Skip to content
Snippets Groups Projects
  1. Sep 10, 2020
  2. Jun 26, 2020
  3. May 25, 2020
  4. Apr 06, 2020
  5. Sep 13, 2019
    • Jacques-Henri Jourdan's avatar
      Reorder Requires so that we do not depend of Export bugs. · 43a1a90f
      Jacques-Henri Jourdan authored
      The general idea is to first import/export modules which are further
      than the current one, and then import/export modules which are close
      dependencies.
      
      This commit tries to use the same order of imports for every file, and
      describes the convention in ProofGuide.md. There is one exception,
      where we do not follow said convention: in program_logic/weakestpre.v,
      using that order would break printing of texan triples (??).
      43a1a90f
  6. Mar 05, 2019
  7. Nov 29, 2018
  8. Oct 31, 2018
    • Robbert Krebbers's avatar
    • Robbert Krebbers's avatar
    • Robbert Krebbers's avatar
      f7af5b3f
    • Robbert Krebbers's avatar
      Fine-grained post-conditions for forked-off threads. · ebf06f91
      Robbert Krebbers authored
      This commit extends the state interpretation with an additional parameter to
      talk about the number of forked-off threads, and a fixed postcondition for each
      forked-off thread:
      
          state_interp : Λstate → list Λobservation → nat → iProp Σ;
          fork_post : iProp Σ;
      
      This way, instead of having `True` as the post-condition of `Fork`, one can
      have any post-condition, which is then recorded in the state interpretation.
      The point of keeping track of the postconditions of forked-off threads, is that
      we get an (additional) stronger adequacy theorem:
      
          Theorem wp_strong_all_adequacy Σ Λ `{invPreG Σ} s e σ1 v vs σ2 φ :
             (∀ `{Hinv : invG Σ} κs,
               (|={⊤}=> ∃
                   (stateI : state Λ → list (observation Λ) → nat → iProp Σ)
                   (fork_post : iProp Σ),
                 let _ : irisG Λ Σ := IrisG _ _ _ Hinv stateI fork_post in
                 stateI σ1 κs 0 ∗ WP e @ s; ⊤ {{ v,
                   let m := length vs in
                   stateI σ2 [] m -∗ [∗] replicate m fork_post ={⊤,∅}=∗ ⌜ φ v ⌝ }})%I) →
            rtc erased_step ([e], σ1) (of_val <$> v :: vs, σ2) →
            φ v.
      
      The difference with the ordinary adequacy theorem is that this one only applies
      once all threads terminated. In this case, one gets back the post-conditions
      `[∗] replicate m fork_post` of all forked-off threads.
      
      In Iron we showed that we can use this mechanism to make sure that all
      resources are disposed of properly in the presence of fork-based concurrency.
      ebf06f91
  9. Oct 24, 2018
  10. Oct 18, 2018
  11. Oct 05, 2018
  12. Jun 18, 2018
  13. Jun 14, 2018
  14. May 24, 2018
  15. May 23, 2018
  16. Dec 07, 2017
  17. Nov 26, 2017
  18. Nov 09, 2017
  19. Nov 08, 2017
  20. Oct 30, 2017
  21. Sep 25, 2017
  22. Mar 15, 2017
  23. Mar 09, 2017
  24. Jan 12, 2017
Loading