Shuvendu K. Lahiri

Feedback-Directed Random Test Generation

We present a technique that improves random test generation by incorporating feedback obtained from executing test inputs as they are created. Our technique builds inputs incrementally by randomly selecting a method call to apply and finding arguments from among previously-constructed inputs. As soon as an input is built, it is executed and checked against a set of contracts and filters. The result of the execution determines whether the input is redundant, illegal, contract-violating, or useful for generating more inputs. The technique outputs a test suite consisting of unit tests for the classes under test. Passing tests can be used to ensure that code contracts are preserved across program changes; failing tests (that violate one or more contract) point to potential errors that should be corrected. Our experimental results indicate that feedback-directed random test generation can outperform systematic and undirected random test generation, in terms of coverage and error detection. On four small but nontrivial data structures (used previously in the literature), our technique achieves higher or equal block and predicate coverage than model checking (with and without abstraction) and undirected random generation. On 14 large, widely-used libraries (comprising 780KLOC), feedback-directed random test generation finds many previously-unknown errors, not found by either model checking or undirected random generation.

Back to the future: revisiting precise program verification using SMT solvers

This paper takes a fresh look at the problem of precise verification of heap-manipulating programs using first-order Satisfiability-Modulo-Theories (SMT) solvers. We augment the specification logic of such solvers by introducing the Logic of Interpreted Sets and Bounded Quantification for specifying properties of heap-manipulating programs. Our logic is expressive, closed under weakest preconditions, and efficiently implementable on top of existing SMT solvers. We have created a prototype implementation of our logic over the solvers Simplify and Z3 and used our prototype to verify many programs. Our preliminary experience is encouraging; the completeness and the efficiency of the decisionprocedure is clearly evident in practice and has greatly improved the user experience of the verifier.

SYMDIFF: a language-agnostic semantic diff tool for imperative programs

In this paper, we describe SymDiff, a language-agnostic tool for equivalence checking and displaying semantic (behavioral) differences over imperative programs. The tool operates on an intermediate verification language Boogie, for which translations exist from various source languages such as C, C# and x86. We discuss the tool and the front-end interface to target various source languages. Finally, we provide a brief description of the front-end for C programs.

A Symbolic Approach to Predicate Abstraction

Predicate abstraction is a useful form of abstraction for the verification of transition systems with large or infinite state spaces. One of the main bottlenecks of this approach is the extremely large number of decision procedures calls that are required to construct the abstract state space. In this paper we propose the use of a symbolic decision procedure and its application for predicate abstraction. The advantage of the approach is that it reduces the number of calls to the decision procedure exponentially and also provides for reducing the re-computations inherent in the current approaches. We provide two implementations of the symbolic decision procedure: one based on BDDs which leverages the current advances in early quantification algorithms, and the other based on SAT-solvers. We also demonstrate our approach with quantified predicates for verifying parameterized systems. We illustrate the effectiveness of this approach on benchmarks from the verification of microprocessors, communication protocols, parameterized systems, and Microsoft Windows device drivers.

Verifying properties of well-founded linked lists

We describe a novel method for verifying programs that manipulate linked lists, based on two new predicates that characterize reachability of heap cells. These predicates allow reasoning about both acyclic and cyclic lists uniformly with equal ease. The crucial insight behind our approach is that a circular list invariably contains a distinguished head cell that provides a handle on the list. This observation suggests a programming methodology that requires the heap of the program at each step to be well-founded, i.e., for any field f in the program, every sequence u.f, u.f.f,... contains at least one head cell. We believe that our methodology captures the most common idiom of programming with linked data structures. We enforce our methodology by automatically instrumenting the program with updates to two auxiliary variables representing these predicates and adding assertions in terms of these auxiliary variables.To prove program properties and the instrumented assertions, we provide a first-order axiomatization of our two predicates. We also introduce a novel induction principle made possible by the well-foundedness of the heap. We use our induction principle to derive from two basic axioms a small set of additional first-order axioms that are useful for proving the correctness of several programs.We have implemented our method in a tool and used it to verify the correctness of a variety of nontrivial programs manipulating both acyclic and cyclic singly-linked lists and doubly-linked lists. We also demonstrate the use of indexed predicate abstraction to automatically synthesize loop invariants for these examples.

Modeling and Verification of Out-of-Order Microprocessors in UCLID

In this paper, we describe the modeling and verification of out-of-order microprocessors with unbounded resources using an expressive, yet efficiently decidable, quantifier-free fragment of first order logic. This logic includes uninterpreted functions, equality, ordering, constrained lambda expressions, and counter arithmetic. UCLID is a tool for specifying and verifying systems expressed in this logic. The paper makes two main contributions. First, we show that the logic is expressive enough to model components found in most modern microprocessors, independent of their actual sizes. Second, we demonstrate UCLIDs verification capabilities, ranging from full automation for bounded property checking to a high degree of automation in proving restricted classes of invariants. These techniques, coupled with a counterexample generation facility, are useful in establishing correctness of processor designs. We demonstrate UCLIDs methods using a case study of a synthetic model of an out-of-order processor where all the invariants were proved automatically.

A solver for reachability modulo theories

Consider a sequential programming language with control flow constructs such as assignments, choice, loops, and procedure calls. We restrict the syntax of expressions in this language to one that can be efficiently decided by a satisfiability-modulo-theories solver. For such a language, we define the problem of deciding whether a program can reach a particular control location as the reachability-modulo-theories problem. This paper describes the architecture of Corral, a semi-algorithm for the reachability-modulo-theories problem. Corraluses novel algorithms for inlining procedures on demand (Stratified Inlining) and abstraction refinement (Hierarchical Refinement). The paper also presents an evaluation of Corralagainst other related tools. Corralconsistently outperforms its competitors on most benchmarks.

Indexed Predicate Discovery for Unbounded System Verification

Predicate abstraction has been proved effective for verifying several infinite-state systems. In predicate abstraction, an abstract system is automatically constructed given a set of predicates. Predicate abstraction coupled with automatic predicate discovery provides for a completely automatic verification scheme. For systems with unbounded integer state variables (e.g. software), counterexample guided predicate discovery has been successful in identifying the necessary predicates.

A hybrid SAT-based decision procedure for separation logic with uninterpreted functions

SAT-based decision procedures for quantifier-free fragments of first-order logic have proved to be useful in formal verification. These decisions procedures are either based on encoding atomic subformulas with Boolean variables, or by encoding integer variables as bit-vectors. Based on evaluating these two encoding methods on a diverse set of hardware and software benchmarks, we conclude that neither method is robust to variations in formula characteristics. We therefore propose a new hybrid technique that combines the two methods. We give experimental results showing that the hybrid method can significantly outperform either approach as well as other decision procedures.

ZAPATO: Automatic Theorem Proving for Predicate Abstraction Refinement

Counterexample-driven abstraction refinement is an automatic process that produces abstract models of finite and infinite-state systems. When this process is applied to software, an automatic theorem prover for quantifier-free first-order logic helps to determine the feasibility of program paths and to refine the abstraction. In this paper we report on a fast, lightweight, and automatic theorem prover called Zapato which we have built specifically to solve the queries produced during the abstraction refinement process.