mirror of
https://github.com/achlipala/frap.git
synced 2024-11-10 00:07:51 +00:00
370 lines
12 KiB
Coq
370 lines
12 KiB
Coq
(** Formal Reasoning About Programs <http://adam.chlipala.net/frap/>
|
|
* Chapter 6: Transition Systems
|
|
* Author: Adam Chlipala
|
|
* License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ *)
|
|
|
|
Require Import Frap.
|
|
|
|
Set Implicit Arguments.
|
|
(* This command will treat type arguments to functions as implicit, like in
|
|
* Haskell or ML. *)
|
|
|
|
|
|
(* Here's a classic recursive, functional program for factorial. *)
|
|
Fixpoint fact (n : nat) : nat :=
|
|
match n with
|
|
| O => 1
|
|
| S n' => fact n' * S n'
|
|
end.
|
|
|
|
(* But let's reformulate factorial relationally, as an example to explore
|
|
* treatment of inductive relations in Coq. First, these are the states of our
|
|
* state machine. *)
|
|
Inductive fact_state :=
|
|
| AnswerIs (answer : nat)
|
|
| WithAccumulator (input accumulator : nat).
|
|
|
|
(* *Initial* states *)
|
|
Inductive fact_init (original_input : nat) : fact_state -> Prop :=
|
|
| FactInit : fact_init original_input (WithAccumulator original_input 1).
|
|
|
|
(** *Final* states *)
|
|
Inductive fact_final : fact_state -> Prop :=
|
|
| FactFinal : forall ans, fact_final (AnswerIs ans).
|
|
|
|
(** The most important part: the relation to step between states *)
|
|
Inductive fact_step : fact_state -> fact_state -> Prop :=
|
|
| FactDone : forall acc,
|
|
fact_step (WithAccumulator O acc) (AnswerIs acc)
|
|
| FactStep : forall n acc,
|
|
fact_step (WithAccumulator (S n) acc) (WithAccumulator n (acc * S n)).
|
|
|
|
(* We care about more than just single steps. We want to run factorial to
|
|
* completion, for which it is handy to define a general relation of
|
|
* *transitive-reflexive closure*, like so. *)
|
|
Inductive trc {A} (R : A -> A -> Prop) : A -> A -> Prop :=
|
|
| TrcRefl : forall x, trc R x x
|
|
| TrcFront : forall x y z,
|
|
R x y
|
|
-> trc R y z
|
|
-> trc R x z.
|
|
|
|
(* Transitive-reflexive closure is so common that it deserves a shorthand notation! *)
|
|
Set Warnings "-notation-overridden". (* <-- needed while we play with defining one
|
|
* of the book's notations ourselves locally *)
|
|
Notation "R ^*" := (trc R) (at level 0).
|
|
|
|
(* Now let's use it to execute the factorial program. *)
|
|
Example factorial_3 : fact_step^* (WithAccumulator 3 1) (AnswerIs 6).
|
|
Proof.
|
|
Admitted.
|
|
|
|
(* It will be useful to give state machines more first-class status, as
|
|
* *transition systems*, formalized by this record type. It has one type
|
|
* parameter, [state], which records the type of states. *)
|
|
Record trsys state := {
|
|
Initial : state -> Prop;
|
|
Step : state -> state -> Prop
|
|
}.
|
|
|
|
(* The example of our factorial program: *)
|
|
Definition factorial_sys (original_input : nat) : trsys fact_state := {|
|
|
Initial := fact_init original_input;
|
|
Step := fact_step
|
|
|}.
|
|
|
|
(* A useful general notion for transition systems: reachable states *)
|
|
Inductive reachable {state} (sys : trsys state) (st : state) : Prop :=
|
|
| Reachable : forall st0,
|
|
sys.(Initial) st0
|
|
-> sys.(Step)^* st0 st
|
|
-> reachable sys st.
|
|
|
|
(* To prove that our state machine is correct, we rely on the crucial technique
|
|
* of *invariants*. What is an invariant? Here's a general definition, in
|
|
* terms of an arbitrary transition system. *)
|
|
Definition invariantFor {state} (sys : trsys state) (invariant : state -> Prop) :=
|
|
forall s, sys.(Initial) s
|
|
-> forall s', sys.(Step)^* s s'
|
|
-> invariant s'.
|
|
(* That is, when we begin in an initial state and take any number of steps, the
|
|
* place we wind up always satisfies the invariant. *)
|
|
|
|
(* Here's a simple lemma to help us apply an invariant usefully,
|
|
* really just restating the definition. *)
|
|
Lemma use_invariant' : forall {state} (sys : trsys state)
|
|
(invariant : state -> Prop) s s',
|
|
invariantFor sys invariant
|
|
-> sys.(Initial) s
|
|
-> sys.(Step)^* s s'
|
|
-> invariant s'.
|
|
Proof.
|
|
unfold invariantFor.
|
|
simplify.
|
|
eapply H.
|
|
eassumption.
|
|
assumption.
|
|
Qed.
|
|
|
|
Theorem use_invariant : forall {state} (sys : trsys state)
|
|
(invariant : state -> Prop) s,
|
|
invariantFor sys invariant
|
|
-> reachable sys s
|
|
-> invariant s.
|
|
Proof.
|
|
simplify.
|
|
invert H0.
|
|
eapply use_invariant'.
|
|
eassumption.
|
|
eassumption.
|
|
assumption.
|
|
Qed.
|
|
|
|
(* What's the most fundamental way to establish an invariant? Induction! *)
|
|
Lemma invariant_induction' : forall {state} (sys : trsys state)
|
|
(invariant : state -> Prop),
|
|
(forall s, invariant s -> forall s', sys.(Step) s s' -> invariant s')
|
|
-> forall s s', sys.(Step)^* s s'
|
|
-> invariant s
|
|
-> invariant s'.
|
|
Proof.
|
|
induct 2; propositional.
|
|
(* [propositional]: simplify the goal according to the rules of propositional
|
|
* logic. *)
|
|
|
|
apply IHtrc.
|
|
eapply H.
|
|
eassumption.
|
|
assumption.
|
|
Qed.
|
|
|
|
Theorem invariant_induction : forall {state} (sys : trsys state)
|
|
(invariant : state -> Prop),
|
|
(forall s, sys.(Initial) s -> invariant s)
|
|
-> (forall s, invariant s -> forall s', sys.(Step) s s' -> invariant s')
|
|
-> invariantFor sys invariant.
|
|
Proof.
|
|
unfold invariantFor; intros.
|
|
eapply invariant_induction'.
|
|
eassumption.
|
|
eassumption.
|
|
apply H.
|
|
assumption.
|
|
Qed.
|
|
|
|
Definition fact_invariant (original_input : nat) (st : fact_state) : Prop :=
|
|
True.
|
|
(* We must fill in a better invariant. *)
|
|
|
|
Theorem fact_invariant_ok : forall original_input,
|
|
invariantFor (factorial_sys original_input) (fact_invariant original_input).
|
|
Proof.
|
|
Admitted.
|
|
|
|
(* Therefore, every reachable state satisfies this invariant. *)
|
|
Theorem fact_invariant_always : forall original_input s,
|
|
reachable (factorial_sys original_input) s
|
|
-> fact_invariant original_input s.
|
|
Proof.
|
|
simplify.
|
|
eapply use_invariant.
|
|
apply fact_invariant_ok.
|
|
assumption.
|
|
Qed.
|
|
|
|
(* Therefore, any final state has the right answer! *)
|
|
Lemma fact_ok' : forall original_input s,
|
|
fact_final s
|
|
-> fact_invariant original_input s
|
|
-> s = AnswerIs (fact original_input).
|
|
Admitted.
|
|
|
|
Theorem fact_ok : forall original_input s,
|
|
reachable (factorial_sys original_input) s
|
|
-> fact_final s
|
|
-> s = AnswerIs (fact original_input).
|
|
Proof.
|
|
simplify.
|
|
apply fact_ok'.
|
|
assumption.
|
|
apply fact_invariant_always.
|
|
assumption.
|
|
Qed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
(** * A simple example of another program as a state transition system *)
|
|
|
|
(* We'll formalize this pseudocode for one thread of a concurrent, shared-memory program.
|
|
lock();
|
|
local = global;
|
|
global = local + 1;
|
|
unlock();
|
|
*)
|
|
|
|
(* This inductive state effectively encodes all possible combinations of two
|
|
* kinds of *local*state* in a thread:
|
|
* - program counter
|
|
* - values of local variables that may be read eventually *)
|
|
Inductive increment_program :=
|
|
| Lock
|
|
| Read
|
|
| Write (local : nat)
|
|
| Unlock
|
|
| Done.
|
|
|
|
(* Next, a type for state shared between threads. *)
|
|
Record inc_state := {
|
|
Locked : bool; (* Does a thread hold the lock? *)
|
|
Global : nat (* A shared counter *)
|
|
}.
|
|
|
|
(* The combined state, from one thread's perspective, using a general
|
|
* definition. *)
|
|
Record threaded_state shared private := {
|
|
Shared : shared;
|
|
Private : private
|
|
}.
|
|
|
|
Definition increment_state := threaded_state inc_state increment_program.
|
|
|
|
(* Now a routine definition of the three key relations of a transition system.
|
|
* The most interesting logic surrounds saving the counter value in the local
|
|
* state after reading. *)
|
|
|
|
Inductive increment_init : increment_state -> Prop :=
|
|
| IncInit :
|
|
increment_init {| Shared := {| Locked := false; Global := O |};
|
|
Private := Lock |}.
|
|
|
|
Inductive increment_step : increment_state -> increment_state -> Prop :=
|
|
| IncLock : forall g,
|
|
increment_step {| Shared := {| Locked := false; Global := g |};
|
|
Private := Lock |}
|
|
{| Shared := {| Locked := true; Global := g |};
|
|
Private := Read |}
|
|
| IncRead : forall l g,
|
|
increment_step {| Shared := {| Locked := l; Global := g |};
|
|
Private := Read |}
|
|
{| Shared := {| Locked := l; Global := g |};
|
|
Private := Write g |}
|
|
| IncWrite : forall l g v,
|
|
increment_step {| Shared := {| Locked := l; Global := g |};
|
|
Private := Write v |}
|
|
{| Shared := {| Locked := l; Global := S v |};
|
|
Private := Unlock |}
|
|
| IncUnlock : forall l g,
|
|
increment_step {| Shared := {| Locked := l; Global := g |};
|
|
Private := Unlock |}
|
|
{| Shared := {| Locked := false; Global := g |};
|
|
Private := Done |}.
|
|
|
|
Definition increment_sys := {|
|
|
Initial := increment_init;
|
|
Step := increment_step
|
|
|}.
|
|
|
|
|
|
(** * Running transition systems in parallel *)
|
|
|
|
(* That last example system is a cop-out: it only runs a single thread. We want
|
|
* to run several threads in parallel, sharing the global state. Here's how we
|
|
* can do it for just two threads. The key idea is that, while in the new
|
|
* system the type of shared state remains the same, we take the Cartesian
|
|
* product of the sets of private state. *)
|
|
|
|
Inductive parallel_init shared private1 private2
|
|
(init1 : threaded_state shared private1 -> Prop)
|
|
(init2 : threaded_state shared private2 -> Prop)
|
|
: threaded_state shared (private1 * private2) -> Prop :=
|
|
| Pinit : forall sh pr1 pr2,
|
|
init1 {| Shared := sh; Private := pr1 |}
|
|
-> init2 {| Shared := sh; Private := pr2 |}
|
|
-> parallel_init init1 init2 {| Shared := sh; Private := (pr1, pr2) |}.
|
|
|
|
Inductive parallel_step shared private1 private2
|
|
(step1 : threaded_state shared private1 -> threaded_state shared private1 -> Prop)
|
|
(step2 : threaded_state shared private2 -> threaded_state shared private2 -> Prop)
|
|
: threaded_state shared (private1 * private2)
|
|
-> threaded_state shared (private1 * private2) -> Prop :=
|
|
| Pstep1 : forall sh pr1 pr2 sh' pr1',
|
|
(* First thread gets to run. *)
|
|
step1 {| Shared := sh; Private := pr1 |} {| Shared := sh'; Private := pr1' |}
|
|
-> parallel_step step1 step2 {| Shared := sh; Private := (pr1, pr2) |}
|
|
{| Shared := sh'; Private := (pr1', pr2) |}
|
|
| Pstep2 : forall sh pr1 pr2 sh' pr2',
|
|
(* Second thread gets to run. *)
|
|
step2 {| Shared := sh; Private := pr2 |} {| Shared := sh'; Private := pr2' |}
|
|
-> parallel_step step1 step2 {| Shared := sh; Private := (pr1, pr2) |}
|
|
{| Shared := sh'; Private := (pr1, pr2') |}.
|
|
|
|
Definition parallel shared private1 private2
|
|
(sys1 : trsys (threaded_state shared private1))
|
|
(sys2 : trsys (threaded_state shared private2)) := {|
|
|
Initial := parallel_init sys1.(Initial) sys2.(Initial);
|
|
Step := parallel_step sys1.(Step) sys2.(Step)
|
|
|}.
|
|
|
|
(* Example: composing two threads of the kind we formalized earlier *)
|
|
Definition increment2_sys := parallel increment_sys increment_sys.
|
|
|
|
(* Let's prove that the counter is always 2 when the composed program terminates. *)
|
|
|
|
(** We must write an invariant. *)
|
|
Inductive increment2_invariant :
|
|
threaded_state inc_state (increment_program * increment_program) -> Prop :=
|
|
| Inc2Inv : forall sh pr1 pr2,
|
|
increment2_invariant {| Shared := sh; Private := (pr1, pr2) |}.
|
|
(* This isn't it yet! *)
|
|
|
|
(* Now, to show it really is an invariant. *)
|
|
Theorem increment2_invariant_ok : invariantFor increment2_sys increment2_invariant.
|
|
Proof.
|
|
Admitted.
|
|
|
|
(* Now, to prove our final result about the two incrementing threads, let's use
|
|
* a more general fact, about when one invariant implies another. *)
|
|
Theorem invariant_weaken : forall {state} (sys : trsys state)
|
|
(invariant1 invariant2 : state -> Prop),
|
|
invariantFor sys invariant1
|
|
-> (forall s, invariant1 s -> invariant2 s)
|
|
-> invariantFor sys invariant2.
|
|
Proof.
|
|
unfold invariantFor; simplify.
|
|
apply H0.
|
|
eapply H.
|
|
eassumption.
|
|
assumption.
|
|
Qed.
|
|
|
|
(* Here's another, much weaker invariant, corresponding exactly to the overall
|
|
* correctness property we want to establish for this system. *)
|
|
Definition increment2_right_answer
|
|
(s : threaded_state inc_state (increment_program * increment_program)) :=
|
|
s.(Private) = (Done, Done)
|
|
-> s.(Shared).(Global) = 2.
|
|
|
|
(** Now we can prove that the system only runs to happy states. *)
|
|
Theorem increment2_sys_correct : forall s,
|
|
reachable increment2_sys s
|
|
-> increment2_right_answer s.
|
|
Proof.
|
|
Admitted.
|
|
(*simplify.
|
|
eapply use_invariant.
|
|
apply invariant_weaken with (invariant1 := increment2_invariant).
|
|
(* Note the use of a [with] clause to specify a quantified variable's
|
|
* value. *)
|
|
|
|
apply increment2_invariant_ok.
|
|
|
|
simplify.
|
|
invert H0.
|
|
unfold increment2_right_answer; simplify.
|
|
invert H0.
|
|
(* Here we use inversion on an equality, to derive more primitive
|
|
* equalities. *)
|
|
simplify.
|
|
equality.
|
|
|
|
assumption.
|
|
Qed.*)
|