In: Proc. ARITH

  46. O’Leary J et al (1999) Formally verifying IEEE compliance of floating-point hardware. Intel Technol J (Q1)

  47. Owre S. PVS 3.2 release notes. http://pvs.csl.sri.com/pvs-release-notes/pvs-release-notes_4.html#SEC37

  48. Owre S et al (1992) PVS. In: Proc. CADE

  49. Owre S et al (1996) PVS: combining specification, proof checking, and model checking. In: Proc. CAV

  50. Owre S et al (2001) PVS language reference. Technical report, SRI International

  51. Richards D (2011) Hardware languages and proof. PhD in Preparation, The University of Manchester

  52. Richards D (2011) Source code. https://sourceforge.net/projects/ar4bluespec

  53. Richards D, Lester D (2010) A prototype embedding of Bluespec SystemVerilog in the SAL model checker. In: Proc. DCC

  54. Rushby J (2000) From refutation to verification. In: Proc. FORTE

  55. Russinoff D (2000) A case study in formal verification of register-transfer logic with ACL2. In: Proc. FMCAD

  56. Saïdi H, Shankar N (1999) Abstract and model check while you prove. In: Proc. CAV

  57. Seger C (1993) VOSS—a formal hardware verification system user’s guide. Technical report

  58. Seger C et al (2005) An industrially effective environment for formal hardware verification. IEEE Trans Comput Aided Des Integr Circ Syst 24(9)

  59. Shankar N et al (2001) PVS prover guide. Technical report, SRI International

  60. Singh G, Shukla S (2008) Verifying compiler based refinement of Bluespec specifications using the SPIN model checker. In: Proc. SPIN

  61. Sprenger C, Basin D (2007) A monad-based modeling and verification toolbox with application to security protocols. In: Proc. TPHOLS

  62. Stoy J, Shen X, Arvind (2001) Proofs of correctness of cache-coherence protocols. In: Proc. FME

  63. Thomas D, Moorby P (1996) The Verilog hardware description language. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  64. Urard P et al (2008) Leveraging sequential equivalence checking to enable system-level to RTL flows. In: Proc. DAC

  65. Wadler P (1992) Comprehending monads. Math Struct Comput Sci 2: 61–78

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  66. Wong W-F et al (2004) High-level synthesis. In: Proc. CAD

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Computer Science, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK

    Dominic Richards & David Lester

Authors
  1. Dominic Richards
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David Lester
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dominic Richards.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Richards, D., Lester, D. A monadic approach to automated reasoning for Bluespec SystemVerilog. Innovations Syst Softw Eng 7, 85–95 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11334-011-0149-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11334-011-0149-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation