frap/AbstractInterpretation.v

2167 lines
66 KiB
Coq

(** Formal Reasoning About Programs <http://adam.chlipala.net/frap/>
* Chapter 9: Abstract Interpretation and Dataflow Analysis
* Author: Adam Chlipala
* License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ *)
Require Import Frap Imp.
Set Implicit Arguments.
(* With model checking, we were able to find invariants automatically for
* nontrivial transition systems. With operational semantics, we're able to
* build transition systems automatically from program syntax. Let's put these
* two sorts of examples together into an even more computationally efficient
* technique: abstract interpretation. *)
(* Apologies for jumping right into abstract formal details, but that's what the
* medium of Coq forces on us! We will apply abstract interpretation to the
* imperative language that we formalized in the last chapter. Here's a record
* capturing the idea of an abstract interpretation for that language. *)
Record absint := {
Domain :> Set;
(* We will represent concrete values (natural numbers) with this alternative,
* abstract set. This [:>] notation lets us treat any [absint] as its
* [Domain], automatically. See below for examples (e.g., return type of
* [absint_interp]). *)
Top : Domain;
(* A universal (least informative) element, describing *all* concrete
* values *)
Constant : nat -> Domain;
(* Most accurate representation of a constant *)
Add : Domain -> Domain -> Domain;
Subtract : Domain -> Domain -> Domain;
Multiply : Domain -> Domain -> Domain;
(* Abstract versions of arithmetic operators *)
Join : Domain -> Domain -> Domain;
(* Returns some new element that covers all cases of each of its inputs *)
Represents : nat -> Domain -> Prop
(* Which elements represent which numbers? *)
}.
(* That was a mouthful, but we still need to say what makes one of these
* reasonable. *)
Record absint_sound (a : absint) : Prop := {
TopSound : forall n, a.(Represents) n a.(Top);
ConstSound : forall n, a.(Represents) n (a.(Constant) n);
AddSound : forall n na m ma, a.(Represents) n na
-> a.(Represents) m ma
-> a.(Represents) (n + m) (a.(Add) na ma);
SubtractSound: forall n na m ma, a.(Represents) n na
-> a.(Represents) m ma
-> a.(Represents) (n - m) (a.(Subtract) na ma);
MultiplySound : forall n na m ma, a.(Represents) n na
-> a.(Represents) m ma
-> a.(Represents) (n * m) (a.(Multiply) na ma);
AddMonotone : forall na na' ma ma', (forall n, a.(Represents) n na -> a.(Represents) n na')
-> (forall n, a.(Represents) n ma -> a.(Represents) n ma')
-> (forall n, a.(Represents) n (a.(Add) na ma)
-> a.(Represents) n (a.(Add) na' ma'));
SubtractMonotone : forall na na' ma ma', (forall n, a.(Represents) n na -> a.(Represents) n na')
-> (forall n, a.(Represents) n ma -> a.(Represents) n ma')
-> (forall n, a.(Represents) n (a.(Subtract) na ma)
-> a.(Represents) n (a.(Subtract) na' ma'));
MultiplyMonotone : forall na na' ma ma', (forall n, a.(Represents) n na -> a.(Represents) n na')
-> (forall n, a.(Represents) n ma -> a.(Represents) n ma')
-> (forall n, a.(Represents) n (a.(Multiply) na ma)
-> a.(Represents) n (a.(Multiply) na' ma'));
JoinSoundLeft : forall x y n, a.(Represents) n x
-> a.(Represents) n (a.(Join) x y);
JoinSoundRight : forall x y n, a.(Represents) n y
-> a.(Represents) n (a.(Join) x y)
}.
(* Here's a "bonus" condition that we'll sometimes use and sometimes not:
* [Join] gives a *least* upper bound of its two arguments, such that any other
* upper bound is also at or above the join. *)
Definition absint_complete (a : absint) :=
forall x y z n, a.(Represents) n (a.(Join) x y)
-> (forall n, a.(Represents) n x -> a.(Represents) n z)
-> (forall n, a.(Represents) n y -> a.(Represents) n z)
-> a.(Represents) n z.
(* Let's ask [eauto] to try all of the above soundness rules automatically. *)
Local Hint Resolve TopSound ConstSound AddSound SubtractSound MultiplySound
AddMonotone SubtractMonotone MultiplyMonotone
JoinSoundLeft JoinSoundRight : core.
(** * Example: even-odd analysis *)
Inductive parity := Even | Odd | Either.
(* In this interpretation, every value either has known parity or not. *)
Definition isEven (n : nat) := exists k, n = k * 2.
Definition isOdd (n : nat) := exists k, n = k * 2 + 1.
(* Here are some convenient definitions of the parities. *)
(* BEGIN SPAN OF BORING THEOREMS ABOUT PARITY, WHICH WE WON'T EXPLAIN. *)
Theorem decide_parity : forall n, isEven n \/ isOdd n.
Proof.
induct n; simplify; propositional.
left; exists 0; linear_arithmetic.
invert H.
right.
exists x; linear_arithmetic.
invert H.
left.
exists (x + 1); linear_arithmetic.
Qed.
Theorem notEven_odd : forall n, ~isEven n -> isOdd n.
Proof.
simplify.
assert (isEven n \/ isOdd n).
apply decide_parity.
propositional.
Qed.
Theorem odd_notEven : forall n, isOdd n -> ~isEven n.
Proof.
propositional.
invert H.
invert H0.
linear_arithmetic.
Qed.
Theorem isEven_0 : isEven 0.
Proof.
exists 0; linear_arithmetic.
Qed.
Theorem isEven_1 : ~isEven 1.
Proof.
propositional; invert H; linear_arithmetic.
Qed.
Theorem isEven_S_Even : forall n, isEven n -> ~isEven (S n).
Proof.
propositional; invert H; invert H0; linear_arithmetic.
Qed.
Theorem isEven_S_Odd : forall n, ~isEven n -> isEven (S n).
Proof.
propositional.
apply notEven_odd in H.
invert H.
exists (x + 1); linear_arithmetic.
Qed.
Local Hint Resolve isEven_0 isEven_1 isEven_S_Even isEven_S_Odd : core.
(* END SPAN OF BORING THEOREMS ABOUT PARITY. *)
(* Next, we are ready to implement the operators of the abstract
* interpretation. *)
Definition parity_flip (p : parity) :=
match p with
| Even => Odd
| Odd => Even
| Either => Either
end.
Fixpoint parity_const (n : nat) :=
match n with
| O => Even
| S n' => parity_flip (parity_const n')
end.
Definition parity_add (x y : parity) :=
match x, y with
| Even, Even => Even
| Odd, Odd => Even
| Even, Odd => Odd
| Odd, Even => Odd
| _, _ => Either
end.
Definition parity_subtract (x y : parity) :=
match x, y with
| Even, Even => Even
| Odd, Odd => Even
| _, _ => Either
end.
(* Note subtleties with [Either]s above, to deal with underflow at zero! *)
Definition parity_multiply (x y : parity) :=
match x, y with
| Even, _ => Even
| Odd, Odd => Odd
| _, Even => Even
| _, _ => Either
end.
Definition parity_join (x y : parity) :=
match x, y with
| Even, Even => Even
| Odd, Odd => Odd
| _, _ => Either
end.
(* What does it mean for a parity to classify a number correctly? *)
Inductive parity_rep : nat -> parity -> Prop :=
| PrEven : forall n,
isEven n
-> parity_rep n Even
| PrOdd : forall n,
~isEven n
-> parity_rep n Odd
| PrEither : forall n,
parity_rep n Either.
Local Hint Constructors parity_rep : core.
(* Putting it all together: *)
Definition parity_absint := {|
Top := Either;
Constant := parity_const;
Add := parity_add;
Subtract := parity_subtract;
Multiply := parity_multiply;
Join := parity_join;
Represents := parity_rep
|}.
(* Now we prove soundness. *)
Lemma parity_const_sound : forall n,
parity_rep n (parity_const n).
Proof.
induct n; simplify; eauto.
cases (parity_const n); simplify; eauto.
invert IHn; eauto.
invert IHn; eauto.
Qed.
Local Hint Resolve parity_const_sound : core.
Lemma even_not_odd :
(forall n, parity_rep n Even -> parity_rep n Odd)
-> False.
Proof.
simplify.
specialize (H 0).
assert (parity_rep 0 Even) by eauto.
apply H in H0.
invert H0.
apply H1.
auto.
Qed.
Lemma odd_not_even :
(forall n, parity_rep n Odd -> parity_rep n Even)
-> False.
Proof.
simplify.
specialize (H 1).
assert (parity_rep 1 Odd) by eauto.
apply H in H0.
invert H0.
invert H1.
linear_arithmetic.
Qed.
Local Hint Resolve even_not_odd odd_not_even : core.
Lemma parity_join_complete : forall n x y,
parity_rep n (parity_join x y)
-> parity_rep n x \/ parity_rep n y.
Proof.
simplify; cases x; cases y; simplify; propositional.
assert (isEven n \/ isOdd n) by apply decide_parity.
propositional; eauto using odd_notEven.
assert (isEven n \/ isOdd n) by apply decide_parity.
propositional; eauto using odd_notEven.
Qed.
Local Hint Resolve parity_join_complete : core.
(* The final proof uses some automation that we won't explain, to descend down
* to the hearts of the interesting cases. *)
Theorem parity_sound : absint_sound parity_absint.
Proof.
constructor; simplify; eauto;
repeat match goal with
| [ H : parity_rep _ _ |- _ ] => invert H
| [ H : ~isEven _ |- _ ] => apply notEven_odd in H; invert H
| [ H : isEven _ |- _ ] => invert H
| [ p : parity |- _ ] => cases p; simplify; try equality
end; try solve [ exfalso; eauto ]; try (constructor; try apply odd_notEven).
(* We finish up by instantiating all those existential quantifiers in uses of
* [isEven] and [isOdd]. *)
exists (x0 + x); ring.
exists (x0 + x); ring.
exists (x0 + x); ring.
exists (x0 + x + 1); ring.
exists (x - x0); linear_arithmetic.
exists (x - x0); linear_arithmetic.
exists (x * x0 * 2); ring.
exists ((x * 2 + 1) * x0); ring.
exists (n * x); ring.
exists ((x * 2 + 1) * x0); ring.
exists (2 * x * x0 + x + x0); ring.
exists (x * m); ring.
exists x; ring.
exists x; ring.
exists x; ring.
exists x; ring.
exists x; ring.
exists x; ring.
exists x; ring.
exists x; ring.
exists x; ring.
exists x; ring.
exists x; ring.
exists x; ring.
exists x; ring.
exists x; ring.
exists x; ring.
exists x; ring.
exists x; ring.
exists x; ring.
exists x0; ring.
exists x0; ring.
Qed.
Theorem parity_complete : absint_complete parity_absint.
Proof.
unfold absint_complete; simplify; eauto;
repeat match goal with
| [ H : parity_rep _ _ |- _ ] => invert H
| [ H : ~isEven _ |- _ ] => apply notEven_odd in H; invert H
| [ H : isEven _ |- _ ] => invert H
| [ p : parity |- _ ] => cases p; simplify; try equality
end; try solve [ exfalso; eauto ]; try (constructor; try apply odd_notEven).
exists x0; ring.
exists x0; ring.
Qed.
(** * Flow-insensitive analysis *)
(* So there's an example of an abstract interpretation, but how do we put it to
* use to prove a theorem about a program? Model checking was an example of a
* *path-sensitive* analysis, where we accumulated a finite set of reachable
* states of a system. Abstract interpretation is usually *path-insensitive*,
* and it may even be *flow-insensitive*, which means that we will find an
* invariant that *ignores the current command altogether*. Instead, the
* invariant talks just about the valuation. To help us do that, here's a type
* definition: *)
Definition astate (a : absint) := fmap var a.
(* An abstract state maps variables to abstract elements. The idea is that each
* variable should take on a concrete value represented by its associated
* abstract value. These are only finite maps, so missing variables are allowed
* to take arbitrary values. *)
(* An easy thing to do with an [astate] is evaluate an expression into another
* abstract element. *)
Fixpoint absint_interp (e : arith) a (s : astate a) : a :=
match e with
| Const n => a.(Constant) n
| Var x => match s $? x with
| None => a.(Top)
| Some xa => xa
end
| Plus e1 e2 => a.(Add) (absint_interp e1 s) (absint_interp e2 s)
| Minus e1 e2 => a.(Subtract) (absint_interp e1 s) (absint_interp e2 s)
| Times e1 e2 => a.(Multiply) (absint_interp e1 s) (absint_interp e2 s)
end.
(* To automate finding a suitable path-insensitive invariant, it's helpful to
* compute the set of all assignments in a command. *)
Fixpoint assignmentsOf (c : cmd) : set (var * arith) :=
match c with
| Skip => {}
| Assign x e => {(x, e)}
| Sequence c1 c2 => assignmentsOf c1 \cup assignmentsOf c2
| If _ c1 c2 => assignmentsOf c1 \cup assignmentsOf c2
| While _ c1 => assignmentsOf c1
end.
(* Any step in a program can be matched by either doing nothing or running one
* of the assignments. *)
Theorem assignmentsOf_ok : forall v c v' c',
step (v, c) (v', c')
-> v' = v \/ exists x e, (x, e) \in assignmentsOf c
/\ v' = v $+ (x, interp e v).
Proof.
induct 1; unfold Sets.In; simplify; eauto 10.
first_order.
Qed.
(* Taking a step never adds new possible assignments. *)
Theorem assignmentsOf_monotone : forall v c v' c',
step (v, c) (v', c')
-> assignmentsOf c' \subseteq assignmentsOf c.
Proof.
induct 1; simplify; sets.
(* [sets]: simplify a goal involving set-theory operators. *)
Qed.
(* OK, now we know all the assignments that could happen. We can start with
* some initial [astate] and repeatedly pick some assignment and execute it to
* modify [astate]. The trouble would be if, for instance in our even-odd
* example, the program had two assignments ["x" <- 0] and ["x" <- 1]. We could
* alternate between these assignments and waste our time forever, switching
* ["x"] back and forth between [Even] and [Odd]! Instead, when we run an
* assignment, we want to merge the new abstract value with the old, getting a
* new value guaranteed to overapproximate both of them. [merge_astate] applies
* that combination to all variables in two abstract states, using a finite-map
* function [merge] from the book library. Any variable found in at most one of
* the two input maps is absent from the output map, and any variable found in
* both maps is now mapped to the *join* of the original values, using a crucial
* component of any abstract interpretation. *)
Definition merge_astate a : astate a -> astate a -> astate a :=
merge (fun x y =>
match x with
| None => None
| Some x' =>
match y with
| None => None
| Some y' => Some (a.(Join) x' y')
end
end).
(* With [merge_astate] in place, we can define a new transition system,
* capturing the essence of flow-insensitive abstract interpretations. We can
* either do nothing or we can pick an assignment, run it, and merge the result
* into our growing candidate invariant. *)
Inductive flow_insensitive_step a (c : cmd) : astate a -> astate a -> Prop :=
| InsensitiveNothing : forall s,
flow_insensitive_step c s s
| InsensitiveStep : forall x e s,
(x, e) \in assignmentsOf c
-> flow_insensitive_step c s (merge_astate s (s $+ (x, absint_interp e s))).
Local Hint Constructors flow_insensitive_step : core.
Definition flow_insensitive_trsys a (s : astate a) (c : cmd) := {|
Initial := {s};
Step := flow_insensitive_step (a := a) c
|}.
(* Now we revisit our studies of *simulation* from model checking. After all,
* that abstraction principle worked for transition systems in general,
* regardless of whether we want to model-check afterward. To define our
* simulation relation, let's start with what makes an abstract state compatible
* with a concrete valuation. *)
Definition insensitive_compatible a (s : astate a) (v : valuation) : Prop :=
forall x xa, s $? x = Some xa
-> (exists n, v $? x = Some n
/\ a.(Represents) n xa)
\/ (forall n, a.(Represents) n xa).
(* That is, when a variable is mapped to some abstract element, either that
* variable has a compatible concrete value, or the variable has no value and
* that element actually accepts all values (i.e., is probably [Top]). *)
(* Concrete state matches abstract when:
* (1) The abstract state and valuation match up.
* (2) The command's assignment set is contained within the set of the overall
* program [c]. *)
Inductive Rinsensitive a (c : cmd) : valuation * cmd -> astate a -> Prop :=
| RInsensitive : forall v s c',
insensitive_compatible s v
-> assignmentsOf c' \subseteq assignmentsOf c
-> Rinsensitive c (v, c') s.
Local Hint Constructors Rinsensitive : core.
(* A helpful decomposition property for compatibility *)
Lemma insensitive_compatible_add : forall a (s : astate a) v x na n,
insensitive_compatible s v
-> a.(Represents) n na
-> insensitive_compatible (s $+ (x, na)) (v $+ (x, n)).
Proof.
unfold insensitive_compatible; simplify.
cases (x ==v x0); simplify; eauto.
invert H1; eauto.
Qed.
(* Interpretation of expressions is compatible with [Represents]. *)
Theorem absint_interp_ok : forall a, absint_sound a
-> forall (s : astate a) v e,
insensitive_compatible s v
-> a.(Represents) (interp e v) (absint_interp e s).
Proof.
induct e; simplify; eauto.
cases (s $? x); auto.
unfold insensitive_compatible in H0.
apply H0 in Heq.
invert Heq.
invert H1.
propositional.
rewrite H1.
assumption.
eauto.
Qed.
Local Hint Resolve insensitive_compatible_add absint_interp_ok : core.
(* With that, let's show that the flow-insensitive version of a program
* *simulates* the original program, w.r.t. any sound abstract
* interpretation. *)
Theorem insensitive_simulates : forall a (s : astate a) v c,
absint_sound a
-> insensitive_compatible s v
-> simulates (Rinsensitive (a := a) c) (trsys_of v c) (flow_insensitive_trsys s c).
Proof.
simplify.
constructor; simplify.
exists s; propositional.
subst.
constructor.
assumption.
sets.
invert H1.
cases st1'.
assert (assignmentsOf c0 \subseteq assignmentsOf c).
apply assignmentsOf_monotone in H2.
sets.
apply assignmentsOf_ok in H2.
propositional; subst.
eauto.
invert H5.
invert H2.
propositional; subst.
exists (merge_astate st2 (st2 $+ (x, absint_interp x0 st2))).
propositional; eauto.
econstructor; eauto.
unfold insensitive_compatible in *; simplify.
unfold merge_astate in *; simplify.
cases (st2 $? x1); simplify; try equality.
cases (x ==v x1); simplify; try equality.
invert H5; eauto 6.
rewrite Heq in H5.
invert H5; eauto.
apply H3 in Heq; propositional; eauto.
invert H5; propositional; eauto.
Qed.
(* Now we need a way to come up with an invariant, in the form of one unifying
* [astate]. This predicate formalizes one step from our informal recipe above:
* run every possible assignment on an [astate] in some order, at each step
* merging the new state with the old. *)
Inductive runAllAssignments a : set (var * arith) -> astate a -> astate a -> Prop :=
| RunDone : forall s,
runAllAssignments {} s s
| RunStep : forall x e xes s s',
runAllAssignments (constant xes) (merge_astate s (s $+ (x, absint_interp e s))) s'
-> runAllAssignments (constant ((x, e) :: xes)) s s'.
(* Finally, we can iterate that process to take an initial state to a final one
* that covers all possible executions. *)
Inductive iterate a (c : cmd) : astate a -> astate a -> Prop :=
(* If [runAllAssignments] has no effect, then we're done. *)
| IterateDone : forall s,
runAllAssignments (assignmentsOf c) s s
-> iterate c s s
(* Otherwise, use it to evolve one step and continue from there. *)
| IterateStep : forall s s' s'',
runAllAssignments (assignmentsOf c) s s'
-> iterate c s' s''
-> iterate c s s''.
(* What does it mean for [s2] to capture all concrete states captured by
* [s1]? *)
Definition subsumed a (s1 s2 : astate a) :=
forall x, match s1 $? x with
| None => s2 $? x = None
| Some xa1 =>
forall xa2, s2 $? x = Some xa2
-> forall n, a.(Represents) n xa1
-> a.(Represents) n xa2
end.
(* A few basic properties of subsumption *)
Theorem subsumed_refl : forall a (s : astate a),
subsumed s s.
Proof.
unfold subsumed; simplify.
cases (s $? x); equality.
Qed.
Local Hint Resolve subsumed_refl : core.
Lemma subsumed_use : forall a (s s' : astate a) x n t0 t,
s $? x = Some t0
-> subsumed s s'
-> s' $? x = Some t
-> Represents a n t0
-> Represents a n t.
Proof.
unfold subsumed; simplify.
specialize (H0 x).
rewrite H in H0.
eauto.
Qed.
Lemma subsumed_use_empty : forall a (s s' : astate a) x n t0 t,
s $? x = None
-> subsumed s s'
-> s' $? x = Some t
-> Represents a n t0
-> Represents a n t.
Proof.
unfold subsumed; simplify.
specialize (H0 x).
rewrite H in H0.
equality.
Qed.
Local Hint Resolve subsumed_use subsumed_use_empty : core.
Lemma subsumed_trans : forall a (s1 s2 s3 : astate a),
subsumed s1 s2
-> subsumed s2 s3
-> subsumed s1 s3.
Proof.
unfold subsumed; simplify.
specialize (H x); specialize (H0 x).
cases (s1 $? x); simplify.
cases (s2 $? x); eauto.
cases (s2 $? x); eauto.
equality.
Qed.
Lemma subsumed_merge_left : forall a, absint_sound a
-> forall s1 s2 : astate a,
subsumed s1 (merge_astate s1 s2).
Proof.
unfold subsumed, merge_astate; simplify.
cases (s1 $? x); trivial.
cases (s2 $? x); simplify; try equality.
invert H0; eauto.
Qed.
Local Hint Resolve subsumed_merge_left : core.
Lemma subsumed_merge_both : forall a, absint_sound a
-> absint_complete a
-> forall s1 s2 s : astate a,
subsumed s1 s
-> subsumed s2 s
-> subsumed (merge_astate s1 s2) s.
Proof.
unfold subsumed, merge_astate; simplify.
specialize (H1 x).
specialize (H2 x).
cases (s1 $? x); auto.
cases (s2 $? x); auto.
simplify.
unfold absint_complete in *; eauto.
Qed.
Lemma subsumed_add : forall a, absint_sound a
-> forall (s1 s2 : astate a) x v1 v2,
subsumed s1 s2
-> (forall n, a.(Represents) n v1 -> a.(Represents) n v2)
-> subsumed (s1 $+ (x, v1)) (s2 $+ (x, v2)).
Proof.
unfold subsumed; simplify.
cases (x ==v x0); subst; simplify; eauto.
invert H2; eauto.
specialize (H0 x0); eauto.
Qed.
Local Hint Resolve subsumed_add : core.
(* A key property of interpreting expressions abstractly: it's *monotone*, in
* the sense that moving up to a less precise [astate] leads to a less precise
* interpretation result. *)
Lemma absint_interp_monotone : forall a, absint_sound a
-> forall (s : astate a) e s' n,
a.(Represents) n (absint_interp e s)
-> subsumed s s'
-> a.(Represents) n (absint_interp e s').
Proof.
induct e; simplify; eauto.
cases (s' $? x); eauto.
cases (s $? x); eauto.
Qed.
Local Hint Resolve absint_interp_monotone : core.
(* [runAllAssignments] also respects the subsumption order, in going from inputs
* to outputs. *)
Lemma runAllAssignments_monotone : forall a, absint_sound a
-> forall xes (s s' : astate a),
runAllAssignments xes s s'
-> subsumed s s'.
Proof.
induct 2; simplify; eauto using subsumed_trans.
Qed.
Local Hint Resolve runAllAssignments_monotone : core.
(* The output of [runAllAssignments] subsumes every state reachable by running a
* single command. *)
Lemma runAllAssignments_ok : forall a, absint_sound a
-> forall xes (s s' : astate a),
runAllAssignments xes s s'
-> forall x e, (x, e) \in xes
-> subsumed (s $+ (x, absint_interp e s)) s'.
Proof.
induct 2; unfold Sets.In; simplify; propositional.
invert H2.
apply subsumed_trans with (s2 := merge_astate s (s $+ (x0, absint_interp e0 s))); eauto.
unfold subsumed, merge_astate; simplify.
cases (x0 ==v x); subst; simplify.
cases (s $? x); try equality.
invert H1; eauto.
cases (s $? x); try equality.
invert 1; eauto.
eapply subsumed_trans; try apply IHrunAllAssignments; eauto.
Qed.
(* Let's skip past this lemma to the theorem it supports. *)
Lemma iterate_ok' : forall a, absint_sound a
-> absint_complete a
-> forall c (s0 s s' : astate a),
iterate c s s'
-> subsumed s0 s
-> invariantFor (flow_insensitive_trsys s0 c) (fun s'' => subsumed s'' s').
Proof.
induct 3; simplify.
apply invariant_induction; simplify; propositional; subst; auto.
invert H4; auto.
eapply runAllAssignments_ok in H5; eauto.
apply subsumed_merge_both; auto.
unfold subsumed, merge_astate; simplify.
assert (subsumed s1 s) by assumption.
specialize (H4 x0).
specialize (H5 x0).
cases (x ==v x0); subst; simplify; eauto.
eauto using subsumed_trans.
Qed.
(* In a sound and complete abstract interpretation, [iterate] produces a genuine
* invariant for the flow-insensitive execution of a command, phrased in terms
* of subsumption. *)
Theorem iterate_ok : forall a, absint_sound a
-> absint_complete a
-> forall c (s0 s : astate a),
iterate c s0 s
-> invariantFor (flow_insensitive_trsys s0 c) (fun s' => subsumed s' s).
Proof.
eauto using iterate_ok'.
Qed.
(* Here's our corral of automatic tactics for the day. These do the boring
* parts of iteration for us. *)
Ltac insensitive_simpl := unfold merge_astate; simplify; repeat simplify_map.
Ltac runAllAssignments := repeat (constructor; insensitive_simpl).
Ltac iterate1 := eapply IterateStep; [ simplify; runAllAssignments | ].
Ltac iterate_done := eapply IterateDone; simplify; runAllAssignments.
(* Here's a good first program to try our analysis on. *)
Definition straightline :=
"a" <- 7;;
"b" <- "b" + 2 * "a";;
"a" <- "a" + "b".
(* A useful property, capturing the intended meaning of [Even] *)
Lemma final_even : forall (s s' : astate parity_absint) v x,
insensitive_compatible s v
-> subsumed s s'
-> s' $? x = Some Even
-> exists n, v $? x = Some n /\ isEven n.
Proof.
unfold insensitive_compatible, subsumed; simplify.
specialize (H x); specialize (H0 x).
cases (s $? x); simplify.
rewrite Heq in *.
assert (Some d = Some d) by equality.
apply H in H2.
first_order.
eapply H0 in H1.
invert H1.
eauto.
assumption.
specialize (H2 1).
invert H2; try (exfalso; eauto).
rewrite Heq in *.
equality.
Qed.
(* Now we can verify the example program, saying that, when the program
* finishes, variable ["b"] holds an even number. *)
Theorem straightline_even :
invariantFor (trsys_of ($0 $+ ("a", 0) $+ ("b", 0)) straightline)
(fun p => snd p = Skip
-> exists n, fst p $? "b" = Some n /\ isEven n).
Proof.
(* We start off much as with model checking: strengthening the invariant. *)
simplify.
eapply invariant_weaken.
(* Now we use simulation to switch to analyzing the flow-insensitive
* program. *)
unfold straightline.
eapply invariant_simulates.
apply insensitive_simulates with (s := $0 $+ ("a", Even) $+ ("b", Even))
(a := parity_absint).
apply parity_sound.
unfold insensitive_compatible; simplify.
cases (x ==v "b"); simplify.
invert H; eauto.
cases (x ==v "a"); simplify.
invert H; eauto.
equality.
(* Now we apply the general principle that iteration is a sound way to find an
* invariant for a flow-insensitive program. *)
apply iterate_ok.
apply parity_sound.
apply parity_complete.
(* Time to iterate! It only takes one round of run-all-commands to reach an
* [astate] that covers all reachable states. Watch the [astate] change as we
* iterate. *)
iterate1.
iterate_done.
(* Now the routine step of showing that our calculated invariant implies the
* original one from the theorem statement. *)
invert 1.
invert H0; simplify.
eapply final_even; eauto; simplify; equality.
Qed.
(* Everything still works with programs that have conditions. *)
Definition less_straightline :=
"a" <- 7;;
when "c" then
"b" <- "b" + 2 * "a"
else
"b" <- 18
done.
Theorem less_straightline_even :
invariantFor (trsys_of ($0 $+ ("a", 0) $+ ("b", 0)) less_straightline)
(fun p => snd p = Skip
-> exists n, fst p $? "b" = Some n /\ isEven n).
Proof.
simplify.
eapply invariant_weaken.
unfold less_straightline.
eapply invariant_simulates.
apply insensitive_simulates with (s := $0 $+ ("a", Even) $+ ("b", Even))
(a := parity_absint).
apply parity_sound.
unfold insensitive_compatible; simplify.
cases (x ==v "b"); simplify.
invert H; eauto.
cases (x ==v "a"); simplify.
invert H; eauto.
equality.
apply iterate_ok.
apply parity_sound.
apply parity_complete.
iterate1.
iterate_done.
invert 1.
invert H0; simplify.
eapply final_even; eauto; simplify; equality.
Qed.
(* It works for loops, too. *)
Definition loopy :=
"n" <- 100;;
"a" <- 0;;
while "n" loop
"a" <- "a" + "n";;
"n" <- "n" - 2
done.
Theorem loopy_even :
invariantFor (trsys_of ($0 $+ ("n", 0) $+ ("a", 0)) loopy)
(fun p => snd p = Skip
-> exists n, fst p $? "n" = Some n /\ isEven n).
Proof.
simplify.
eapply invariant_weaken.
unfold loopy.
eapply invariant_simulates.
apply insensitive_simulates with (s := $0 $+ ("n", Even) $+ ("a", Even))
(a := parity_absint).
apply parity_sound.
unfold insensitive_compatible; simplify.
cases (x ==v "a"); simplify.
invert H; eauto.
cases (x ==v "n"); simplify.
invert H; eauto.
equality.
apply iterate_ok.
apply parity_sound.
apply parity_complete.
(* This time, the original [astate] is already fully general. *)
iterate_done.
invert 1.
invert H0; simplify.
eapply final_even; eauto; simplify; equality.
Qed.
(** * Flow-sensitive analysis *)
(* Flow-insensitive parity analysis will get stuck on a program like this one,
* assuming, like before, that all variables start out initialized to zero. *)
Definition simple :=
"a" <- 7;;
"b" <- 8;;
"a" <- "a" + "b";;
"b" <- ("a" + 1) * ("b" + 1).
(* Unfortunately, some variables get assigned odd values in this program.
* However the parity of a variable is still uniquely determined, given
* *where we are in the program*! Flow-sensitive analysis attaches a different
* [astate] to every intermediate program, allowing us to handle such
* potentially tricky cases. We will be able to do a fully accurate
* flow-sensitive parity analysis on this program. *)
(* Here, we can get away with a simpler definition of compatibility than last
* time. *)
Definition compatible a (s : astate a) (v : valuation) : Prop :=
forall x xa, s $? x = Some xa
-> exists n, v $? x = Some n
/\ a.(Represents) n xa.
Lemma compatible_add : forall a (s : astate a) v x na n,
compatible s v
-> a.(Represents) n na
-> compatible (s $+ (x, na)) (v $+ (x, n)).
Proof.
unfold compatible; simplify.
cases (x ==v x0); simplify; eauto.
invert H1; eauto.
Qed.
Local Hint Resolve compatible_add : core.
(* A similar result follows about soundness of expression interpretation. *)
Theorem absint_interp_ok2 : forall a, absint_sound a
-> forall (s : astate a) v e,
compatible s v
-> a.(Represents) (interp e v) (absint_interp e s).
Proof.
induct e; simplify; eauto.
cases (s $? x); auto.
unfold compatible in H0.
apply H0 in Heq.
invert Heq.
propositional.
rewrite H2.
assumption.
Qed.
Local Hint Resolve absint_interp_ok2 : core.
(* The new type of invariant we calculate as we go: a map from commands to
* [astate]s. The idea is that we populate this map with the commands that show
* up as we step the program through full executions. *)
Definition astates (a : absint) := fmap cmd (astate a).
(* Here's an executable version of executing a command for a single step
* abstractly. The function is to return an [astates] capturing all the "places
* we could end up" after running [c]. A complication is the argument [wrap],
* which captures the fact that we are actually running [wrap c], which puts
* some additional context around the command we're focusing on. Note how
* [wrap] is extended in the first recursive call for [Sequence]. Also, this
* function returns [None] when [c] is [Skip], signalling that no step can be
* taken. *)
Fixpoint absint_step a (s : astate a) (c : cmd) (wrap : cmd -> cmd) : option (astates a) :=
match c with
| Skip => None
| Assign x e => Some ($0 $+ (wrap Skip, s $+ (x, absint_interp e s)))
| Sequence c1 c2 =>
match absint_step s c1 (fun c => wrap (Sequence c c2)) with
| None => Some ($0 $+ (wrap c2, s))
| v => v
end
| If _ then_ else_ => Some ($0 $+ (wrap then_, s) $+ (wrap else_, s))
| While e body => Some ($0 $+ (wrap Skip, s) $+ (wrap (Sequence body (While e body)), s))
(* We approximate mercilessly by ignoring the test expressions in
* conditional control flow! *)
end.
(* Below, it will be helpful to do case splits on whether two commands are
* equal. Here we automatically derive a proof that every pair of commands are
* equal or aren't. *)
Lemma command_equal : forall c1 c2 : cmd, sumbool (c1 = c2) (c1 <> c2).
Proof.
repeat decide equality.
Qed.
(* Key correctness property: every concrete step can be matched by one of the
* choices returned by [absint_step]. *)
Theorem absint_step_ok : forall a, absint_sound a
-> forall (s : astate a) v, compatible s v
-> forall c v' c', step (v, c) (v', c')
-> forall wrap, exists ss s', absint_step s c wrap = Some ss
/\ ss $? wrap c' = Some s'
/\ compatible s' v'.
Proof.
induct 2; simplify.
do 2 eexists; propositional.
simplify; equality.
eauto.
eapply IHstep in H0; auto.
invert H0.
invert H2.
propositional.
rewrite H2.
eauto.
do 2 eexists; propositional.
simplify; equality.
assumption.
do 2 eexists; propositional.
cases (command_equal (wrap c') (wrap else_)).
simplify; equality.
simplify; equality.
assumption.
do 2 eexists; propositional.
simplify; equality.
assumption.
do 2 eexists; propositional.
simplify; equality.
assumption.
do 2 eexists; propositional.
cases (command_equal (wrap Skip) (wrap (body;; while e loop body done))).
simplify; equality.
simplify; equality.
assumption.
Qed.
(* Now we can define a flow-sensitive, abstract transition-system version of a
* program. *)
Inductive abs_step a : astate a * cmd -> astate a * cmd -> Prop :=
| AbsStep : forall s c ss s' c',
absint_step s c (fun x => x) = Some ss
-> ss $? c' = Some s'
-> abs_step (s, c) (s', c').
Local Hint Constructors abs_step : core.
Definition absint_trsys a (c : cmd) := {|
Initial := {($0, c)};
Step := abs_step (a := a)
|}.
(* Now here's the pretty obvious simulation relation to use, to connect the
* abstract version to the concrete version. *)
Inductive Rabsint a : valuation * cmd -> astate a * cmd -> Prop :=
| RAbsint : forall v s c,
compatible s v
-> Rabsint (v, c) (s, c).
Local Hint Constructors abs_step Rabsint : core.
Theorem absint_simulates : forall a v c,
absint_sound a
-> simulates (Rabsint (a := a)) (trsys_of v c) (absint_trsys a c).
Proof.
simplify.
constructor; simplify.
exists ($0, c); propositional.
subst.
constructor.
unfold compatible.
simplify.
equality.
invert H0.
cases st1'.
eapply absint_step_ok in H1; eauto.
invert H1.
invert H0.
propositional.
eauto.
Qed.
(* As before, we will compute candidate invariants iteratively. This operation
* helps us merge states as before, except now it works at the level of
* [astates], which distinguish between commands. A difference from
* [merge_astate] is that, when one of the two inputs omits a mapping for some
* command, we just keep the other map's entry for that command. When both maps
* know about a command, we merge their values with [merge_astate]. *)
Definition merge_astates a : astates a -> astates a -> astates a :=
merge (fun x y =>
match x with
| None => y
| Some x' =>
match y with
| None => Some x'
| Some y' => Some (merge_astate x' y')
end
end).
(* This relation captures an iteration process where we consider steps from
* every command in an [astates], running [absint_step] to proceed onward from
* each point, using [merge_astates] to combine results. *)
Inductive oneStepClosure a : astates a -> astates a -> Prop :=
| OscNil :
oneStepClosure $0 $0
| OscCons : forall ss c s ss' ss'',
oneStepClosure ss ss'
-> match absint_step s c (fun x => x) with
| None => ss'
| Some ss'' => merge_astates ss'' ss'
end = ss''
-> oneStepClosure (ss $+ (c, s)) ss''.
(* A derivative of basic subsumption, lifted to flow-sensitive states *)
Definition subsumeds a (ss1 ss2 : astates a) :=
forall c s1, ss1 $? c = Some s1
-> exists s2, ss2 $? c = Some s2
/\ subsumed s1 s2.
(* A few basic facts about [subsumeds] *)
Theorem subsumeds_refl : forall a (ss : astates a),
subsumeds ss ss.
Proof.
unfold subsumeds; simplify; eauto.
Qed.
Local Hint Resolve subsumeds_refl : core.
Lemma subsumeds_add : forall a (ss1 ss2 : astates a) c s1 s2,
subsumeds ss1 ss2
-> subsumed s1 s2
-> subsumeds (ss1 $+ (c, s1)) (ss2 $+ (c, s2)).
Proof.
unfold subsumeds; simplify.
cases (command_equal c c0); subst; simplify; eauto.
invert H1; eauto.
Qed.
Local Hint Resolve subsumeds_add : core.
Lemma subsumeds_empty : forall a (ss : astates a),
subsumeds $0 ss.
Proof.
unfold subsumeds; simplify.
equality.
Qed.
Lemma subsumeds_add_left : forall a (ss1 ss2 : astates a) c s,
ss2 $? c = Some s
-> subsumeds ss1 ss2
-> subsumeds (ss1 $+ (c, s)) ss2.
Proof.
unfold subsumeds; simplify.
cases (command_equal c c0); subst; simplify; eauto.
invert H1; eauto.
Qed.
(* Now we just repeat [oneStepClosure] until finding a fixed point.
* Note the arguments to this predicate, called like
* [interpret ss worklist ss']. [ss] is the state we're starting from, and
* [ss'] is the final invariant we calculate. [worklist] includes only those
* command/[astate] pairs that we didn't already explore outward from. It would
* be pointless to continually explore from all the points we already
* processed! *)
Inductive interpret a : astates a -> astates a -> astates a -> Prop :=
(* One-step closure produces a state that is subsumed within the original, so
* we're done. *)
| InterpretDone : forall ss1 any ss2,
oneStepClosure ss1 ss2
-> subsumeds ss2 ss1
-> interpret ss1 any ss1
(* One-step closure from the worklist produces a frontier of new states.
* Continue interpreting from there, merging into [ss], but keeping only the new
* states for the worklist. *)
| InterpretStep : forall ss worklist ss' ss'',
oneStepClosure worklist ss'
-> interpret (merge_astates ss ss') ss' ss''
-> interpret ss worklist ss''.
(* One-step closure really does cover everything that one abstract step could
* do. *)
Lemma oneStepClosure_sound : forall a, absint_sound a
-> forall ss ss' : astates a, oneStepClosure ss ss'
-> forall c s s' c', ss $? c = Some s
-> abs_step (s, c) (s', c')
-> exists s'', ss' $? c' = Some s''
/\ subsumed s' s''.
Proof.
induct 2; simplify.
equality.
cases (command_equal c c0); subst; simplify.
invert H2.
invert H3.
rewrite H5.
unfold merge_astates; simplify.
rewrite H7.
cases (ss' $? c').
eexists; propositional.
unfold subsumed; simplify.
unfold merge_astate; simplify.
cases (s' $? x); try equality.
cases (a0 $? x); simplify; try equality.
invert H1; eauto.
eauto.
apply IHoneStepClosure in H3; auto.
invert H3; propositional.
cases (absint_step s c (fun x => x)); eauto.
unfold merge_astates; simplify.
rewrite H3.
cases (a0 $? c'); eauto.
eexists; propositional.
unfold subsumed; simplify.
unfold merge_astate; simplify.
specialize (H4 x0).
cases (s' $? x0).
cases (a1 $? x0); try equality.
cases (x $? x0); try equality.
invert 1.
eauto.
rewrite H4.
cases (a1 $? x0); equality.
Qed.
(* Changing [astate] preserves behavior of [absint_step] on [Skip]. *)
Lemma absint_step_monotone_None : forall a (s : astate a) c wrap,
absint_step s c wrap = None
-> forall s' : astate a, absint_step s' c wrap = None.
Proof.
induct c; simplify; try equality.
cases (absint_step s c1 (fun c => wrap (c;; c2))); equality.
Qed.
(* Moving to a less specific [astate] preserves behavior of [absint_step] on
* non-[Skip]. *)
Lemma absint_step_monotone : forall a, absint_sound a
-> forall (s : astate a) c wrap ss,
absint_step s c wrap = Some ss
-> forall s', subsumed s s'
-> exists ss', absint_step s' c wrap = Some ss'
/\ subsumeds ss ss'.
Proof.
induct c; simplify.
equality.
invert H0.
eexists; propositional.
eauto.
apply subsumeds_add; eauto.
cases (absint_step s c1 (fun c => wrap (c;; c2))).
invert H0.
eapply IHc1 in Heq; eauto.
invert Heq; propositional.
rewrite H2; eauto.
invert H0.
eapply absint_step_monotone_None in Heq; eauto.
rewrite Heq; eauto.
invert H0; eauto.
invert H0; eauto.
Qed.
(* [abs_step] outputs less specific states when its input gets less specific. *)
Lemma abs_step_monotone : forall a, absint_sound a
-> forall (s : astate a) c s' c',
abs_step (s, c) (s', c')
-> forall s1, subsumed s s1
-> exists s1', abs_step (s1, c) (s1', c')
/\ subsumed s' s1'.
Proof.
invert 2; simplify.
eapply absint_step_monotone in H4; eauto.
invert H4; propositional.
apply H3 in H6.
invert H6; propositional; eauto.
Qed.
(* Let's skip describing this lemma, to move to the main event below. *)
Lemma interpret_sound' : forall c a, absint_sound a
-> forall ss worklist ss' : astates a, interpret ss worklist ss'
-> ss $? c = Some $0
-> invariantFor (absint_trsys a c) (fun p => exists s, ss' $? snd p = Some s
/\ subsumed (fst p) s).
Proof.
induct 2; simplify; subst.
apply invariant_induction; simplify; propositional; subst; simplify; eauto.
invert H3; propositional.
cases s.
cases s'.
simplify.
eapply abs_step_monotone in H4; eauto.
invert H4; propositional.
eapply oneStepClosure_sound in H4; eauto.
invert H4; propositional.
eapply H1 in H4.
invert H4; propositional.
eauto using subsumed_trans.
apply IHinterpret.
unfold merge_astates; simplify.
rewrite H2.
cases (ss' $? c); trivial.
unfold merge_astate; simplify; equality.
Qed.
(* Iterating with a sound abstract interpretation produces an [astates] that
* gives an invariant for the flow-insensitive abstract system. *)
Theorem interpret_sound : forall c a (ss : astates a),
absint_sound a
-> interpret ($0 $+ (c, $0)) ($0 $+ (c, $0)) ss
-> invariantFor (absint_trsys a c) (fun p => exists s, ss $? snd p = Some s
/\ subsumed (fst p) s).
Proof.
simplify.
eapply interpret_sound'; eauto.
simplify; equality.
Qed.
(* Now two lemmas that we prove to help the [simplify] tactic reduce uses of
* [merge_astates]. *)
Lemma merge_astates_fok_parity : forall x : option (astate parity_absint),
match x with Some x' => Some x' | None => None end = x.
Proof.
simplify; cases x; equality.
Qed.
Lemma merge_astates_fok2_parity : forall x (y : option (astate parity_absint)),
match y with
| Some y' => Some (merge_astate x y')
| None => Some x
end = None -> False.
Proof.
simplify; cases y; equality.
Qed.
Local Hint Resolve merge_astates_fok_parity merge_astates_fok2_parity : core.
(* Our second corral of tactics for the day, automating iteration *)
Ltac interpret_simpl := unfold merge_astates, merge_astate;
simplify; repeat simplify_map.
Ltac oneStepClosure := apply OscNil
|| (eapply OscCons; [ oneStepClosure
| interpret_simpl; reflexivity ]).
Ltac interpret1 := eapply InterpretStep; [ oneStepClosure | interpret_simpl ].
Ltac interpret_done := eapply InterpretDone; [ oneStepClosure
| repeat (apply subsumeds_add_left || apply subsumeds_empty); (simplify; equality) ].
(* A flow-sensitive variant of [final_even] from before *)
Lemma final_even2 : forall (s s' : astate parity_absint) v x,
compatible s v
-> subsumed s s'
-> s' $? x = Some Even
-> exists n, v $? x = Some n /\ isEven n.
Proof.
unfold insensitive_compatible, subsumed; simplify.
specialize (H x); specialize (H0 x).
cases (s $? x); simplify.
rewrite Heq in *.
assert (Some d = Some d) by equality.
apply H in H2.
first_order.
eapply H0 in H1.
invert H1.
eauto.
assumption.
rewrite Heq in *.
equality.
Qed.
(* Finally, we can analyze that simple program we started with! *)
Theorem simple_even : forall v,
invariantFor (trsys_of v simple) (fun p => snd p = Skip
-> exists n, fst p $? "b" = Some n /\ isEven n).
Proof.
(* The beginning of the proof is just as before, using a flow-sensitive
* simulation in place of flow-insensitive. *)
simplify.
eapply invariant_weaken.
unfold simple.
eapply invariant_simulates.
apply absint_simulates with (a := parity_absint).
apply parity_sound.
apply interpret_sound.
apply parity_sound.
(* Time to iterate! Note how steps are modifying [interpret]'s first argument
* both by extending its domain and by generalizing the mappings of existing
* commands. *)
interpret1.
interpret1.
interpret1.
interpret1.
interpret1.
interpret1.
interpret1.
interpret_done.
invert 1.
first_order.
invert H0; simplify.
invert H1.
eapply final_even2; eauto; simplify; try equality.
Qed.
(* This tricky program gives ["b"] different parity on different branches, but ["a"]
* stays even. *)
Definition branchy :=
"a" <- 8;;
when "c" then
"b" <- "a" + 4;;
"a" <- "b"
else
"b" <- 7;;
"a" <- "b" + 3
done.
Theorem branchy_even : forall v,
invariantFor (trsys_of v branchy) (fun p => snd p = Skip
-> exists n, fst p $? "a" = Some n /\ isEven n).
Proof.
simplify.
eapply invariant_weaken.
unfold branchy.
eapply invariant_simulates.
apply absint_simulates with (a := parity_absint).
apply parity_sound.
apply interpret_sound.
apply parity_sound.
interpret1.
interpret1.
interpret1.
interpret1.
interpret1.
interpret1.
interpret_done.
invert 1.
first_order.
invert H0; simplify.
invert H1.
eapply final_even2; eauto; simplify; equality.
Qed.
(* Here's a simple loop to analyze for evenness. *)
Definition easy :=
"n" <- 10;;
while "n" loop
"n" <- "n" - 2
done.
Theorem easy_even : forall v,
invariantFor (trsys_of v easy) (fun p => snd p = Skip
-> exists n, fst p $? "n" = Some n /\ isEven n).
Proof.
simplify.
eapply invariant_weaken.
unfold easy.
eapply invariant_simulates.
apply absint_simulates with (a := parity_absint).
apply parity_sound.
apply interpret_sound.
apply parity_sound.
interpret1.
interpret1.
interpret1.
interpret_done.
invert 1.
first_order.
invert H0; simplify.
invert H1.
eapply final_even2; eauto; simplify; equality.
Qed.
(* We can also tackle the loop we handled with flow-insensitive analysis. *)
Theorem loopy_even_again : forall v,
invariantFor (trsys_of v loopy) (fun p => snd p = Skip
-> exists n, fst p $? "n" = Some n /\ isEven n).
Proof.
simplify.
eapply invariant_weaken.
unfold loopy.
eapply invariant_simulates.
apply absint_simulates with (a := parity_absint).
apply parity_sound.
apply interpret_sound.
apply parity_sound.
interpret1.
interpret1.
interpret1.
interpret1.
interpret1.
interpret1.
interpret1.
interpret_done.
invert 1.
first_order.
invert H0; simplify.
invert H1.
eapply final_even2; eauto; simplify; equality.
Qed.
(** * Another abstract interpretation: intervals *)
(* We might also want to track intervals of natural numbers that a variable's
* value must fall within. *)
Record interval := {
Lower : nat;
Upper : option nat
}.
Record interval_rep (n : nat) (i : interval) : Prop := {
BoundedBelow : i.(Lower) <= n;
BoundedAbove : match i.(Upper) with
| None => True
| Some n2 => n <= n2
end
}.
Local Hint Constructors interval_rep : core.
(* Test if an interval contains any values. *)
Definition impossible (x : interval) :=
match x.(Upper) with
| None => false
| Some u => if x.(Lower) <=? u then false else true
end.
(* To join two intervals, we check explicitly if either one is impossible.
* Otherwise, we might join an impossible interval with a possible interval and
* get a different, less precise possible interval, which can't be the *least*
* upper bound of the two. Rather, that least bound would need to be the
* original possible interval. Similarly, without this check, we could join two
* impossible intervals and get a possible interval, when the least upper bound
* must be impossible. *)
Definition interval_join (x y : interval) :=
if impossible x then y
else if impossible y then x
else {| Lower := min x.(Lower) y.(Lower);
Upper := match x.(Upper) with
| None => None
| Some x2 =>
match y.(Upper) with
| None => None
| Some y2 => Some (max x2 y2)
end
end |}.
Lemma interval_join_impossible1 : forall x y,
impossible x = true
-> interval_join x y = y.
Proof.
unfold interval_join; simplify.
rewrite H; equality.
Qed.
Lemma interval_join_impossible2 : forall x y,
impossible x = false
-> impossible y = true
-> interval_join x y = x.
Proof.
unfold interval_join; simplify.
rewrite H, H0; equality.
Qed.
Lemma interval_join_possible : forall x y,
impossible x = false
-> impossible y = false
-> interval_join x y = {| Lower := min x.(Lower) y.(Lower);
Upper := match x.(Upper) with
| None => None
| Some x2 =>
match y.(Upper) with
| None => None
| Some y2 => Some (max x2 y2)
end
end |}.
Proof.
unfold interval_join; simplify.
rewrite H, H0; equality.
Qed.
Local Hint Rewrite interval_join_impossible1 interval_join_impossible2 interval_join_possible
using assumption.
(* We'll reuse this function to define both addition and multiplication.
* [f] gets filled in with either underlying operation. *)
Definition interval_combine (f : nat -> nat -> nat) (x y : interval) :=
if impossible x || impossible y then
{| Lower := 1; Upper := Some 0 |}
(* Why this special case? Otherwise, we might encounter the
* counterintuitive result of adding an impossible interval to a possible
* one to get a possible one. Then we'd continue exploring out from the new
* interval, wasting our time when, actually, that state is inherently
* contradictory. Note that we return a particular impossible interval in
* this case. *)
else {| Lower := f x.(Lower) y.(Lower);
Upper := match x.(Upper) with
| None => None
| Some x2 =>
match y.(Upper) with
| None => None
| Some y2 => Some (f x2 y2)
end
end |}.
Lemma interval_combine_possible_fwd : forall f x y,
impossible x = false
-> impossible y = false
-> interval_combine f x y
= {| Lower := f x.(Lower) y.(Lower);
Upper := match x.(Upper) with
| None => None
| Some x2 =>
match y.(Upper) with
| None => None
| Some y2 => Some (f x2 y2)
end
end |}.
Proof.
unfold interval_combine; simplify.
rewrite H, H0; simplify; equality.
Qed.
Lemma interval_combine_possible_bwd : forall f x y,
impossible (interval_combine f x y) = false
-> impossible x = false /\ impossible y = false.
Proof.
unfold interval_combine; simplify.
cases (impossible x); simplify.
unfold impossible in H; simplify; equality.
cases (impossible y); simplify; equality.
Qed.
Local Hint Rewrite interval_combine_possible_fwd using assumption.
Definition interval_subtract (x y : interval) :=
if impossible x || impossible y then
{| Lower := 1; Upper := Some 0 |}
else
{| Lower := match y.(Upper) with
| None => 0
| Some y2 => x.(Lower) - y2
end;
Upper := match x.(Upper) with
| None => None
| Some x2 => Some (x2 - y.(Lower))
end |}.
Lemma interval_subtract_possible_fwd : forall x y,
impossible x = false
-> impossible y = false
-> interval_subtract x y
= {| Lower := match y.(Upper) with
| None => 0
| Some y2 => x.(Lower) - y2
end;
Upper := match x.(Upper) with
| None => None
| Some x2 => Some (x2 - y.(Lower))
end |}.
Proof.
unfold interval_subtract; simplify.
rewrite H, H0; simplify; equality.
Qed.
Lemma interval_subtract_possible_bwd : forall x y,
impossible (interval_subtract x y) = false
-> impossible x = false /\ impossible y = false.
Proof.
unfold interval_subtract; simplify.
cases (impossible x); simplify.
unfold impossible in H; simplify; equality.
cases (impossible y); simplify; equality.
Qed.
Local Hint Rewrite interval_subtract_possible_fwd using assumption.
Definition interval_absint := {|
Top := {| Lower := 0; Upper := None |};
Constant := fun n => {| Lower := n;
Upper := Some n |};
Add := interval_combine plus;
Subtract := interval_subtract;
Multiply := interval_combine mult;
Join := interval_join;
Represents := interval_rep
|}.
Local Hint Resolve mult_le_compat : core. (* Theorem from Coq standard library *)
(* When one interval implies another, and the first is possible, we can deduce
* arithmetic relationships betwen their respective bounds. *)
Lemma interval_imply : forall k1 k2 u1 u2,
impossible {| Lower := k1; Upper := u1 |} = false
-> (forall n,
interval_rep n {| Lower := k1; Upper := u1 |}
-> interval_rep n {| Lower := k2; Upper := u2 |})
-> k1 >= k2
/\ match u2 with
| None => True
| Some u2' => match u1 with
| None => False
| Some u1' => u1' <= u2'
end
end
/\ impossible {| Lower := k2; Upper := u2 |} = false.
Proof.
simplify.
assert (k1 >= k2 \/ k1 < k2) by linear_arithmetic.
invert H1.
propositional.
cases u2; auto.
cases u1.
assert (n >= n0 \/ n < n0) by linear_arithmetic.
propositional.
exfalso.
assert (interval_rep n0 {| Lower := k2; Upper := Some n |}).
apply H0.
constructor; simplify; auto.
unfold impossible in H; simplify.
cases (k1 <=? n0); equality.
invert H1; simplify; auto.
linear_arithmetic.
assert (interval_rep (S (max k1 n)) {| Lower := k2; Upper := Some n |}).
apply H0.
constructor; simplify; auto.
linear_arithmetic.
invert H1; simplify; linear_arithmetic.
unfold impossible; simplify.
cases u2; try equality.
cases (k2 <=? n); try equality; try linear_arithmetic.
exfalso.
assert (interval_rep k1 {| Lower := k2; Upper := Some n |}).
apply H0.
unfold impossible in H; simplify.
cases u1.
cases (k1 <=? n0); try equality.
constructor; simplify; linear_arithmetic.
constructor; simplify; auto; linear_arithmetic.
invert H1; simplify.
linear_arithmetic.
exfalso.
assert (interval_rep k1 {| Lower := k2; Upper := u2 |}).
apply H0.
unfold impossible in H; simplify.
cases u1.
cases (k1 <=? n); try equality.
constructor; simplify; linear_arithmetic.
constructor; simplify; auto; linear_arithmetic.
invert H1; simplify; try linear_arithmetic.
Qed.
Lemma impossible_sound : forall n x,
interval_rep n x
-> impossible x = true
-> False.
Proof.
invert 1.
unfold impossible.
cases (Upper x); simplify; try equality.
cases (Lower x <=? n0); try equality.
linear_arithmetic.
Qed.
Lemma mult_bound1 : forall a b n a' b',
a' * b' <= n
-> a <= a'
-> b <= b'
-> a * b <= n.
Proof.
simplify.
transitivity (a' * b'); eauto.
Qed.
Lemma mult_bound2 : forall a b n a' b',
n <= a' * b'
-> a' <= a
-> b' <= b
-> n <= a * b.
Proof.
simplify.
transitivity (a' * b'); eauto.
Qed.
Local Hint Immediate mult_bound1 mult_bound2 : core.
(* Now a bruiser of an automated proof, covering all the cases to show that this
* abstraction is sound. *)
Theorem interval_sound : absint_sound interval_absint.
Proof.
constructor; simplify; eauto;
repeat match goal with
| [ x : interval |- _ ] => cases x
end; simplify;
(repeat match goal with
| [ _ : interval_rep _ (interval_join ?x ?y) |- _ ] =>
cases (impossible x); simplify; eauto;
cases (impossible y); simplify; eauto
| [ H : interval_rep _ ?x |- _ ] =>
cases (impossible x); [ exfalso; solve [ eauto using impossible_sound ] | invert H ]
| [ H : impossible _ = _ |- _ ] => apply interval_combine_possible_bwd in H; propositional; simplify
| [ H : impossible _ = _ |- _ ] => apply interval_subtract_possible_bwd in H; propositional; simplify
| [ H : forall x, _ |- _ ] => apply interval_imply in H; auto
| [ |- context[interval_join ?x _] ] =>
match goal with
| [ _ : impossible x = _ |- _ ] => fail 1
| _ => cases (impossible x); simplify
end
| [ |- context[interval_join _ ?x] ] =>
match goal with
| [ _ : impossible x = _ |- _ ] => fail 1
| _ => cases (impossible x); simplify
end
end; propositional; try constructor; simplify;
repeat match goal with
| [ H : Some _ = Some _ |- _] => invert H
| [ _ : context[match ?X with _ => _ end] |- _ ] => cases X
| [ |- context[match ?X with _ => _ end] ] => cases X
end; eauto; try equality; try linear_arithmetic).
Qed.
(* As before, two helpful lemmas to feed the book library's automation about
* [merge] *)
Lemma merge_astates_fok_interval : forall x : option (astate interval_absint),
match x with Some x' => Some x' | None => None end = x.
Proof.
simplify; cases x; equality.
Qed.
Lemma merge_astates_fok2_interval : forall x (y : option (astate interval_absint)),
match y with
| Some y' => Some (merge_astate x y')
| None => Some x
end = None -> False.
Proof.
simplify; cases y; equality.
Qed.
Local Hint Resolve merge_astates_fok_interval merge_astates_fok2_interval : core.
(* The same kind of lemma we've proved for finishing off each proof by abstract
* interpretation so far *)
Lemma final_upper : forall (s s' : astate interval_absint) v x l u,
compatible s v
-> subsumed s s'
-> s' $? x = Some {| Lower := l; Upper := Some u |}
-> exists n, v $? x = Some n /\ n <= u.
Proof.
unfold compatible, subsumed; simplify.
specialize (H x); specialize (H0 x).
cases (s $? x); simplify.
rewrite Heq in *.
assert (Some d = Some d) by equality.
apply H in H2.
first_order.
rewrite Heq in *.
equality.
Qed.
Local Hint Rewrite min_l min_r max_l max_r using linear_arithmetic.
(* Let's see which intervals are computed for this program. *)
Definition interval_test :=
"a" <- 6;;
"b" <- 7;;
when "c" then
"a" <- "a" + "b"
else
"b" <- "a" * "b"
done.
Theorem interval_test_ok : forall v,
invariantFor (trsys_of v interval_test)
(fun p => snd p = Skip
-> exists n, fst p $? "b" = Some n /\ n <= 42).
Proof.
simplify.
eapply invariant_weaken.
unfold interval_test.
eapply invariant_simulates.
apply absint_simulates with (a := interval_absint).
apply interval_sound.
apply interpret_sound.
apply interval_sound.
interpret1.
interpret1.
interpret1.
interpret1.
interpret1.
interpret1.
unfold interval_join, interval_combine; simplify.
interpret_done.
invert 1.
first_order.
invert H0; simplify.
invert H1.
eapply final_upper; eauto; simplify; equality.
Qed.
(** * Widening *)
(* Imagine analyzing this program with the previous abstract interpretation. *)
Definition ge7 :=
"a" <- 7;;
while "a" loop
"a" <- "a" + 3
done.
(* The inferred upper bound for ["a"] will keep going up forever, and the
* iteration will never terminate! An idea called *widening* will save us,
* where for certain join operations we intentionally return an element less
* precise than we really could. For this example, let's say that when a new
* interval has a higher upper bound than an old interval, we push the upper
* bound to infinity for the joined interval. Now there are no infinite
* sequences of joins where the result is different each time. *)
(* It turns out that this operation is used so that, when combining "old" and
* "new" elements, [x] is always old and [y] is always new. *)
Definition interval_widen (x y : interval) :=
if impossible x then y
else if impossible y then x
else {| Lower := if x.(Lower) <=? y.(Lower) then x.(Lower) else 0;
Upper := match x.(Upper) with
| None => None
| Some x2 =>
match y.(Upper) with
| None => None
| Some y2 => if y2 <=? x2 then Some x2 else None
end
end |}.
Lemma interval_widen_impossible1 : forall x y,
impossible x = true
-> interval_widen x y = y.
Proof.
unfold interval_widen; simplify.
rewrite H; equality.
Qed.
Lemma interval_widen_impossible2 : forall x y,
impossible x = false
-> impossible y = true
-> interval_widen x y = x.
Proof.
unfold interval_widen; simplify.
rewrite H, H0; equality.
Qed.
Lemma interval_widen_possible : forall x y,
impossible x = false
-> impossible y = false
-> interval_widen x y = {| Lower := if x.(Lower) <=? y.(Lower) then x.(Lower) else 0;
Upper := match x.(Upper) with
| None => None
| Some x2 =>
match y.(Upper) with
| None => None
| Some y2 => if y2 <=? x2 then Some x2 else None
end
end |}.
Proof.
unfold interval_widen; simplify.
rewrite H, H0; equality.
Qed.
Local Hint Rewrite interval_widen_impossible1 interval_widen_impossible2 interval_widen_possible
using assumption.
Definition interval_absint_widening := {|
Top := {| Lower := 0; Upper := None |};
Constant := fun n => {| Lower := n;
Upper := Some n |};
Add := interval_combine plus;
Subtract := interval_subtract;
Multiply := interval_combine mult;
Join := interval_widen;
Represents := interval_rep
|}.
Theorem interval_widening_sound : absint_sound interval_absint_widening.
Proof.
constructor; simplify; eauto;
repeat match goal with
| [ x : interval |- _ ] => cases x
end; simplify;
(repeat match goal with
| [ _ : interval_rep _ (interval_widen ?x ?y) |- _ ] =>
cases (impossible x); simplify; eauto;
cases (impossible y); simplify; eauto
| [ H : interval_rep _ ?x |- _ ] =>
cases (impossible x); [ exfalso; solve [ eauto using impossible_sound ] | invert H ]
| [ H : impossible _ = _ |- _ ] => apply interval_combine_possible_bwd in H; propositional; simplify
| [ H : impossible _ = _ |- _ ] => apply interval_subtract_possible_bwd in H; propositional; simplify
| [ H : forall x, _ |- _ ] => apply interval_imply in H; auto
| [ |- context[interval_widen ?x _] ] =>
match goal with
| [ _ : impossible x = _ |- _ ] => fail 1
| _ => cases (impossible x); simplify
end
| [ |- context[interval_widen _ ?x] ] =>
match goal with
| [ _ : impossible x = _ |- _ ] => fail 1
| _ => cases (impossible x); simplify
end
end; propositional; try constructor; simplify;
repeat match goal with
| [ H : Some _ = Some _ |- _] => invert H
| [ _ : context[match ?X with _ => _ end] |- _ ] => cases X
| [ |- context[match ?X with _ => _ end] ] => cases X
end; eauto; try equality; linear_arithmetic).
Qed.
Lemma merge_astates_fok_interval_widening : forall x : option (astate interval_absint_widening),
match x with Some x' => Some x' | None => None end = x.
Proof.
simplify; cases x; equality.
Qed.
Lemma merge_astates_fok2_interval_widening : forall x (y : option (astate interval_absint_widening)),
match y with
| Some y' => Some (merge_astate x y')
| None => Some x
end = None -> False.
Proof.
simplify; cases y; equality.
Qed.
Local Hint Resolve merge_astates_fok_interval_widening merge_astates_fok2_interval_widening : core.
Lemma final_lower_widening : forall (s s' : astate interval_absint_widening) v x l,
compatible s v
-> subsumed s s'
-> s' $? x = Some {| Lower := l; Upper := None |}
-> exists n, v $? x = Some n /\ n >= l.
Proof.
unfold compatible, subsumed; simplify.
specialize (H x); specialize (H0 x).
cases (s $? x); simplify.
rewrite Heq in *.
assert (Some d = Some d) by equality.
apply H in H2.
first_order.
rewrite Heq in *.
equality.
Qed.
(* Now, behold our quite-terminating analysis of this infinite-looping
* program! *)
Theorem ge7_ok : forall v,
invariantFor (trsys_of v ge7)
(fun p => snd p = (while "a" loop "a" <- "a" + 3 done)
-> exists n, fst p $? "a" = Some n /\ n >= 7).
Proof.
simplify.
eapply invariant_weaken.
unfold ge7.
eapply invariant_simulates.
apply absint_simulates with (a := interval_absint_widening).
apply interval_widening_sound.
apply interpret_sound.
apply interval_widening_sound.
interpret1.
interpret1.
interpret1.
interpret1.
unfold interval_combine, interval_widen; simplify.
interpret1.
unfold interval_combine, interval_widen; simplify.
interpret1.
unfold interval_combine, interval_widen; simplify.
interpret_done.
invert 1.
first_order.
invert H0; simplify.
invert H1.
eapply final_lower_widening; eauto; simplify; equality.
Qed.