Article

Automated soundness proofs for dataflow analyses and transformations via local rules

Authors:

Todd Millstein,

Craig ChambersAuthors Info & Claims

POPL '05: Proceedings of the 32nd ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming languages

Pages 364 - 377

https://doi.org/10.1145/1040305.1040335

Published: 12 January 2005 Publication History

Abstract

We present Rhodium, a new language for writing compiler optimizations that can be automatically proved sound. Unlike our previous work on Cobalt, Rhodium expresses optimizations using explicit dataflow facts manipulated by local propagation and transformation rules. This new style allows Rhodium optimizations to be mutually recursively defined, to be automatically composed, to be interpreted in both flow-sensitive and -insensitive ways, and to be applied interprocedurally given a separate context-sensitivity strategy, all while retaining soundness. Rhodium also supports infinite analysis domains while guaranteeing termination of analysis. We have implemented a soundness checker for Rhodium and have specified and automatically proven the soundness of all of Cobalt's optimizations plus a variety of optimizations not expressible in Cobalt, including Andersen's points-to analysis, arithmetic-invariant detection, loop-induction-variable strength reduction, and redundant array load elimination.

References

[1]

Kamal Aboul-Hosn and Dexter Kozen. KAT-ML: An interactive theorem prover for kleene algebra with tests. In Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on the Implementation of Logics (WIL'03), University of Manchester, September 2003.]]

[2]

Jonathan Aldrich, Craig Chambers, Emin Gun Sirer, and Susan Eggers. Static analyses for eliminating unnecessary synchronization from java programs. In Proceedings of the sixth International Static Analysis Symposium, pages 19--38, Venice Italy, 1999.]]

Digital Library

[3]

L. O. Andersen. Program Analysis and Specialization for the C Programming Languge. PhD thesis, DIKU, University of Copenhagen, May 1994 (available as DIKU technical report 94-19).]]

[4]

Nick Benton. Simple relational correctness proofs for static analyses and and program transformations. In Proceedings of the 31st ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, Venice Itally, January 2004.]]

Digital Library

[5]

Marc Berndl, Ondřej Lhoták, Feng Qian, Laurie Hendren, and Navindra Umanee. Points-to analysis using BDDs. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN 2003 Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, pages 103--114. ACM Press, 2003.]]

Digital Library

[6]

David Cachera, Thomas Jensen, David Pichardie, and Vlad Rusu. Extracting a data flow analyser in constructive logic. In Proceedings of the 13th European Symposium on Programming (ESOP 2004), volume 2986 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer-Verlag, 2004.]]

[7]

Craig Chambers, Jeffrey Dean, and David Grove. Frameworks for intra- and interprocedural dataflow analysis. Technical Report UW-CSE-96-11-02, University of Washington, November 1996.]]

[8]

Patrick Cousot and Radhia Cousot. Abstract interpretation: A unified lattice model for static analysis of programs by construction or approximation of fixpoints. In Proceedings of the Fourth ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, pages 238--252, Los Angeles CA, January 1977.]]

Digital Library

[9]

Patrick Cousot and Radhia Cousot. Systematic design of program analysis frameworks. In Proceedings of the Sixth ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, pages 269--282, San Antonio TX, January 1979.]]

Digital Library

[10]

Patrick Cousot and Radhia Cousot. Systematic design of program transformation frameworks by abstract interpretation. In Proceedings of the 29th ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, Portland OR, January 2002.]]

Digital Library

[11]

Jeffrey Dean, Greg DeFouw, Dave Grove, Vassily Litvinov, and Craig Chambers. Vortex: An optimizing compiler for object-oriented languages. In Proceedings of the 1996 ACM Conference on Object-Oriented Programming Systems, Languages, and Applications, pages 83--100, San Jose CA, October 1996.]]

Digital Library

[12]

Cormac Flanagan, K. Rustan M. Leino, Mark Lillibridge, Greg Nelson, James B. Saxe, and Raymie Stata. Extended static checking for Java. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN '02 Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, June 2002.]]

Digital Library

[13]

David Grove and Craig Chambers. A framework for call graph construction algorithms. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, 23(6):685--746, 2001.]]

Digital Library

[14]

J. Guttman, J. Ramsdell, and M. Wand. VLISP: a verified implementation of Scheme. Lisp and Symbolic Compucation, 8(1-2):33--110, 1995.]]

Digital Library

[15]

M. Kauffmann and R.S. Boyer. The Boyer-Moore theorem prover and its interactive enhancement. Computers and Mathematics with Applications, 29(2):27--62, 1995.]]

[16]

Dexter Kozen. Kleene algebra with tests. ACM Transactions on Programming Langauges and Systems, 19(3):427--443, September 1997.]]

Digital Library

[17]

David Lacey, Neil D. Jones, Eric Van Wyk, and Carl Christian Frederiksen. Proving correctness of compiler optimizations by temporal logic. In Proceedings of the 29th ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, Portland OR, January 2002.]]

Digital Library

[18]

Sorin Lerner, David Grove, and Craig Chambers. Composing dataflow analyses and transformations. In Proceedings of the 29th ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, Portland OR, January 2002.]]

Digital Library

[19]

Sorin Lerner, Todd Millstein, and Craig Chambers. Automatically proving the correctness of compiler optimizations. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN 2003 conference on Programming language design and implementation, pages 220--231. ACM Press, 2003.]]

Digital Library

[20]

Sorin Lerner, Todd Millstein, Erika Rice, and Craig Chambers. Automated soundness proofs for dataflow analyses and transformations via local rules. Technical Report UW-CSE-2004-07-04, University of Washington, July 2004.]]

[21]

Greg Morrisett, Karl Crary, Neal Glew, Dan Grossman, Richard Samuels, Frederick Smith, David Walker, Stephanie Weirich, and Steve Zdancewic. TALx86: A realistic typed assembly language. In 1999 ACM SIGPLAN Workshop on Compiler Support for System Software, pages 25--35, Atlanta GA, May 1999.]]

[22]

George C. Necula. Proof-carrying code. In Proceedings of the 24th ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, Paris, France, January 1997.]]

Digital Library

[23]

George C. Necula. Translation validation for an optimizing compiler. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, pages 83--95, Vancouver, Canada, June 2000.]]

Digital Library

[24]

George C. Necula and Peter Lee. The design and implementation of a certifying compiler. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN '98 Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, Montreal, Canada, June 1998.]]

Digital Library

[25]

A. Pnueli, M. Siegel, and E. Singerman. Translation validation. In Tools and Algorithms for Construction and Analysis of Systems, TACAS '98, volume 1384 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 151--166, 1998.]]

Digital Library

[26]

Martin Rinard and Darko Marinov. Credible compilation. In Proceedings of the FLoC Workshop Run-Time Result Verification, July 1999.]]

[27]

Micha Sharir and Amir Pnueli. Two approaches to interprocedural data flow analysis. In Steven~S. Muchnick and Neil~D. Jones, editors, Program Flow Analysis: Theory and Applications, chapter 7, pages 189--233. Prentice-hall, 1981.]]

[28]

Olin Shivers. Control-flow analysis in Scheme. In Proceedings of the SIGPLAN '88 Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, pages 164--174, Atlanta GA, June 1988.]]

Digital Library

[29]

Ganesh Sittampalam, Oege de Moor, and Ken Friis Larsen. Incremental execution of transformation specifications. In Proceedings of the 31st ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, Venice Italy, January 2004.]]

Digital Library

[30]

Bernhard Steffen. Data flow analysis as model checking. In T. Ito and A.R. Meyer, editors, Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (TACS), Sendai (Japan), volume 526 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science (LNCS), pages 346--364. Springer-Verlag, September 1991.]]

Digital Library

[31]

David Tarditi, Greg Morrisett, Perry Cheng, Chris Stone, Robert Harper, and Peter Lee. TIL: A type-directed optimizing compiler for ML. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN '96 Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, Philadelphia PA, May 1996.]]

[32]

Steven W. K. Tjiang and John L. Hennessy. Sharlit -- a tool for building optimizers. In Proceedings of the 5th ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, pages 82--93, July 1992.]]

Digital Library

[33]

Jeffrey D. Ullman. Principles of Database and Knowledge-base Systems, Volume I. Computer Science Press, 1988.]]

Digital Library

[34]

John Whaley and Monica S. Lam. Cloning-based context-sensitive pointer alias analysis using binary decision diagrams. In Proceedings of the Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation. ACM Press, June 2004.]]

Digital Library

[35]

Deborah L. Whitfield and Mary Lou Soffa. An approach for exploring code improving transformations. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, 19(6):1053--1084, November 1997.]]

Digital Library

[36]

Kwangkeun Yi and Williams Ludwell Harrison III. Automatic generation and management of interprocedural program analyses. In Proceedings of the Twentieth ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, pages 246--259, January 1993.]]

Digital Library

[37]

William D. Young. A mechanically verified code generator. Journal of Automated Reasoning, 5(4):493--518, December 1989.]]

Digital Library

Cited By

Erhard JSchinabeck JSchwarz MSeidl HMonat RRubio-González C(2024)When to Stop Going Down the Rabbit Hole: Taming Context-Sensitivity on the FlyProceedings of the 13th ACM SIGPLAN International Workshop on the State Of the Art in Program Analysis10.1145/3652588.3663321(35-44)Online publication date: 20-Jun-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3652588.3663321
Zang ZThimmaiah AGligoric MJust RFraser G(2023)Pattern-Based Peephole Optimizations with Java JIT TestsProceedings of the 32nd ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis10.1145/3597926.3598038(64-75)Online publication date: 12-Jul-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3597926.3598038
Ozdemir AWahby RBrown FBarrett C(2023)Bounded Verification for Finite-Field-BlastingComputer Aided Verification10.1007/978-3-031-37709-9_8(154-175)Online publication date: 17-Jul-2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-37709-9_8
Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Automated soundness proofs for dataflow analyses and transformations via local rules
Proceedings of the 32nd ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming languages

We present Rhodium, a new language for writing compiler optimizations that can be automatically proved sound. Unlike our previous work on Cobalt, Rhodium expresses optimizations using explicit dataflow facts manipulated by local propagation and ...
Simple relational correctness proofs for static analyses and program transformations
POPL '04: Proceedings of the 31st ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming languages

We show how some classical static analyses for imperative programs, and the optimizing transformations which they enable, may be expressed and proved correct using elementary logical and denotationaltechniques. The key ingredients are an interpretation ...
Simple relational correctness proofs for static analyses and program transformations
POPL '04

We show how some classical static analyses for imperative programs, and the optimizing transformations which they enable, may be expressed and proved correct using elementary logical and denotationaltechniques. The key ingredients are an interpretation ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

POPL '05: Proceedings of the 32nd ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming languages

January 2005

402 pages

ISBN:158113830X

DOI:10.1145/1040305

General Chair:
Jens Palsberg
University of California, Los Angeles, CA
,
Program Chair:
Martín Abadi
University of California, Santa Cruz, CA

ACM SIGPLAN Notices Volume 40, Issue 1
Proceedings of the 32nd ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming languages
January 2005
391 pages
ISSN:0362-1340
EISSN:1558-1160
DOI:10.1145/1047659
Issue’s Table of Contents

Copyright © 2005 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 12 January 2005

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Article

Conference

POPL05

Sponsor:

POPL05: The 32nd Annual ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages 2005

January 12 - 14, 2005

California, Long Beach, USA

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 824 of 4,130 submissions, 20%

Upcoming Conference

POPL '25

Sponsor:
sigplan

The 52nd Annual ACM SIGPLAN Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages

January 19 - 25, 2025

Denver , CO , USA

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

105
Total Citations
View Citations
716
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)14
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2

Reflects downloads up to 01 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Erhard JSchinabeck JSchwarz MSeidl HMonat RRubio-González C(2024)When to Stop Going Down the Rabbit Hole: Taming Context-Sensitivity on the FlyProceedings of the 13th ACM SIGPLAN International Workshop on the State Of the Art in Program Analysis10.1145/3652588.3663321(35-44)Online publication date: 20-Jun-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3652588.3663321
Zang ZThimmaiah AGligoric MJust RFraser G(2023)Pattern-Based Peephole Optimizations with Java JIT TestsProceedings of the 32nd ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis10.1145/3597926.3598038(64-75)Online publication date: 12-Jul-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3597926.3598038
Ozdemir AWahby RBrown FBarrett C(2023)Bounded Verification for Finite-Field-BlastingComputer Aided Verification10.1007/978-3-031-37709-9_8(154-175)Online publication date: 17-Jul-2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-37709-9_8
Pit-Claudel CPhilipoom JJamner DErbsen AChlipala AJhala RDillig I(2022)Relational compilation for performance-critical applications: extensible proof-producing translation of functional models into low-level codeProceedings of the 43rd ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation10.1145/3519939.3523706(918-933)Online publication date: 9-Jun-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3519939.3523706
Lopes NLee JHur CLiu ZRegehr JFreund SYahav E(2021)Alive2: bounded translation validation for LLVMProceedings of the 42nd ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation10.1145/3453483.3454030(65-79)Online publication date: 19-Jun-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3453483.3454030
Brown FRenner JNötzli ALerner SShacham HStefan DDonaldson ATorlak E(2020)Towards a verified range analysis for JavaScript JITsProceedings of the 41st ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation10.1145/3385412.3385968(135-150)Online publication date: 11-Jun-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3385412.3385968
Pit-Claudel CWang PDelaware BGross JChlipala A(2020)Extensible Extraction of Efficient Imperative Programs with Foreign Functions, Manually Managed Memory, and ProofsAutomated Reasoning10.1007/978-3-030-51054-1_7(119-137)Online publication date: 24-Jun-2020
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-51054-1_7
Blaß TPhilippsen MAmaral JKulkarni M(2019)GPU-accelerated fixpoint algorithms for faster compiler analysesProceedings of the 28th International Conference on Compiler Construction10.1145/3302516.3307352(122-134)Online publication date: 16-Feb-2019
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3302516.3307352
Cusumano-Towner MBichsel BGehr TVechev MMansinghka V(2018)Incremental inference for probabilistic programsACM SIGPLAN Notices10.1145/3296979.319239953:4(571-585)Online publication date: 11-Jun-2018
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3296979.3192399
Pombrio JKrishnamurthi S(2018)Inferring type rules for syntactic sugarACM SIGPLAN Notices10.1145/3296979.319239853:4(812-825)Online publication date: 11-Jun-2018
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3296979.3192398
Show More Cited By

View Options

Get Access

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents