【24h】

Proving Non-opacity

机译:证明不透明

获取原文

摘要

Guerraoui and Kapalka defined opacity as a safety criterion for transactional memory algorithms in 2008. Researchers have shown how to prove opacity, while little is known about pitfalls that can lead to non-opacity. In this paper, we identify two problems that lead to non-opacity, we present automatic tool support for finding such problems, and we prove an impossibility result. We first show that the well-known TM algorithms DSTM and McRT don't satisfy opacity. DSTM suffers from a write-skew anomaly, while McRT suffers from a write-exposure anomaly. We then prove that for direct-update TM algorithms, opacity is incompatible with a liveness criterion called local progress, even for fault-free systems. Our result implies that if TM algorithm designers want both opacity and local progress, they should avoid direct-update algorithms.
机译:Guerraoui和Kapalka在2008年将不透明性定义为事务性存储算法的安全标准。研究人员已经展示了如何证明不透明性,而对于可能导致非不透明性的陷阱知之甚少。在本文中,我们确定了导致非透明性的两个问题,我们提供了自动工具支持来发现此类问题,并证明了不可能的结果。我们首先显示众所周知的TM算法DSTM和McRT不满足不透明度。 DSTM遭受写偏斜异常,而McRT遭受写曝光异常。然后,我们证明对于直接更新TM算法,即使对于无故障的系统,不透明度也与称为本地进度的活动性标准不兼容。我们的结果表明,如果TM算法设计人员既需要不透明性又需要本地进度,则应避免使用直接更新算法。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号