Publications by Dr Mark Batty

Verification techniques for C11 programs have advanced significantly in recent years with the development of operational semantics and associated logics for increasingly large fragments of C11. However, these semantics and logics have been developed in a restricted setting to avoid the thin-air-read problem. In this paper, we propose an operational semantics that leverages an intra-thread partial order (called semantic dependencies ) induced by a recently developed denotational event-structure-based semantics. We prove that our operational semantics is sound and complete with respect to the denotational semantics. We present an associated logic that generalises a recent Owicki-Gries framework for RC11 RAR (repaired C11) with relaxed and release-acquire accesses. We describe the mechanisation of the logic in the Isabelle/HOL theorem prover, which we use to prove correctness of a number of examples.

Program logics and semantics tell a pleasant story about sequential composition: when executing (S1;S2), we first execute S1 then S2. To improve performance, however, processors execute instructions out of order, and compilers reorder programs even more dramatically. By design, single-threaded systems cannot observe these reorderings; however, multiple-threaded systems can, making the story considerably less pleasant. A formal attempt to understand the resulting mess is known as a "relaxed memory model." Prior models either fail to address sequential composition directly, or overly restrict processors and compilers, or permit nonsense thin-air behaviors which are unobservable in practice. To support sequential composition while targeting modern hardware, we enrich the standard event-based approach with preconditions and families of predicate transformers. When calculating the meaning of (S1; S2), the predicate transformer applied to the precondition of an event e from S2 is chosen based on the set of events in S1 upon which e depends. We apply this approach to two existing memory models.

There is a broad design space for concurrent computer processors: they can be optimized for low power, low latency or high throughput. This freedom to tune each processor design to its niche has led to an increasing diversity of machines, from powerful pocketable devices to those responsible for complex and critical tasks, such as car guidance systems. Given this context, academic concurrency research sounds notes of both caution and optimism. Caution because recent work has uncovered flaws in the way we explain the subtle memory behaviour of concurrent systems: specifications have been shown to be incorrect, leading to bugs throughout the many layers of the system. And optimism because our tools and methods for verifying the correctness of concurrent code—although built above an idealized model of concurrency—are becoming more mature. This paper looks at the way we specify the memory behaviour of concurrent systems and suggests a new direction. Currently, there is a siloed approach, with each processor and programming language specified separately in an incomparable way. But this does not match the structure of our programs, which may use multiple processors and languages together. Instead we propose a compositional approach, where program components carry with them a description of the sort of concurrency they rely on, and there is a mechanism for composing these. This will support not only components written for the multiple varied processors found in a modern system but also those that use idealized models of concurrency, providing a sound footing for mature verification techniques.

Previous work on the semantics of relaxed shared-memory concurrency has only considered the case in which each load reads the data of exactly one store. In practice, however, multiprocessors support mixed-size accesses, and these are used by systems software and (to some degree) exposed at the C/C++ language level. A semantic foundation for software, therefore, has to address them. We investigate the mixed-size behaviour of ARMv8 and IBM POWER architectures and implementations: by experiment, by developing semantic models, by testing the correspondence between these, and by discussion with ARM and IBM staff. This turns out to be surprisingly subtle, and on the way we have to revisit the fundamental concepts of coherence and sequential consistency, which change in this setting. In particular, we show that adding a memory barrier between each instruction does not restore sequential consistency. We go on to extend the C/C++11 model to support non-atomic mixed-size memory accesses. This is a necessary step towards semantics for real-world shared-memory concurrent code, beyond litmus tests.

Despite the growing popularity of GPGPU programming, there is not yet a portable and formally-specified barrier that one can use to synchronise across workgroups. Moreover, the occupancy-bound execution model of GPUs breaks assumptions inherent in traditional software execution barriers, exposing them to deadlock. We present an occupancy discovery protocol that dynamically discovers a safe estimate of the occupancy for a given GPU and kernel, allowing for a starvation-free (and hence, deadlock-free) inter-workgroup barrier by restricting the number of workgroups according to this estimate. We implement this idea by adapting an existing, previously non-portable, GPU inter-workgroup barrier to use OpenCL 2.0 atomic operations, and prove that the barrier meets its natural specification in terms of synchronisation. We assess the portability of our approach over eight GPUs spanning four vendors, comparing the performance of our method against alternative methods. Our key findings include: (1) the recall of our discovery protocol is nearly 100%; (2) runtime comparisons vary substantially across GPUs and applications; and (3) our method provides portable and safe inter-workgroup synchronisation across the applications we study.

Despite the conceptual simplicity of sequential consistency (SC), the semantics of SC atomic operations and fences in the C11 and OpenCL memory models is subtle, leading to convoluted prose descriptions that translate to complex axiomatic formalisations. We conduct an overhaul of SC atomics in C11, reducing the associated axioms in both number and complexity. A consequence of our simplification is that the SC operations in an execution no longer need to be totally ordered. This relaxation enables, for the first time, efficient and exhaustive simulation of litmus tests that use SC atomics. We extend our improved C11 model to obtain the first rigorous memory model formalisation for OpenCL (which extends C11 with support for heterogeneous many-core programming). In the OpenCL setting, we refine the SC axioms still further to give a sensible semantics to SC operations that employ a 'memory scope' to restrict their visibility to specific threads. Our overhaul requires slight strengthenings of both the C11 and the OpenCL memory models, causing some behaviours to become disallowed. We argue that these strengthenings are natural, and that all of the formalised C11 and OpenCL compilation schemes of which we are aware (Power and x86 CPUs for C11, AMD GPUs for OpenCL) remain valid in our revised models. Using the HERD memory model simulator, we show that our overhaul leads to an exponential improvement in simulation time for C11 litmus tests compared with the original model, making exhaustive simulation competitive, time-wise, with the non-exhaustive CDSChecker tool.

Modern accelerator programming frameworks, such as OpenCL, organise threads into work-groups. Remote-scope promotion (RSP) is a language extension recently proposed by AMD researchers that is designed to enable applications, for the first time, both to optimise for the common case of intra-work-group communication (using memory scopes to provide consistency only within a work-group) and to allow occasional inter-work-group communication (as required, for instance, to support the popular load-balancing idiom of work stealing). We present the first formal, axiomatic memory model of OpenCL extended with RSP. We have extended the Herd memory model simulator with support for OpenCL kernels that exploit RSP, and used it to discover bugs in several litmus tests and a work-stealing queue, that have been used previously in the study of RSP. We have also formalised the proposed GPU implementation of RSP. The formalisation process allowed us to identify bugs in the description of RSP that could result in well-synchronised programs experiencing memory inconsistencies. We present and prove sound a new implementation of RSP that incorporates bug fixes and requires less non-standard hardware than the original implementation. This work, a collaboration between academia and industry, clearly demonstrates how, when designing hardware support for a new concurrent language feature, the early application of formal tools and techniques can help to prevent errors, such as those we have found, from making it into silicon.

Shared memory concurrency relies on synchronisation primitives: compare-and-swap, load-reserve/store-conditional (aka LL/SC), language-level mutexes, and so on. In a sequentially consistent setting, or even in the TSO setting of x86 and Sparc, these have well-understood semantics. But in the very relaxed settings of IBM®, POWER®, ARM, or C/C++, it remains surprisingly unclear exactly what the programmer can depend on. This paper studies relaxed-memory synchronisation. On the hardware side, we give a clear semantic characterisation of the load-reserve/store-conditional primitives as provided by POWER multiprocessors, for the first time since they were introduced 20 years ago; we cover their interaction with relaxed loads, stores, barriers, and dependencies. Our model, while not officially sanctioned by the vendor, is validated by extensive testing, comparing actual implementation behaviour against an oracle generated from the model, and by detailed discussion with IBM staff. We believe the ARM semantics to be similar. On the software side, we prove sound a proposed compilation scheme of the C/C++ synchronisation constructs to POWER, including C/C++ spinlock mutexes, fences, and read-modify-write operations, together with the simpler atomic operations for which soundness is already known from our previous work; this is a first step in verifying concurrent algorithms that use load-reserve/store-conditional with respect to a realistic semantics. We also build confidence in the C/C++ model in its own terms, fixing some omissions and contributing to the C standards committee adoption of the C++11 concurrency model.

The upcoming C and C++ revised standards add concurrency to the languages, for the first time, in the form of a subtle *relaxed memory model* (the *C++11 model*). This aims to permit compiler optimisation and to accommodate the differing relaxed-memory behaviours of mainstream multiprocessors, combining simple semantics for most code with high-performance *low-level atomics* for concurrency libraries. In this paper, we first establish two simpler but provably equivalent models for C++11, one for the full language and another for the subset without consume operations. Subsetting further to the fragment without low-level atomics, we identify a subtlety arising from atomic initialisation and prove that, under an additional condition, the model is equivalent to sequential consistency for race-free programs.

Shared-memory concurrency in C and C++ is pervasive in systems programming, but has long been poorly defined. This motivated an ongoing shared effort by the standards committees to specify concurrent behaviour in the next versions of both languages. They aim to provide strong guarantees for race-free programs, together with new (but subtle) relaxed-memory atomic primitives for high-performance concurrent code. However, the current draft standards, while the result of careful deliberation, are not yet clear and rigorous definitions, and harbour substantial problems in their details. In this paper we establish a mathematical (yet readable) semantics for C++ concurrency. We aim to capture the intent of the current (`Final Committee') Draft as closely as possible, but discuss changes that fix many of its problems. We prove that a proposed x86 implementation of the concurrency primitives is correct with respect to the x86-TSO model, and describe our Cppmem tool for exploring the semantics of examples, using code generated from our Isabelle/HOL definitions. Having already motivated changes to the draft standard, this work will aid discussion of any further changes, provide a correctness condition for compilers, and give a much-needed basis for analysis and verification of concurrent C and C++ programs.

Previous work formalized the C++ memory model in Isabelle/HOL in an effort to clarify the proposed standard's semantics. Here we employ the model finder Nitpick to check litmus test programs that exercise the memory model, including a simple locking algorithm. Nitpick is built on Kodkod (Alloy's backend) but understands Isabelle's richer logic; hence it can be applied directly to the C++ memory model. We only need to give it a few hints, and thanks to the underlying SAT solver it scales much better than the Cppmem explicit-state model checker. This case study inspired optimizations in Nitpick from which other formalizations can now benefit.

Memory consistency models traditionally specify the behavior of shared memory concurrent hardware. Hardware behavior drifts away from traditional sequential reasoning, thus exhibiting behaviors that are termed as "weak". Weaker consistency models allow for more concurrent behaviors, thus justifying hardware optimizations such as read/write buffers. In parallel, weaker memory models for software allow more compiler optimizations (transformations). However, this "more" may not be strict: certain safe optimizations in stronger models are rendered unsafe in ones weaker than them. We identify properties that must hold among a pair of weak and strong memory models to guarantee this. We propose a framework using which we could build such models, showcasing our results in allowing Read Read reordering over Sequential Consistency (SC). We also show how to partially retain our desired property for a pair of models, placing constraints on the set of transformations or equivalently, on program structure. Lastly, we discuss the potential advantage of designing models satisfying such properties.

Deductive verification techniques for C11 programs have advanced significantly in recent years with the development of operational semantics and associated logics for increasingly large fragments of C11. However, these semantics and logics have been developed in a restricted setting to avoid the thin-air-read problem. In this paper, we propose an operational semantics that leverages an intra-thread partial order (called semantic dependencies) induced by a recently developed denotational event-structure-based semantics. We prove that our operational semantics is sound and complete with respect to the denotational semantics. We present an associated logic that generalises a recent Owicki-Gries framework for RC11 (repaired C11), and demonstrate the use of this logic over several example proofs.

We present a denotational semantics for weak memory concurrency that avoids thin-air reads, provides data-race free programs with sequentially consistent semantics (DRF-SC), and supports a compositional refinement relation for validating optimisations. Our semantics identifies false program dependencies that might be removed by compiler optimisation, and leaves in place just the dependencies necessary to rule out thin-air reads. We show that our dependency calculation can be used to rule out thin-air reads in any axiomatic concurrency model, in particular C++. We present a tool that automatically evaluates litmus tests, show that we can augment C++ to fix the thin-air problem, and we prove that our augmentation is compatible with the previously used compilation mappings over key processor architectures. We argue that our dependency calculation offers a practical route to fixing the longstanding problem of thin-air reads in the C++ specification.

This paper is about verifying program transformations on an axiomatic relaxed memory model of the kind used in C/C++ and Java. Relaxed models present particular challenges for verifying program transformations, because they generate many additional modes of interaction between code and context. For a block of code being transformed, we define a denotation from its behaviour in a set of representative contexts. Our denotation summarises interactions of the code block with the rest of the program both through local and global variables, and through subtle synchronisation effects due to relaxed memory. We can then prove that a transformation does not introduce new program behaviours by comparing the denotations of the code block before and after. Our approach is compositional: by examining only representative contexts, transformations are verified for any context. It is also fully abstract, meaning any valid transformation can be verified. We cover several tricky aspects of C/C++-style memory models, including release-acquire operations, sequentially consistent fences, and non-atomics. We also define a variant of our denotation that is finite at the cost of losing full abstraction. Based on this variant, we have implemented a prototype verification tool and app

A memory consistency model (MCM) is the part of a programming language or computer architecture specification that defines which values can legally be read from shared memory locations. Because MCMs take into account various optimisations employed by archi- tectures and compilers, they are often complex and counterintu- itive, which makes them challenging to design and to understand. We identify four tasks involved in designing and understanding MCMs: generating conformance tests, distinguishing two MCMs, checking compiler optimisations, and checking compiler mappings. We show that all four tasks are instances of a general constraint-satisfaction problem to which the solution is either a program or a pair of programs. Although this problem is intractable for automatic solvers when phrased over programs directly, we show how to solve analogous constraints over program executions, and then construct programs that satisfy the original constraints. Our technique, which is implemented in the Alloy modelling framework, is illustrated on several software- and architecture-level MCMs, both axiomatically and operationally defined. We automatically recreate several known results, often in a simpler form, including: distinctions between variants of the C11 MCM; a failure of the 'SC-DRF guarantee' in an early C11 draft; that x86 is 'multi-copy atomic' and Power is not; bugs in common C11 compiler optimisations; and bugs in a compiler mapping from OpenCL to AMD-style GPUs. We also use our technique to develop and validate a new MCM for NVIDIA GPUs that supports a natural mapping from OpenCL.

Concurrency is pervasive and perplexing, particularly on graphics processing units (GPUs). Current specifications of languages and hardware are inconclusive; thus programmers often rely on folklore assumptions when writing software. To remedy this state of affairs, we conducted a large empirical study of the concurrent behaviour of deployed GPUs. Armed with litmus tests (i.e. short concurrent programs), we questioned the assumptions in programming guides and vendor documentation about the guarantees provided by hardware. We developed a tool to generate thousands of litmus tests and run them under stressful workloads. We observed a litany of previously elusive weak behaviours, and exposed folklore beliefs about GPU programming---often supported by official tutorials---as false. As a way forward, we propose a model of Nvidia GPU hardware, which correctly models every behaviour witnessed in our experiments. The model is a variant of SPARC Relaxed Memory Order (RMO), structured following the GPU concurrency hierarchy.

Despite decades of research, we do not have a satisfactory concurrency semantics for any general-purpose programming language that aims to support concurrent systems code. The Java Memory Model has been shown to be unsound with respect to standard compiler optimisations, while the C/C++11 model is too weak, admitting undesirable thin-air executions. Our goal in this paper is to articulate this major open problem as clearly as is currently possible, showing how it arises from the combination of multiprocessor relaxed-memory behaviour and the desire to accommodate current compiler optimisations. We make several novel contributions that each shed some light on the problem, constraining the possible solutions and identifying new difficulties. First we give a positive result, proving in HOL4 that the existing axiomatic model for C/C++11 guarantees sequentially consistent semantics for simple race-free programs that do not use low-level atomics (DRF-SC, one of the core design goals). We then describe the thin-air problem and show that it cannot be solved, without restricting current compiler optimisations, using any per-candidate-execution condition in the style of the C/C++11 model. Thin-air executions were thought to be confined to programs using relaxed atomics, but we further show that they recur when one attempts to integrate the concurrency model with more of C, mixing atomic and nonatomic accesses, and that also breaks the DRF-SC result. We then describe a semantics based on an explicit operational construction of out-of-order execution, giving the desired behaviour for thin-air examples but exposing further difficulties with accommodating existing compiler optimisations. Finally, we show that there are major difficulties integrating concurrency semantics with the C/C++ notion of undefined behaviour. We hope thereby to stimulate and enable research on this key issue.