BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Roland Meyer

Roland Meyer contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Logic in Computer ScienceData Structures and AlgorithmsDistributed, Parallel, and Cluster ComputingFormal Languages and Automata TheoryOperating SystemsProgramming Languages

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 17 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
4works
0followers
6topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

4 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Safety Verification of Parameterized Systems under Release-Acquire

We study the safety verification problem for parameterized systems under the release-acquire (RA) semantics. It has been shown that the problem is intractable for systems with unlimited access to atomic compare-and-swap (CAS) instructions. We show that, from a verification perspective where approximate results help, this is overly pessimistic. We study parameterized systems consisting of an unbounded number of environment threads executing identical but CAS-free programs and a fixed number of distinguished threads that are unrestricted. Our first contribution is a new semantics that considerably simplifies RA but is still equivalent for the above systems as far as safety verification is concerned. We apply this (general) result to two subclasses of our model. We show that safety verification is only \pspace-complete for the bounded model checking problem where the distinguished threads are loop-free. Interestingly, we can still afford the unbounded environment. We show that the complexity jumps to \nexp-complete for thread-modular verification where an unrestricted distinguished `ego' thread interacts with an environment of CAS-free threads plus loop-free distinguished threads (as in the earlier setting). Besides the usefulness for verification, the results are strong in that they delineate the tractability border for an established semantics.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Verifying and Optimizing Compact NUMA-Aware Locks on Weak Memory Models

Developing concurrent software is challenging, especially if it has to run on modern architectures with Weak Memory Models (WMMs) such as ARMv8, Power, or RISC-V. For the sake of performance, WMMs allow hardware and compilers to aggressively reorder memory accesses. To guarantee correctness, developers have to carefully place memory barriers in the code to enforce ordering among critical memory operations. While WMM architectures are growing in popularity, identifying the necessary and sufficient barriers of complex synchronization primitives is notoriously difficult. Unfortunately, publications often consider barriers to be just implementation details and omit them. In this technical note, we report our efforts in verifying the correctness of the Compact NUMA-Aware (CNA) lock algorithm on WMMs. The CNA lock is of special interest because it has been proposed as a new slowpath for Linux qspinlock, the main spinlock in Linux. Besides determining a correct and efficient set of barriers for the original CNA algorithm on WMMs, we investigate the correctness of Linux qspinlock and the latest Linux CNA patch (v15) on the memory models LKMM, ARMv8, and Power. Surprisingly, we have found that Linux qspinlock and, consequently, Linux CNA are incorrect according to LKMM, but are still correct when compiled to ARMv8 or Power.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Fine-Grained Complexity of Safety Verification

We study the fine-grained complexity of Leader Contributor Reachability (LCR) and Bounded-Stage Reachability (BSR), two variants of the safety verification problem for shared memory concurrent programs. For both problems, the memory is a single variable over a finite data domain. Our contributions are new verification algorithms and lower bounds. The latter are based on the Exponential Time Hypothesis (ETH), the problem Set Cover, and cross-compositions. LCR is the question whether a designated leader thread can reach an unsafe state when interacting with a certain number of equal contributor threads. We suggest two parameterizations: (1) By the size of the data domain D and the size of the leader L, and (2) by the size of the contributors C. We present algorithms for both cases. The key techniques are compact witnesses and dynamic programming. The algorithms run in O*((L(D+1))^(LD) * D^D) and O*(2^C) time, showing that both parameterizations are fixed-parameter tractable. We complement the upper bounds by (matching) lower bounds based on ETH and Set Cover. Moreover, we prove the absence of polynomial kernels. For BSR, we consider programs involving t different threads. We restrict the analysis to computations where the write permission changes s times between the threads. BSR asks whether a given configuration is reachable via such an s-stage computation. When parameterized by P, the maximum size of a thread, and t, the interesting observation is that the problem has a large number of difficult instances. Formally, we show that there is no polynomial kernel, no compression algorithm that reduces the size of the data domain D or the number of stages s to a polynomial dependence on P and t. This indicates that symbolic methods may be harder to find for this problem.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Liveness in Broadcast Networks

We study liveness and model checking problems for broadcast networks, a system model of identical clients communicating via message passing. The first problem that we consider is Liveness Verification. It asks whether there is a computation such that one of the clients visits a final state infinitely often. The complexity of the problem has been open since 2010 when it was shown to be P-hard and solvable in EXPSPACE. We close the gap by a polynomial-time algorithm. The algorithm relies on a characterization of live computations in terms of paths in a suitable graph, combined with a fixed-point iteration to efficiently check the existence of such paths. The second problem is Fair Liveness Verification. It asks for a computation where all participating clients visit a final state infinitely often. We adjust the algorithm to also solve fair liveness in polynomial time. Both problems can be instrumented to answer model checking questions for broadcast networks against linear time temporal logic specifications. The first problem in this context is Fair Model Checking. It demands that for all computations of a broadcast network, all participating clients satisfy the specification. We solve the problem via the Vardi-Wolper construction and a reduction to Liveness Verification. The second problem is Sparse Model Checking. It asks whether each computation has a participating client that satisfies the specification. We reduce the problem to Fair Liveness Verification.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access