Abstract
In this paper, we introduce an interactive simulator for programs in the form of LLVM bitcode. The main features of the simulator include precise control over thread scheduling, automatic checkpoints and reverse stepping, support for source-level information about functions and variables in C and C++ programs and structured heap visualisation. Additionally, the simulator is compatible with DiVM (DIVINE VM) hypercalls, which makes it possible to load, simulate and analyse counterexamples from an existing model checker.
This work has been partially supported by the Czech Science Foundation grant No. 18-02177S.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
How this is achieved is described in more detail in [12].
- 3.
The behaviour of the program may depend on external factors, such as scheduling choices, user inputs, asynchronous events and so on.
- 4.
This is often the case in verification-centric tools, partly because it is a simple implementation strategy that builds on the same primitives as the verification tool itself.
- 5.
This description is necessarily incomplete, being much more concise than the real representation of the program’s state. Including additional information improves completeness, but compromises brevity, which is an important strength of this presentation format.
- 6.
- 7.
- 8.
The source code of the graphical user interface is available from the supplementary materials page at https://divine.fi.muni.cz/2019/sim/.
- 9.
We speculate that this is the primary reason why interactive simulators (and debuggers in general) are so scarce.
- 10.
Supported by anecdotal evidence from working with students, both individually and in a validation & verification course.
References
Ball, T., Naik, M., Rajamani, S.K.: From symptom to cause: localizing errors in counterexample traces. In: POPL, pp. 97–105. ACM (2003)
Ball, T., Cook, B., Levin, V., Rajamani, S.K.: SLAM and static driver verifier: technology transfer of formal methods inside Microsoft. In: Boiten, E.A., Derrick, J., Smith, G. (eds.) IFM 2004. LNCS, vol. 2999, pp. 1–20. Springer, Heidelberg (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-24756-2_1
Barnat, J., Beran, J., Brim, L., Kratochvíla, T., Ročkai, P.: Tool chain to support automated formal verification of avionics simulink designs. In: Stoelinga, M., Pinger, R. (eds.) FMICS 2012. LNCS, vol. 7437, pp. 78–92. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-32469-7_6
Basu, S., Saha, D., Smolka, S.A.: Getting to the root of the problem: focus statements for the analysis of counter-examples (2012)
Behrmann, G., David, A., Larsen, K.G.: A tutorial on Uppaal. In: Bernardo, M., Corradini, F. (eds.) SFM-RT 2004. LNCS, vol. 3185, pp. 200–236. Springer, Heidelberg (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30080-9_7
Groce, A., Kroening, D., Lerda, F.: Understanding counterexamples with explain. In: Alur, R., Peled, D.A. (eds.) CAV 2004. LNCS, vol. 3114, pp. 453–456. Springer, Heidelberg (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-27813-9_35
Kleiman, R., Brayshaw, M., Eisenstadt, M., Eisenstadt, M.: Tales of debugging from the front lines (1993)
Lee, K.: Using LLDB, pp. 415–434. Apress, Berkeley (2013). ISBN 978-1-4302-5051-7
Magee, J.: Behavioral analysis of software architectures using LTSA. In: ICSE (1999)
Nethercote, N., Seward, J.: Valgrind: a framework for heavyweight dynamic binary instrumentation. In: PLDI (2007)
The LLVM Project. LLVM language reference manual (2016). http://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html
Ročkai, P., Vladimír, Š., Černá, I., Barnat, J.: DiVM: model checking with LLVM and graph memory. J. Syst. Softw. 143, 1–13 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2018.04.026. ISSN 0164-1212
Stallman, R., Pesch, R., Shebs, S.: Debugging with GDB (2010)
Visan, A.-M., Arya, K., Cooperman, G., Denniston, T.: URDB: a universal reversible debugger based on decomposing debugging histories. In: PLOS 2011 (2011)
Groce, A., Visser, W.: What went wrong: explaining counterexamples. In: Ball, T., Rajamani, S.K. (eds.) SPIN 2003. LNCS, vol. 2648, pp. 121–136. Springer, Heidelberg (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44829-2_8
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Ročkai, P., Barnat, J. (2019). A Simulator for LLVM Bitcode. In: Larsen, K., Willemse, T. (eds) Formal Methods for Industrial Critical Systems. FMICS 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11687. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27008-7_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27008-7_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-27007-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-27008-7
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)