Huayang Guo 1,2 , Ming Wu 1 , Lidong Zhou 1 , Gang Hu 1,2 , Junfeng Yang 2 , Lintao Zhang 1 1...

Huayang Guo1,2, Ming Wu1, Lidong Zhou1, Gang Hu1,2, Junfeng Yang2, Lintao Zhang1

1Microsoft Research Asia2Columbia University

Practical Software Model Checking via Dynamic Interface Reduction

Building reliable distributed systems is hardMachine failureMessage lostMessage reorderThread interleaving

Non-determinism leads to tricky bugs

Crash

Thr1Thr2

Async I/O

Implementation-level software model checkersMaceMC (NSDI’07), MoDist (NSDI’09)Directly check implementationsNo need to construct abstract model beforehand

Crash

Thr1Thr2

Async I/O

State Space Explorer

…

State space explosion

MPS: Product-level PaxosNever fully explored 3

nodes34 years for MoDist

…

Dynamic Interface Reduction (DIR)Effective

34 years 18 hours (Fully explored MPS-3)Exponential Reduction:

100K : 1 states for MPS and Berkeley DB w/ replicationAutomatic, no manual efforts requiredProvably sound and completeEasy to integrate with legacy MCsDeMeter: DIR with MoDist and MaceMC

MC specific modifications: ≤ 1k loc

5

OutlineInsightChallengesDynamic Interface ReductionEvaluationRelated workConclusion

6

InsightDistributed systems: componentized

Local non-determinism isolated Empirically, 99.9% do not propagate (Berkeley DB)

Previous work:Check components together|m1|*|m2|*|m3|

DIR:Check components separately|m1|+|m2|+|m3|

7

Thr1Thr2

Async I/O

Thr3Thr4

Interface behavior

m1 m2

m3

Challenges and SolutionsHow to discover/construct interface

behavior of component?Manually or statically construct interface process

Impractical for complex software systemHow to guarantee

Completeness: find all bugsSoundness: no false positives

Our solution: Dynamically discover interface behaviorsCombine discovered interface behaviorsTrack dependencies

8

DIR Overview

9

Global Explorer

Explore global interface behaviors

Local Explorers

Component1

Component2

Component3Explore

local states

Explore local

states

Explore local

states

Interface behavior Interface

behaviorInterface behavior

Interface behavior

Interface behavior

Interface behavior

Example

10

Sum

Ckpt

Client Primary/Secondary //Main thread //Checkpoint thread if (Choose(2)==0){ while (n=Recv()) { Lock(); Send(P,1); Lock(); Log(total); Send(P,2); total+=n; Unlock();} else { Unlock(); Send(P,1); if (isPrimary) Send(P,3); Send(S,n); } }  

Client Primary

Secondary

Produce initial global trace

11

Client(Cli) Primary/Secondary(Pri/Sec) //Main thread //Checkpoint thread if (Choose(2)==0){ while (n=Recv()) { Lock(); Send(P,1); Lock(); Log(total); Ckpt Send(P,2); total+=n; Sum Unlock();} else { Unlock(); Send(P,1); if (isPrimary) Send(P,3); Send(S,n); } }  

Cli.Choose(2) = 0Cli.Send(Pri, 1)Pri.Recv(Cli, 1)Pri.CkptPri.SumPri.Send(Sec, 1)Sec.Recv(Pri, 1)Sec.CkptSec.SumCli.Send(Pri, 2)Pri.Recv(Cli, 2)Pri.SumPri.Send(Sec, 2)Sec.Recv(Pri, 2)Sec.Sum

Global explorer

-- Produce initial global trace.

Construct message trace

12

Client(Cli) Primary/Secondary(Pri/Sec) //Main thread //Checkpoint thread if (Choose(2)==0){ while (n=Recv()) { Lock(); Send(P,1); Lock(); Log(total); Ckpt Send(P,2); total+=n; Sum Unlock();} else { Unlock(); Send(P,1); if (isPrimary) Send(P,3); Send(S,n); } }  

Cli.Choose(2) = 0Cli.Send(Pri, 1)Pri.Recv(Cli, 1)Pri.CkptPri.SumPri.Send(Sec, 1)Sec.Recv(Pri, 1)Sec.CkptSec.SumCli.Send(Pri, 2)Pri.Recv(Cli, 2)Pri.SumPri.Send(Sec, 2)Sec.Recv(Pri, 2)Sec.Sum

Global explorer

-- Bold statements form the message trace.

Project message trace

13

Client(Cli) Primary/Secondary(Pri/Sec) //Main thread //Checkpoint thread if (Choose(2)==0){ while (n=Recv()) { Lock(); Send(P,1); Lock(); Log(total); Ckpt Send(P,2); total+=n; Sum Unlock();} else { Unlock(); Send(P,1); if (isPrimary) Send(P,3); Send(S,n); } }  

Cli.Choose(2) = 0Cli.Send(Pri, 1)Pri.Recv(Cli, 1)Pri.CkptPri.SumPri.Send(Sec, 1)Sec.Recv(Pri, 1)Sec.CkptSec.SumCli.Send(Pri, 2)Pri.Recv(Cli, 2)Pri.SumPri.Send(Sec, 2)Sec.Recv(Pri, 2)Sec.Sum

Global explorer

-- Project global message trace to components.

Pri.Recv(Cli, 1)Pri.Send(Sec, 1)Pri.Recv(Cli, 2)Pri.Send(Sec, 2)

Primary

Sec.Recv(Pri, 1)Sec.Recv(Pri, 2)

Secondary

Cli.Send(Pri, 1)Cli.Send(Pri, 2)

Client

Local explorer for Primary

14

Client(Cli) Primary/Secondary(Pri/Sec) //Main thread //Checkpoint thread if (Choose(2)==0){ while (n=Recv()) { Lock(); Send(P,1); Lock(); Log(total); Ckpt Send(P,2); total+=n; Sum Unlock();} else { Unlock(); Send(P,1); if (isPrimary) Send(P,3); Send(S,n); } }  

Cli.Choose(2) = 0Cli.Send(Pri, 1)Pri.Recv(Cli, 1)Pri.CkptPri.SumPri.Send(Sec, 1)Sec.Recv(Pri, 1)Sec.CkptSec.SumCli.Send(Pri, 2)Pri.Recv(Cli, 2)Pri.SumPri.Send(Sec, 2)Sec.Recv(Pri, 2)Sec.Sum

Global explorer

Pri.Recv(Cli, 1)

Pri.Send(Sec, 1)Pri.Recv(Cli, 2)

Pri.Send(Sec, 2)

Local explorer for Primary

Pri.Ckpt

Pri.SumPri.Ckpt

Pri.Ckpt

Pri.SumPri.Sum

Pri.Sum

Pri.Recv(Cli, 1)

Pri.Send(Sec, 1)Pri.Recv(Cli, 2)

Pri.Send(Sec, 2)

Pri.Sum

Pri.SumPri.Recv(Cli, 1)

Pri.Send(Sec, 1)Pri.Recv(Cli, 2)

Pri.Send(Sec, 2)

Local explorer for Client

15

Client(Cli) Primary/Secondary(Pri/Sec) //Main thread //Checkpoint thread if (Choose(2)==0){ while (n=Recv()) { Lock(); Send(P,1); Lock(); Log(total); Ckpt Send(P,2); total+=n; Sum Unlock();} else { Unlock(); Send(P,1); if (isPrimary) Send(P,3); Send(S,n); } }  

Cli.Choose(2) = 0Cli.Send(Pri, 1)Pri.Recv(Cli, 1)Pri.CkptPri.SumPri.Send(Sec, 1)Sec.Recv(Pri, 1)Sec.CkptSec.SumCli.Send(Pri, 2)Pri.Recv(Cli, 2)Pri.SumPri.Send(Sec, 2)Sec.Recv(Pri, 2)Sec.Sum

Global explorer

Cli.Send(Pri, 1)Cli.Send(Pri, 2)

Local explorer for Client

Cli.Choose(2) = 0Cli.Send(Pri, 1)Cli.Send(Pri, 3)

Cli.Choose(2) = 1

BranchingTrace

Composition

16

Client(Cli) Primary/Secondary(Pri/Sec) //Main thread //Checkpoint thread if (Choose(2)==0){ while (n=Recv()) { Lock(); Send(P,1); Lock(); Log(total); Ckpt Send(P,2); total+=n; Sum Unlock();} else { Unlock(); Send(P,1); if (isPrimary) Send(P,3); Send(S,n); } }  

Cli.Choose(2) = 0Cli.Send(Pri, 1)Pri.Recv(Cli, 1)Pri.CkptPri.SumPri.Send(Sec, 1)Sec.Recv(Pri, 1)Sec.CkptSec.SumCli.Send(Pri, 2)Pri.Recv(Cli, 2)Pri.SumPri.Send(Sec, 2)Sec.Recv(Pri, 2)Sec.Sum

Global explorer

Cli.Send(Pri, 1)Pri.Recv(Cli, 1)Pri.Send(Sec, 1)Sec.Recv(Pri, 1)Cli.Send(Pri, 2)Pri.Recv(Cli, 2)Pri.Send(Sec, 2)Sec.Recv(Pri, 2)

Existing global message trace:

Cli.Send(Pri, 1)

Cli.Send(Pri, 3)

Branching local message trace:

dependence

==

Composition

17

Client(Cli) Primary/Secondary(Pri/Sec) //Main thread //Checkpoint thread if (Choose(2)==0){ while (n=Recv()) { Lock(); Send(P,1); Lock(); Log(total); Ckpt Send(P,2); total+=n; Sum Unlock();} else { Unlock(); Send(P,1); if (isPrimary) Send(P,3); Send(S,n); } }  

Cli.Choose(2) = 0Cli.Send(Pri, 1)Pri.Recv(Cli, 1)Pri.CkptPri.SumPri.Send(Sec, 1)Sec.Recv(Pri, 1)Sec.CkptSec.SumCli.Send(Pri, 2)Pri.Recv(Cli, 2)Pri.SumPri.Send(Sec, 2)Sec.Recv(Pri, 2)Sec.Sum

Global explorer

Cli.Send(Pri, 1)Pri.Recv(Cli, 1)Pri.Send(Sec, 1)Sec.Recv(Pri, 1)Cli.Send(Pri, 3)

New global message trace:

EvaluationExperiment Setup

DEMETER-MODIST: MPS, an deployed product implementation of Paxos Berkeley DB (BDB)

DEMETER-MACEMC: Chord, peer-to-peer DHT implementation

18

EvaluationEffectiveness of Dynamic Interface ReductionApp-n : n is the number of distributed

nodes

Reduction Ratio: |Mw/o DIR| / |Mw DIR|

19

App MPS-2 MPS-3 BDB-2 BDB-3 Chord-2 Chord-3

Reduction 488 542944 277 278481 19 1587

Speedup 153 217178

50 44203 7 547x1000 x1000 x100

DeMeter-Modist DeMeter-MaceMC

Related WorkCompositional model checking

E.M.Clarke et. al. (Symposium on Logic in Computer Science 1989)

Partial-order reductionC.Flanagan and P.Godefroid (POPL’05)

Model checking network systemR.Guerraoui and M.Yabandeh (NSDI’11)

20

ConclusionDistributed systems componentized

Local non-determinism does not propagate

Dynamic interface reductionEffective, automatic, easyProvably sound and complete

DeMeter – enable DIR for legacy MCs21