Static and Dynamic Analysis at JPL Klaus Havelund
- Slides: 64
Static and Dynamic Analysis at JPL Klaus Havelund
Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) • • • planned launch 2011 biggest rover so far to be sent to Mars programmer team of 30 testing team of 10+ people programming language is C, 3 M LOC highly multi-threaded (over 160 threads) 2
specification and programming Let’s see … a command should always succeed … program input output 3
specification and programming formal specification program input output 4
specification and programming formal specification relationship program input output 5
specification and programming code generation: -from state machines -graphical -textual -from data formats (XML) formal specification refinement program input output 6
specification and programming formal specification model checking [](request -> <>response) static analysis abstraction program input output 7
specification and programming Good practice analysis using commercial static analyzers. formal specification static analysis program input output 8
a checkable Java coding standard 9
why a standard? two perspectives • more reliable code • code that is easier to read, leading to – code that is easier to develop – code that is easier to maintain – code that is easier to share style 10
the choices • • • industry standard organizational standard project standard personal standard no standard good bad 11
basic questions 1. do we need to agree on a standard? carefully designed? or lots of rules, which can be turned on/off? 2. should it be 100% checkable? 3. do we care about naming, style, doc? 4. how many rules? 12
C coding standard 13
14
15
16
free tools coding error checker coding standard checkers 17
18
19
20
specification and programming formal specification dynamic analysis program input output 21
model-based testing
model-based testing http: //spinroot. com/swarm/index. html do : : mkdir : : cd dir : : rm file : : . . … od reference file system SPIN real file system abstract state abstract 23
specification and programming formal specification runtime verification program input output 24
tool-based log file analysis
problems with testing FSW • flight software engineers work under tight schedules: hard to access. • system = hardware + software: it is cumbersome to run. • difficult to determine what events to monitor. A . h . c . h B 26
separation of concerns log log 27
architecture log Log. Maker [e 1, e 2, …, en] Log. Scope spec violations 28
command execution command dispatch failure success failure 29
? example log. . . COMMAND 7308 { Args : = ['CLEAR_RELAY_PYRO_STATUS'] Time : = 51708322925696 Stem : = "POWER_HOUSEKEEPING" Number : = "4" type : = "FSW” } EVR 7309 { message : = "Dispatched immediate command POWER_HOUSEKEEPING: number=4, seconds=789006392, subseconds=1073741824. " Dispatch : = "POWER_HOUSEKEEPING" Time : = 51708322925696 name : = "CMD_DISPATCH" level : = "COMMAND" Number : = "4” }. . . EVR 7311 { name : = "POWER_SEND_REQUEST" Time : = 51708322925696 message : = "power_queue_card_requestsending request to PAM 0. " level : = "DIAGNOSTIC” } EVR 7312 { message : = "Successfully completed command POWER_HOUSEKEEPING: number=4. " Success : = "POWER_HOUSEKEEPING" Time : = 51708322944128 name : = "CMD_COMPLETED_SUCCESS" level : = "COMMAND" Number : = "4” } EVR 7313 { name : = "PWR_REQUEST_CALLBACK" Time : = 51708322944128 message : = "power_card_request FPGA request successfully sent to RPAM A. " level : = "DIAGNOSTIC” } CHANNEL 7314 { channel. Id : = "PWR-3049" DNChange : = 67 dn. Unsigned. Value : = 1600 type : = "UNSIGNED_INT" Time : = 51708323217408 Channel. Name : = "PWR-BCB 1 -AMP” }. . . COMMAND 9626 { Args : = ['set_device(1)', 'TRUE'] Time : = 51708372934400 Stem : = "RUN_COMMAND" Number : = "18" type : = "FSW” } EVR 9627 { message : = "Validation failed for command RUN_COMMAND: number=18. " Dispatch. Failure : = "RUN_COMMAND" Time : = 51708372934499 name : = "CMD_DISPATCH_VALIDATION_FAILURE" level : = "COMMAND" Number : = "18” }. . . 30
? example log. . . COMMAND 7308 { Args : = ['CLEAR_RELAY_PYRO_STATUS'] Time : = 51708322925696 Stem : = "POWER_HOUSEKEEPING" Number : = "4" type : = "FSW” } EVR 7309 { message : = "Dispatched immediate command POWER_HOUSEKEEPING: number=4, seconds=789006392, subseconds=1073741824. " Dispatch : = "POWER_HOUSEKEEPING" Time : = 51708322925696 name : = "CMD_DISPATCH" level : = "COMMAND" Number : = "4” }. . . EVR 7311 { name : = "POWER_SEND_REQUEST" Time : = 51708322925696 message : = "power_queue_card_requestsending request to PAM 0. " level : = "DIAGNOSTIC” } EVR 7312 { message : = "Successfully completed command POWER_HOUSEKEEPING: number=4. " Success : = "POWER_HOUSEKEEPING" Time : = 51708322944128 name : = "CMD_COMPLETED_SUCCESS" level : = "COMMAND" Number : = "4” } EVR 7313 { name : = "PWR_REQUEST_CALLBACK" Time : = 51708322944128 message : = "power_card_request FPGA request successfully sent to RPAM A. " level : = "DIAGNOSTIC” } CHANNEL 7314 { channel. Id : = "PWR-3049" DNChange : = 67 dn. Unsigned. Value : = 1600 type : = "UNSIGNED_INT" Time : = 51708323217408 Channel. Name : = "PWR-BCB 1 -AMP” }. . . COMMAND 9626 { Args : = ['set_device(1)', 'TRUE'] Time : = 51708372934400 Stem : = "RUN_COMMAND" Number : = "18" type : = "FSW” } EVR 9627 { message : = "Validation failed for command RUN_COMMAND: number=18. " Dispatch. Failure : = "RUN_COMMAND" Time : = 51708372934499 name : = "CMD_DISPATCH_VALIDATION_FAILURE" level : = "COMMAND" Number : = "18” }. . . 31
example log. . . COMMAND 7308 { Args : = ['CLEAR_RELAY_PYRO_STATUS'] Time : = 51708322925696 Stem : = "POWER_HOUSEKEEPING" Number : = "4" type : = "FSW” } EVR 7309 { message : = "Dispatched immediate command POWER_HOUSEKEEPING: number=4, seconds=789006392, subseconds=1073741824. " Dispatch : = "POWER_HOUSEKEEPING" Time : = 51708322925696 name : = "CMD_DISPATCH" level : = "COMMAND" Number : = "4” }. . . EVR 7311 { name : = "POWER_SEND_REQUEST" Time : = 51708322925696 message : = "power_queue_card_requestsending request to PAM 0. " level : = "DIAGNOSTIC” } EVR 7312 { message : = "Successfully completed command POWER_HOUSEKEEPING: number=4. " Success : = "POWER_HOUSEKEEPING" Time : = 51708322944128 name : = "CMD_COMPLETED_SUCCESS" level : = "COMMAND" Number : = "4” } EVR 7313 { name : = "PWR_REQUEST_CALLBACK" Time : = 51708322944128 message : = "power_card_request FPGA request successfully sent to RPAM A. " level : = "DIAGNOSTIC” } ? CHANNEL 7314 { channel. Id : = "PWR-3049" DNChange : = 67 dn. Unsigned. Value : = 1600 type : = "UNSIGNED_INT" Time : = 51708323217408 Channel. Name : = "PWR-BCB 1 -AMP” }. . . COMMAND 9626 { Args : = ['set_device(1)', 'TRUE'] Time : = 51708372934400 Stem : = "RUN_COMMAND" Number : = "18" type : = "FSW” } EVR 9627 { message : = "Validation failed for command RUN_COMMAND: number=18. " Dispatch. Failure : = "RUN_COMMAND" Time : = 51708372934499 name : = "CMD_DISPATCH_VALIDATION_FAILURE" level : = "COMMAND" Number : = "18” }. . . 32
specification languages for trace analysis • • • programming languages (Python at JPL) state machines regular expressions most commonly used “formal” trace logics temporal logic grammars 33
the first scripture trigger consequences look: DRILL_DMP evr(CMD_DISPATCH, positive) evr(CMD_COMPLETED_SUCCCESS, positive) evr(CMD_COMPLETED_FAILURE, negative) chan(id: CMD-0004, positive, contains opcode of last immediate command) chan(id: CMD-0007, positive) chan(id: CMD-0001, negative) chan(id: CMD-0009, negative) prod(name: Drill. All, 1, *) 34
property P 1: Whenever a flight software command is issued, then eventually an EVR should indicate success of that command 35
recall log COMMAND 7308 { Args : = ['CLEAR_RELAY_PYRO_STATUS'] Time : = 51708322925696 Stem : = "POWER_HOUSEKEEPING" Number : = "4" type : = "FSW” } . . . EVR 7312 { message : = "Successfully completed command POWER_HOUSEKEEPING: number=4. " Success : = "POWER_HOUSEKEEPING" Time : = 51708322944128 name : = "CMD_COMPLETED_SUCCESS" level : = "COMMAND" Number : = "4” } 36
recall log COMMAND 7308 { Args : = ['CLEAR_RELAY_PYRO_STATUS'] Time : = 51708322925696 Stem : = "POWER_HOUSEKEEPING" Number : = "4" type : = "FSW” } . . . P 1: Whenever a COMMAND is issued with the Type field having the value "FSW”, the Stem field (command name) having some unknown value x, and the Number field having some unknown value y, then eventually an EVR should occur, with the field Success mapped to x and the Number field mapped to y. EVR 7312 { message : = "Successfully completed command POWER_HOUSEKEEPING: number=4. " Success : = "POWER_HOUSEKEEPING" Time : = 51708322944128 name : = "CMD_COMPLETED_SUCCESS" level : = "COMMAND" Number : = "4” } 37
recall log COMMAND 7308 { Args : = ['CLEAR_RELAY_PYRO_STATUS'] Time : = 51708322925696 Stem : = "POWER_HOUSEKEEPING" Number : = "4" type : = "FSW” } . . . pattern P 1: COMMAND{Type: "FSW", Stem: x, Number: y} => EVR{Success: x, Number: y} EVR 7312 { message : = "Successfully completed command POWER_HOUSEKEEPING: number=4. " Success : = "POWER_HOUSEKEEPING" Time : = 51708322944128 name : = "CMD_COMPLETED_SUCCESS" level : = "COMMAND" Number : = "4” } 38
pattern P 1: COMMAND{Type: "FSW", Stem: x, Number: y} => EVR{Success: x, Number: y} 39
pattern syntax pattern : : = 'pattern' NAME ': ' event '=>' consequence : : = event | '!' event | '[' consequence 1, . . . , consequencen ']’ | ‘{' consequence 1, . . . , consequencen ‘}' 40
property P 2: Whenever a COMMAND is issued with the Type field having the value "FSW”, the Stem field (command name) having some unknown value x, and the Number field having some unknown value y, Then an EVR should thereafter not occur, with the field Failure mapped to x and the Number field mapped to y. pattern P 2: COMMAND{Type: "FSW", Stem: x, Number: y} => ! EVR{Failure: x, Number: y} 41
pattern syntax pattern : : = 'pattern' NAME ': ' event '=>' consequence : : = event | '!' event | '[' consequence 1, . . . , consequencen ']’ | ‘{' consequence 1, . . . , consequencen ‘}' 42
property P 3: Whenever a flight software command is issued, there should follow a dispatch and then exactly one success. No dispatch failure before the dispatch, and no failure between dispatch and success. 43
formalization pattern P 3: COMMAND{Type: "FSW", Stem: x, Number: y} => [ ! EVR{Dispatch. Failure: x, Number: y}, EVR{Dispatch: x, Number: y}, ! EVR{Failure: x, Number: y}, EVR{Success: x, Number: y}, ! EVR{Success: x, Number: y} ] 44
expressed in first order LTL 45
Python predicate definitions {: def within(t 1, t 2, max): return (t 2 -t 1) <= max : } pattern P 6: COMMAND{Type: "FSW", Stem: x, Number: y, Time: t 1} where {: x. startswith("PWR_”) : } => EVR{Success: x, Number: y, Time: t 2} where within(t 1, t 2, 10000) 46
scoped version of P 4 pattern P 9: COMMAND{Type: "FSW", Stem: x, Number: y} => { EVR{Dispatch: x, Number: y}, [ EVR{Success: x, Number: y}, ! EVR{Success: x, Number: y} ], ! EVR{Dispatch. Failure: x, Number: y}, ! EVR{Failure: x, Number: y} } upto COMMAND{Type: "FSW"} 47
from patterns to automata • temporal patterns are translated into parameterized universal automata • automaton language more expressive • user can use both, in practice only temporal patterns have been used for testing MSL 48
recall P 3 pattern P 3: COMMAND{Type: "FSW", Stem: x, Number: y} => [ ! EVR{Dispatch. Failure: x, Number: y}, EVR{Dispatch: x, Number: y}, ! EVR{Failure: x, Number: y}, EVR{Success: x, Number: y}, ! EVR{Success: x, Number: y} ] 49
automaton A_P 3 { always S 1 { COMMAND{Type: "FSW", Stem: x, Number: y} => S 2(x, y) } hot state S 2(x, y) { EVR{Dispatch. Failure: x, Number: y} => error EVR{Dispatch: x, Number: y} => S 3(x, y) } hot state S 3(x, y) { EVR{Failure: x, Number: y} => error EVR{Success: x, Number: y} => S 4(x, y) } state S 4(x, y) { EVR{Success: x, Number: y} => error } } 50
51
recall log. . . COMMAND 7308 { Args : = ['CLEAR_RELAY_PYRO_STATUS'] Time : = 51708322925696 Stem : = "POWER_HOUSEKEEPING" Number : = "4" type : = "FSW” } EVR 7309 { message : = "Dispatched immediate command POWER_HOUSEKEEPING: number=4, seconds=789006392, subseconds=1073741824. " Dispatch : = "POWER_HOUSEKEEPING" Time : = 51708322925696 name : = "CMD_DISPATCH" level : = "COMMAND" Number : = "4” }. . . EVR 7311 { name : = "POWER_SEND_REQUEST" Time : = 51708322925696 message : = "power_queue_card_requestsending request to PAM 0. " level : = "DIAGNOSTIC” } EVR 7312 { message : = "Successfully completed command POWER_HOUSEKEEPING: number=4. " Success : = "POWER_HOUSEKEEPING" Time : = 51708322944128 name : = "CMD_COMPLETED_SUCCESS" level : = "COMMAND" Number : = "4” } EVR 7313 { name : = "PWR_REQUEST_CALLBACK" Time : = 51708322944128 message : = "power_card_request FPGA request successfully sent to RPAM A. " level : = "DIAGNOSTIC” } CHANNEL 7314 { channel. Id : = "PWR-3049" DNChange : = 67 dn. Unsigned. Value : = 1600 type : = "UNSIGNED_INT" Time : = 51708323217408 Channel. Name : = "PWR-BCB 1 -AMP” }. . . COMMAND 9626 { Args : = ['set_device(1)', 'TRUE'] Time : = 51708372934400 Stem : = "RUN_COMMAND" Number : = "18" type : = "FSW” } EVR 9627 { message : = "Validation failed for command RUN_COMMAND: number=18. " Dispatch. Failure : = "RUN_COMMAND" Time : = 51708372934499 name : = "CMD_DISPATCH_VALIDATION_FAILURE" level : = "COMMAND" Number : = "18” }. . . 52
log in Python log = [ { "OBJ_TYPE" : "COMMAND", "Args" : ['CLEAR_RELAY_PYRO_STATUS'], "Time" : 51708322925696, "Stem" : "POWER_HOUSEKEEPING", "Number" : "4", "Type" : "FSW" }, … { "OBJ_TYPE" : "EVR", "name" : "PWR_REQUEST_CALLBACK", "Time" : 51708322944128, "message" : "power_card_request - FPGA request successfully sent to RPAM A. ", "level" : "DIAGNOSTIC" }, … ] 53
running Log. Scope import logscope log = extract. Log(…) obs = logscope. Observer("specs/rv-tutorial") obs. monitor(log) 54
55
specification learning • writing specs is time consuming • often hard come up with properties • one approach is to use already generated log files to “get ideas” • in the extreme case, specifications can be automatically generated from log files 56
architecture spec yes learner monitor no: … … logs 57
learner API import logscope log 1 = … ; log 2 = … ; learner = logscope. Concrete. Learner(“P”) learner. learnlog(log 1) learner. learnlog(log 2) learner. dump. Spec(sfile) log 3 = … ; learner = logscope. Concrete. Learner(“P”, sfile) learner. learnlog(log 3) learner. dump. Spec(sfile) log 4 = … ; obs = logscope. Observer(sfile) obs. monitor(log 4) 58
59
the learned spec using step and success states 60
conclusions • use of static analysis is now required for flight missions. • model-based testing is used by La. RS group to test file system – for real. • log analysis support shows promise. • what’s next? : runtime verification, interaction between static and dynamic analysis, specification learning, trace visualization. 61
combining static and dynamic analysis program + spec static analyzer proof obligations monitor the proof obligations 62
RMOR monitor File. Monitor { symbol open = after call(main. c: openfile); symbol read = after call(main. c: readfile); symbol close = after call(main. c: closefile); symbol send = before call(main. c: senddata); symbol end = before call(main. c: finish); state closed {when open -> unread; } state unread {when read -> read; } state read {when send => error; } super opened [unread, read] { when end => error; when close -> closed; } Aspect. C like instrumentation state machine specification } 63
thanks for listening! 64
- Cuckoo sandbox fork
- Difference between static and dynamic analysis
- Malwr sandbox
- Jpl c coding standard
- Http://pds.jpl.nasa.gov/planets/
- 8776441774
- Gary blackwood jpl
- Upcdms
- Jpl org chart
- Jpl siri
- Adrian stoica jpl
- Jason rhodes jpl
- Uml full form
- Dynamic antagonist
- What is an example of a dynamic character
- Mark tinka
- Bernoulli rule of integration
- Static and dynamic anthropometry
- Cs3250
- Static and dynamic ram
- Dynamic characters
- Static and dynamic hashing in dbms
- Static and dynamic anthropometry
- Difference between dynamic and static routing
- Dynamic and static power
- Static interconnection network
- Difference between static and dynamic characters
- Static data structure and dynamic data structure
- Character round flat static dynamic
- What is static hashing in dbms
- Media elements
- Static vs dynamic class loading
- Static vs dynamic simulation
- Types of protagonist
- Dynamic and static
- Type checking in compiler
- Branch prediction techniques
- Dynamic binding
- Package diagram for online shopping system
- What is static transformer
- West egg and east egg
- Dynamic vs static character
- Dynamic picture
- Static character
- Static vs dynamic linking in os
- Loader design
- Static vs dynamic linking
- Righting arm
- Static assessment vs dynamic assessment
- Flat dynamic
- Flat and round characters
- Static vs dynamic data structure
- Static vs dynamic data
- Gatsby protagonist
- The veldt characterization
- Are the characters in the monkey's paw dynamic or static
- Static image vs dynamic image
- Is king duncan a static or dynamic character
- The crucible characters act 1
- Symbols in things fall apart
- Dynamic content vs static content
- Dynamic dynamic - bloom
- Klaus feldmann familie
- Klaus saarikallio
- Klaus collmann