首页> 外文会议>Australian Software Engineering Conference >Comparing the Cost-effectiveness of Statically Analysing and Model Checking Concurrent Java Components for Deadlocks
【24h】

Comparing the Cost-effectiveness of Statically Analysing and Model Checking Concurrent Java Components for Deadlocks

机译:比较静态分析和模型检查同时Java组件的成本效益

获取原文

摘要

Verifying concurrent Java programs is difficult due to the many possible interleavings of threads and a number of specific concurrency defects such as interference and deadlock. To verify concurrent Java components, the TestCon method combines code inspection, static analysis and dynamic analysis. The deadlock detection steps of TestCon include static analysis (using Jlint) that may result in false positives or false negatives; therefore code inspection is combined with Jlint, but inspection can be time-consuming and depends on the inspector's skills. In this paper, we evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the Java PathFinder 2 (JPF 2) model checker for the detection of deadlocks in the context of the TestCon method. The results of the study show that using JPF 2 can improve TestCon's effectiveness but a trade-off has to be made in terms of cost in the development of the driver and analysis of its output. General conclusions cannot be drawn since the study was exploratory and small-scale; however the observations highlight some of the strengths and weaknesses of using JPF 2 compared to static analysis and code inspection.
机译:由于线程的许多可能交织和许多特定的并发缺陷,如干扰和死锁,验证并发Java程序很难。要验证并发Java组件,TestCon方法结合了代码检查,静态分析和动态分析。 TestCon的死锁检测步骤包括可能导致误报或假否定的静态分析(使用JLint);因此,代码检查与jlint相结合,但检查可能是耗时的,取决于检查员的技能。在本文中,我们评估了Java Pathfinder 2(JPF 2)模型检查器的成本效益在TestCON方法的上下文中检测死锁。研究结果表明,使用JPF 2可以提高Testcon的有效性,但必须在开发驾驶员的成本方面进行权衡和其产出分析。由于研究探索性和小规模,因此无法绘制一般结论;然而,与静态分析和代码检查相比,观察结果突出了使用JPF 2的一些优点和缺点。

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