--- layout: fc_discuss_archives title: Message 3 from Frama-C-discuss on January 2020 ---
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Frama-c-discuss] Strange results when verifying bitshifts using frama-c v19.1 with z3



Hi,
Actually, there was probably a bug in 19.1 regarding right-shift, which has been fixed in 20.0 ;
Indeed, you shall upgrade to the new version.
Debugging z3 output is not _yet_ available, since we need some extra support from why3 for doing so.
You can however get the prover output with `-wp-msg-key prover` and have the why3 task for each prover logged down with `-wp-out <dir>`.
Regards,
	L.


> Le 9 janv. 2020 à 22:47, Benjamin Nauck <benjamin at nauck.se> a écrit :
> 
> Hi,
> I know v20 is out and I should probably update but I've got some questions about the behaviour of v19.1 that I would like to have the answer to.
> 
> The problem is that I get some strange result when using frama-c v19.1 with why3 v1.2.1 and z3 v4.8.6 (running on macos 10.14.1).
> It seems to starts when I have bit shift in the code I'm trying to verify, as seen in the following example:
> 
> $ cat test.c
> //@ ensures \result == 0; ensures \result != 0;
> unsigned test(unsigned value) {
>     return value >> 1;
> }
> $ frama-c -wp -wp-prover=z3 test.c
> [kernel] Parsing test.c (with preprocessing)
> [wp] Warning: Missing RTE guards
> [wp] 2 goals scheduled
> [wp] Proved goals:    2 / 2
>   Qed:             0  (0.38ms-0.82ms)
>   Z3:              2  (140ms)
> 
> 1. Maybe I'm missing something, but to me, \result should neither be always 0 nor never 0 and it should especially not be both at the same time, right?
> 
> 2. Any idea what could be causing this?
> 
> 3. Is there a way to read the output of why3 and z3 to try to debug what is happening without diving into the source code of frama-c or the configuration files of why3?
> 
> I've put off upgrading to v20 as I need to verify quite a lot of bit manipulation of integers and I've got the impression that the new version is a bit buggy when it comes to that (even though workarounds seems to exist).
> 4. Should I upgrade to v20 anyway or am I better off with 19.1 for that?
> 
> Regards,
> Benjamin Nauck
> _______________________________________________
> Frama-c-discuss mailing list
> Frama-c-discuss at lists.gforge.inria.fr
> https://lists.gforge.inria.fr/mailman/listinfo/frama-c-discuss