A Foundation for flow-based program matching: Using temporal logic and model checking

ACM SIGPLAN Notices

Volumn 44, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 114-126

  Brunel, Julien ^a   Doligez, Damien ^b   Hansen, René Rydhof ^c   Lawall, Julia L ^a   Muller, Gilles ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

^b INRIA   (France)

^c AALBORG UNIVERSITY   (Denmark)

^d ECOLE DES MINES DE NANTES   (France)

Author keywords

Bug finding; CTLschecking; Program matching; Program transformation

Indexed keywords

BUG FINDING; CONTROL-FLOW; CTLSCHECKING; METAVARIABLES; OPTIMIZING COMPILERS; PROGRAM CONTROL; PROGRAM FRAGMENTS; PROGRAM MATCHING; PROGRAM TRANSFORMATION; PROGRAM TRANSFORMATIONS; SUBTERMS; SYSTEMS CODE; TRANSFORMATION RULES; TRANSFORMATION TOOLS;

COMPUTER OPERATING SYSTEMS; LINGUISTICS; MODEL CHECKING; QUERY LANGUAGES; SYSTEMS ANALYSIS;

TEMPORAL LOGIC;

EID: 70350343826     PISSN: 15232867     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (24)

1. R. A. Åberg, J. L. Lawall, M. Südholt, G. Muller, and A.-F. Le Meur. On the automatic evolution of an OS kernel using temporal logic and AOP. In 18th IEEE International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE 2003), pages 196-204, Montreal, Canada, Oct. 2003. IEEE.
2. T. Ball, E. Bounimova, B. Cook, V. Levin, J. Lichtenberg, C. McGarvey, B. Ondrusek, S. K. Rajamani, and A. Ustuner. Thorough static analysis of device drivers. In The first ACM SIGOPS EuroSys conference (EuroSys 2006), pages 73-85, Leuven, Belgium, Apr. 2006.
3. Y. Bertot and P. Castéran. Interactive Theorem Proving and Program Development. Springer, 2004.
4. J. Bohn, W. Damm, O. Grumberg, H. Hungar, and K. Laster. First-Order-CTL model checking. In Foundations of Software Technology and Theoretical Computer Science, number 1530 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 283-294, Chennai, India, Dec. 1998.
5. R. E. Bryant. Graph-based algorithms for Boolean function manipulation. IEEE Transactions on Computers, 35(8):677-691, 1986.
6. D. Chan. Constructive negation based on the completed database. In Fifth International Conference and Symposium on Logic Programming, pages 111-125, Seattle, WA, Aug. 1988.
7. E. M. Clarke, E. A. Emerson, and A. P. Sistla. Automatic verification of finite-state concurrent systems using temporal logic specifications. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems (TOPLAS), 8(2):244-263, 1986.
8. J. C. Corbett, M. B. Dwyer, J. Hatcliff, and Robby. A language framework for expressing checkable properties of dynamic software. In Proceedings of the SPIN Software Model Checking Workshop, number 1885 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 205-223, Stanford, CA, USA, Aug. 2000.
9. O. de Moor, D. Lacey, and E. Van Wyk. Universal regular path queries. Higher Order and Symbolic Computation, 16:15-35, 2003.
10. D. R. Engler, B. Chelf, A. Chou, and S. Hallem. Checking system rules using system-specific, programmer-written compiler extensions. In Fourth USENIX Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI), pages 1-16, San Diego, CA, Oct. 2000.
11. A. Gupta. Formal hardware verification methods: A survey. Formal Methods in System Design, 1(2-3):151-238, 1992.
12. M. Huth and M. Ryan. Logic in Computer Science: Modelling and reasoning about systems. Cambridge University Press, 2000.
13. N. Jones and R. R. Hansen. The semantics of "semantic patches" in coccinelle: Program transformation for the working programmer. In Fifth ASIAN Symposium on Programming Languages and Systems, number 4807 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 303-318, Singapore, Nov. 2007.
14. C. Kern and M. R. Greenstreet. Formal verification in hardware design: a survey. ACM Transactions on Design Automation of Electronic Systems (TODAES), 4(2):123-193, 1999.
15. D. Lacey. Program Transformation using Temporal Logic Specifications. PhD thesis, Oxford University Computing Laboratory, 2003.
16. D. Lacey and O. de Moor. Imperative program transformation by rewriting. In R. Wilhelm, editor, Compiler Construction, 10th International Conference, CC 2001, number 2027 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 52-68, Genova, Italy, Apr. 2001.
17. D. Lacey, N. D. Jones, E. Van Wyk, and C. C. Frederiksen. Compiler optimization correctness by temporal logic. Higher Order and Symbolic Computation, 17(3):173-206, 2004.
18. J. L. Lawall, J. Brunel, R. R. Hansen, H. Stuart, and G. Muller. WYSIWIB: A declarative approach to finding protocols and bugs in Linux code. Technical Report 08/1/INFO, Ecole des Mines de Nantes, Nantes, France, 2008.
19. D. MacKenzie, P. Eggert, and R. Stallman. Comparing and Merging Files With Gnu Diff and Patch. Network Theory Ltd, Jan. 2003. Unified Format section, http://www.gnu.org/software/diffutils/manual/htmlnode/Unified-Format.html.
20. Y. Padioleau, J. Lawall, R. R. Hansen, and G. Muller. Documenting and automating collateral evolutions in Linux device drivers. In Eurosys 2008, pages 247-260, Glasgow, Scotland, Mar. 2008.
21. M. Sassa and S. Sahara. Validating correctness of compiler optimizer execution using temporal logic. In Compiler Optimization meets Compiler Verification, Budapest, Hungary, Apr. 2008.
22. D. A. Schmidt and B. Steffen. Program analysis as model checking of abstract interpretations. In SAS '98: Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on Static Analysis, pages 351-380, London, UK, 1998. Springer-Verlag.
23. F. Tip. Refactoring using type constraints. In Static Analysis, 14th International Symposium, number 4634 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 1-17, Kongens Lyngby, Denmark, Aug. 2007.
24. M. Verbaere, R. Ettinger, and O. de Moor. JunGL: a scripting language for refactoring. In International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), pages 172-181, Shanghai, China, May 2006. 126