If At First You Don't Succeed, Try, Try, Again...? Insights and LLM-informed Tooling for Detecting Retry Bugs in Software Systems
Bogdan Alexandru Stoica, Utsav Sethi, Yiming Su, Cyrus Zhou, Shan Lu, Jonathan Mace, Madanlal Musuvathi, Suman Nath
Abstract
Retry-the re-execution of a task on failure-is a common mechanism to enable resilient software systems. Yet, despite its commonality and long history, retry remains difficult to implement and test. Guided by our study of real-world retry issues, we propose a novel suite of static and dynamic techniques to detect retry problems in software. We find that the ad-hoc nature of retry implementation in software systems poses challenges for traditional program analysis but can be well handled by large language models; we also find that careful repurposing existing unit tests can, along with fault injection, expose various types of retry problems.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 0714a4a1-c585-4f7b-83bb-174ca3864b6bCited by top-tier papers5
- Sharpen the Spec, Cut the Code: A Case for Generative File System with SYSSPECQingyuan Liu, Mo Zou, Hengbin Zhang, Dong Du et al.FAST 2026 · 9 citations
- Understanding and Detecting Fail-Slow Hardware Failure Bugs in Cloud SystemsGen Dong, Yu Hua, Yongle Zhang, Zhangyu Chen et al.USENIX ATC 2025 · 6 citations
- Towards More Accurate Static Analysis for Taint-Style Bug Detection in Linux KernelHaonan Li, Hang Zhang, Kexin Pei, Zhiyun QianASE 2025 · 5 citations
- Paralegal: Practical Static Analysis for Privacy BugsJustus Adam, Carolyn Zech, Livia Zhu, Sreshtaa Rajesh et al.OSDI 2025 · 2 citations
- Pilot Execution: Simulating Failure Recovery In Situ for Production Distributed SystemsZhenyu Li, Angting Cai, Chang LouNSDI 2026
Builds on24
- Is Your Code Generated by ChatGPT Really Correct? Rigorous Evaluation of Large Language Models for Code GenerationJiawei Liu, Chunqiu Steven Xia, Yuyao Wang, Lingming ZhangNeurIPS 2023 · 2,317 citations
- Automated Program Repair in the Era of Large Pre-trained Language ModelsChunqiu Steven Xia, Yuxiang Wei, Lingming ZhangICSE 2023 · 321 citations
- Large Language Models Are Zero-Shot Fuzzers: Fuzzing Deep-Learning Libraries via Large Language ModelsYinlin Deng, Chunqiu Steven Xia, Haoran Peng, Chenyuan Yang et al.ISSTA 2023 · 253 citations
- CodaMosa: Escaping Coverage Plateaus in Test Generation with Pre-trained Large Language ModelsCaroline Lemieux, Jeevana Priya Inala, Shuvendu K. Lahiri, Siddhartha SenICSE 2023 · 221 citations
- Large Language Models are Few-shot Testers: Exploring LLM-based General Bug ReproductionSungmin Kang, Juyeon Yoon, Shin YooICSE 2023 · 163 citations
Related papers
- ReproCopilot: LLM-Driven Failure Reproduction with Dynamic RefinementTanakorn Leesatapornwongsa, Fazle Elahi Faisal, Suman NathFSE 2025
- Can Large Language Models Reason about Program Invariants?Kexin Pei, David Bieber, Kensen Shi, Charles Sutton et al.ICML 2023 · 128 citations
- AssertFlip: Reproducing Bugs via Inversion of LLM-Generated Passing TestsLara Khatib, Noble Saji Mathews, Meiyappan NagappanICSE 2026 · 1 citation
- Static Prediction of Runtime Errors by Learning to Execute Programs with External Resource DescriptionsDavid Bieber, Rishab Goel, Daniel Zheng, Hugo Larochelle et al.ICLR 2023 · 2 citations
- Revisit Self-Debugging with Self-Generated Tests for Code GenerationXiancai Chen, Zhengwei Tao, Kechi Zhang, Changzhi Zhou et al.ACL 2025
