Discovering Likely Program Invariants for Persistent Memory
Zunchen Huang, Srivatsan Ravi, Chao Wang
Abstract
We propose a method for automatically discovering likely program invariants for persistent memory (PM), which is a type of fast and byte-addressable storage device that can retain data after power loss. The invariants, also called PM properties or PM requirements, specify which objects of the program should be made persistent and in what order. Our method relies on a combination of static and dynamic analysis techniques. Specifically, it relies on static analysis to compute dependence relations between LOAD/STORE instructions and instruments the information into the executable program. Then, it relies on dynamic analysis of the execution traces and counterfactual reasoning to infer PM properties. With precisely computed dependence relations, the inferred properties are necessary conditions for the program to behave correctly through power loss and recovery; with imprecise dependence relations, these are likely program invariants. We have evaluated our method on benchmark programs including eight persistent data structures and two distributed storage applications, Redis and Memcached. The results show that our method can infer PM properties quickly and these properties are of higher quality than those inferred by a state-of-the-art technique. We also demonstrate the usefulness of the inferred properties by leveraging them for PM bug detection, which significantly improves the performance of a state-of-the-art PM bug detection technique.
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 b3e514b9-0615-4c51-8a91-adad69915725Cited by top-tier papers1
Ask how each one uses itBuilds on13
- Persistency semantics of the Intel-x86 architectureAzalea Raad, John Wickerson, Gil Neiger, Viktor VafeiadisPOPL 2020 · 61 citations
- AGAMOTTO: How Persistent is your Persistent Memory Application?Ian Neal, Ben Reeves, Ben Stoler, Andrew Quinn et al.OSDI 2020 · 43 citations
- PMFuzz: test case generation for persistent memory programsSihang Liu, Suyash Mahar, Baishakhi Ray, Samira Manabi KhanASPLOS 2021 · 36 citations
- Jaaru: efficiently model checking persistent memory programsHamed Gorjiara, Guoqing Harry Xu, Brian DemskyASPLOS 2021 · 34 citations
- Hippocrates: healing persistent memory bugs without doing any harmIan Neal, Andrew Quinn, Baris KasikciASPLOS 2021 · 24 citations
Related papers
- Constraint Based Program Repair for Persistent Memory BugsZunchen Huang, Chao WangICSE 2024 · 3 citations
- Fast, flexible, and comprehensive bug detection for persistent memory programsBang Di, Jiawen Liu, Hao Chen, Dong LiASPLOS 2021 · 37 citations
- Cross-Failure Bug Detection in Persistent Memory ProgramsSihang Liu, Korakit Seemakhupt, Yizhou Wei, Thomas F. Wenisch et al.ASPLOS 2020 · 60 citations
- Corundum: statically-enforced persistent memory safetyMorteza Hoseinzadeh, Steven SwansonASPLOS 2021 · 18 citations
- Efficiently detecting concurrency bugs in persistent memory programsZhangyu Chen, Yu Hua, Yongle Zhang, Luochangqi DingASPLOS 2022 · 11 citations
