--- layout: fc_discuss_archives title: Message 16 from Frama-C-discuss on February 2015 ---
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Frama-c-discuss] several WP questions



At Mon, 16 Feb 2015 11:29:02 +0100,
Lo?c Correnson wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> Instead of an axiomatic definition of the permutation, you should introduce the inverse indices array as a ghost variable, say ?rev?, maintain this array during the loop with ghost code and prove that rev[ind[i]]==i in suitable ranges.
> We already used such a technique to prove a bubble-sort algorithm with permutation indices bookkeeping.
> This is much easier than converting C-arrays to abstract lists : I?m afraid you will need, at some point, some frame lemmas to compare `arrayToList{A}` and `arrayToList{B}` when you have memory updates between points `A` and `B`.
> L.

thanks for the recommendation. I pursued this a bit, but got stuck
again. The following PO is not discharged:

Goal Assigns (file partition-mine-momomorphic-ghost.c, line 17) in 'partition' (4/4):
Effect at line 21
partition-mine-momomorphic-ghost.c:21: warning from Typed Model:
 - Warning: Call assigns everything, looking for context inconsistency
   Reason: Cast with incompatible pointers types (source: sint8*) (target: sint32*)
Let x_0 = 4*(to_uint32 length_4).
Let a_0 = (shift arr_6 0).
Let a_1 = (shift ind_7 0).
Assume {
  (* Domain *)
  Type: (is_sint32 length_4).
  (* Heap *)
  Have: (linked Malloc_4).
  (* Pre-condition (file partition-mine-momomorphic-ghost.c, line 11) in 'partition' *)
  (* Pre-condition: *)
  Have: (0<=length_4) /\ (valid_rw Malloc_4 a_0 length_4)
        /\ (valid_rw Malloc_4 a_1 length_4).
  (* Pre-condition (file partition-mine-momomorphic-ghost.c, line 12) in 'partition' *)
  (* Pre-condition: *)
  Have: (separated a_0 length_4 a_1 length_4).
  (* Pre-condition (file partition-mine-momomorphic-ghost.c, line 13) in 'partition' *)
  (* Pre-condition: *)
  Have: (4*length_4)<=4294967295.
  (* Assertion 'rte,signed_overflow' (file partition-mine-momomorphic-ghost.c, line 20) *)
  (* partition-mine-momomorphic-ghost.c:20: Assertion 'rte,signed_overflow': *)
  Have: -2147483647<=length_4.
  (* Assertion 'rte,unsigned_overflow' (file partition-mine-momomorphic-ghost.c, line 21) *)
  (* partition-mine-momomorphic-ghost.c:21: Assertion 'rte,unsigned_overflow': *)
  Have: 0<=x_0.
  (* Assertion 'rte,unsigned_overflow' (file partition-mine-momomorphic-ghost.c, line 21) *)
  (* partition-mine-momomorphic-ghost.c:21: Assertion 'rte,unsigned_overflow': *)
  Have: x_0<=4294967295.
}
Prove: false.
Prover Alt-Ergo returns Unknown

I suspect it is related to the implicit use of __builtin_alloca, but
could not yet find or come up with a way to handle it.

Any hints, ideas?

Thanks in advance,

Marko

> > Le 12 f?vr. 2015 ? 18:48, Marko Sch?tz Schmuck <MarkoSchuetz at web.de> a ?crit :
> > 
> > Dear All,
> > 
> > verifying an implementation of partition I have something like
> > 
> > /*@ axiomatic List {
> >  @ type listInt;
> >  @ logic listInt nil;
> >  @ logic listInt cons(integer x, listInt xs);
> >  @ logic listInt append(listInt xs, listInt ys);
> >  @ logic listInt arrayToList{L}(int *arr, integer length);
> >  @ logic boolean member(integer elem, listInt xs);
> >  @ axiom appendNil:
> >  @   \forall listInt ys; append(nil, ys) == ys;
> >  @ axiom appendCons:
> >  @   \forall listInt xs, ys; \forall integer x; append(cons(x, xs), ys) == cons(x, append(xs, ys));
> >  @ axiom arrayToListNull{L}:
> >  @   \forall int *arr; \forall integer i; i == 0 ==> arrayToList{L}(arr, i) == nil;
> >  @ axiom arrayToListN{L}:
> >  @   \forall int *arr; \forall integer length, newLength; length > 0 && newLength == length-1
> >  @   ==> arrayToList{L}(arr, length) == cons(\at(arr[0], L), arrayToList{L}(arr+1, newLength));
> >  @ axiom memberNil:
> >  @   \forall integer elem; !member(elem, nil);
> >  @ axiom memberConsHead:
> >  @   \forall integer elem; \forall listInt xs; member(elem, cons(elem, xs));
> >  @ axiom memberConsTail:
> >  @   \forall integer elem, x; \forall listInt xs; member(elem, xs) ==> member(elem, cons(x, xs));
> >  @ predicate permutationLists(listInt a, listInt b);
> >  @ axiom permutationListsNil:
> >  @   permutationLists(nil, nil);
> >  @ axiom permutationListsCons:
> >  @   \forall listInt a1, a2, a3, ta, b1, b2, b3, tb; ta == append(a1, append(a2, a3))
> >  @   && tb == append(b1, append(b2, b3)) && a2 != nil && a2 == b2
> >  @   && permutationLists(append(a1, a3), append(b1, b3))
> >  @   ==> permutationLists(ta, b1);
> >  @}
> >  @*/
> > 
> > /*@
> >  @predicate permutation{L1, L2}(int *a, int *b, integer count) =
> >  @  permutationLists(arrayToList{L1}(a, count), arrayToList{L2}(b, count));
> >  @
> >  @predicate property(integer x);
> >  @*/
> > 
> > /*@ assigns \nothing;
> >  @ ensures \result == \true <==> property(x);
> >  @*/
> > int property(int x);
> > 
> > /*@ requires length >= 0 && \valid(arr+(0..length-1)) && \valid(ind+(0..length-1));
> >  @ ensures 0 <= \result < length;
> >  @ ensures \forall int i; 0 <= i <= \result ==> property(arr[ind[i]]);
> >  @ ensures \forall int i; \result + 1 <= i < length ==> !property(arr[ind[i]]);
> >  @ assigns ind[0..length-1];
> >  @*/
> > int partition(int *arr, int *ind, int length) {
> >  int gr = 0, j = length-1;
> >  /*@ loop invariant 0 <= gr <= j+1 <= length ;
> >    @ loop invariant \forall integer i; 0 <= i < gr ==> property(arr[ind[i]]);
> >    @ loop invariant \forall integer i; j+1 <= i < length ==> !property(arr[ind[i]]);
> >    @ loop invariant permutationLists(append(arrayToList{Here}(ind, gr), arrayToList{Here}(ind+j+1, length-j)), arrayToList{Here}(arr, gr + length - j));
> >    @ loop variant j - gr;
> >    @*/
> >  while (gr <= j) {
> >    if (property(arr[gr + length - 1 - j])) {
> >      ind[gr] = gr + length - 1 - j;
> >      //@ assert ind[gr] == gr + length - 1 - j && property(arr[gr + length - 1 - j]) && property(arr[ind[gr]]);
> >      gr++;
> >    } else {
> >      ind[j] = gr + length - 1 - j;
> >      j--;
> >    }
> >  }
> >  return gr-1;
> > }
> > 
> > Frama-C Neon/WP failed to discharge the second part of the invariant,
> > so I started experimenting with some assertions. When I write the
> > assertion as above the PO is not discharged. When I turn on 'split'
> > the first of the three generated POs is discharged. When I write the
> > three assertions as separate assertions:
> > 
> >      //@ assert ind[gr] == gr + length - 1 - j;
> >      //@ assert property(arr[gr + length - 1 - j]);
> >      //@ assert property(arr[ind[gr]]);
> > 
> > then the first and the last are discharged.
> > 
> > Any hints on how I should deal with this and how I could get the
> > invariant proved?
> > 
> > Thanks and best regards,
> > 
> > Marko_______________________________________________
> > Frama-c-discuss mailing list
> > Frama-c-discuss at lists.gforge.inria.fr
> > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/frama-c-discuss
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Frama-c-discuss mailing list
> Frama-c-discuss at lists.gforge.inria.fr
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/frama-c-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: partition-mine-momomorphic-ghost.c
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 1712 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/pipermail/frama-c-discuss/attachments/20150225/614030ea/attachment.obj>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP Digital Signature
URL: <http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/pipermail/frama-c-discuss/attachments/20150225/614030ea/attachment.sig>