Hi,

Thomas gave a pretty good overview (thanks).

The work on eChronos aims at providing a framework to reason about
concurrent code, where for eChronos concurrency mainly comes from
interrupts that can happen during OS execution.

There also is a starting project aiming at modelling and verifying the
"big-lock" multicore version of seL4 (described in [0]). This is still
at its early stages, where the first step is to provide a formalisation
on concurrent C code.

[0]
http://ssrg.nicta.com.au/publications/nictaabstracts/Peters_DEH_15.abstract.pml

Cheers,

June

--
Dr June Andronick
Senior Researcher, DATA61 (formerly NICTA), Sydney
Conjoint Senior Lecturer, UNSW
http://www.ssrg.nicta.com.au/people/?cn=June+Andronick

On 4/12/2015 11:46 am, Thomas Sewell wrote:
> Hello Gergely.
>
> Most of the existing seL4 verification work doesn't involve
> concurrency. On a single core system, the kernel will never be running
> concurrently with anything else. This can be extended to some
> multiprocessor systems by wrapping the kernel in a spinlock or by
> dividing the system into multiple clones. I think that Michael von
> Tessin discusses these options in detail in his thesis[1] and starts
> looking at the verification problem.
>
> To my knowledge noone has yet completed any verification of a
> multiple-thread system on top of seL4, which will require concurrency
> reasoning. Some initial steps have been taken: the integrity proof [2]
> for instance is a necessary step toward allowing verification of one
> task to ignore the existence of other tasks that lack the authority to
> interfere. If dataflow security is a verification concern, the
> information flow proof can be used to establish that the task is not
> accidentally leaking secure information via the kernel.
>
> There's also a concurrency focused group at Data61 (NICTA that was)
> which aims to eventually verify systems built on seL4 [4], but for the
> moment they are focusing on simpler concurrent systems built on the
> smaller eChronos kernel [5].
>
> [1]:
> http://ssrg.nicta.com.au/publications/nictaabstracts/vonTessin:phd.abstract.pml
>
> [2]:
> http://ssrg.nicta.com.au/publications/nictaabstracts/Sewell_WGMAK_11.abstract.pml
>
> [3]:
> http://ssrg.nicta.com.au/publications/nictaabstracts/Murray_MBGBSLGK_13.abstract.pml
>
> [4]: http://ssrg.nicta.com.au/projects/TS/overallproof.pml
>
> [5]:
> http://ssrg.nicta.com.au/publications/nictaabstracts/Andronick_LM_15.abstract.pml
>
> I hope that helps. Others might know more.
>
> Cheers,
>     Thomas.
>
> On 03/12/15 22:40, Gergely Buday wrote:
>> Hi there,
>>
>> what should I read if I want to understand the verification of
>> concurrent programs related to the sel4 project?
>>
>> I have found
>>
>> https://ssrg.nicta.com.au/publications/papers/Daum-phd.pdf
>>
>> https://ssrg.nicta.com.au/publications/papers/Daum_DSW_08.pdf
>>
>> http://ssrg.nicta.com.au/projects/concurrency/
>>
>> Are there others?
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> - Gergely
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Devel mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://sel4.systems/lists/listinfo/devel
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> The information in this e-mail may be confidential and subject to
> legal professional privilege and/or copyright. National ICT Australia
> Limited accepts no liability for any damage caused by this email or
> its attachments.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://sel4.systems/lists/listinfo/devel

_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://sel4.systems/lists/listinfo/devel

Reply via email to