M. Ben-Ari, "Algorithms for On-the-fly Garbage Collection". ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, 6 (1984), pp. 333-344.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....garbage collection. Using the above, we show how to perform the mappings from some common garbage collection techniques onto jobs, tasks, and job termination. The techniques chosen to illustrate these mapping are, in ascending order of difficulty: reference counting [LM86, WW87, Bev89] mark sweep [Ste75, Dij78, Ben84], generational schemes, and the Mature Object Space collector (MOS) HMM 97] Finally, for all of these algorithms we show that job termination is equivalent to eventual reclamation of objects. Our conclusion is that deriving distributed garbage collectors in the above manner separates the issues ....

M. Ben-Ari, "Algorithms for On-the-fly Garbage Collection". ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, 6 (1984), pp. 333-344.

....mark and sweep algorithm [9] does not account for fact 1 it assumes that the local pointers of a thread only point to otherwise accessible objects. This could only be enforced by imposing overhead on move actions [12] and thus breaking (i) All the derivatives of [9] suffer this fatal flaw [4, 14]. Furthermore these algorithms only support a single mutator; the multiple mutator version [15] explicitly requires synchronization overhead, breaking (ii) 2.3 The Doligez Leroy design It may seem a pity that we had to rule out the copying algorithms, as only they can deal with the large amount ....

....A proof of a garbage collection algorithm is never a proof of an actual implementation of that algorithm; it is a proof of some mathematical model that conveys the essential ideas of the algorithm. More often this model is chosen in order to make the proof as short and elegant as possible [9, 4, 7], so it is very high level and abstract. This yields elegant papers, but also carries a price: it is not clear how to fit the vast amount of details of an actual implementation in the small, cleverly crafted invariants of the published proof. This is somewhat unsettling for an asynchronous ....

Ben-Ari, M. Algorithms for on-the-fly garbage collection. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 6, 3 (1984), 333--344.

....Department of Computer Science, Frederik Bajersvej 7E, 9220 Aalborg, Denmark. K. Havelund and N. Shankar 1. Introduction Russinoff [Rus94] used the Boyer Moore theorem prover to verify a safety property of a mark and sweep garbage collection algorithm originally suggested by Ben Ari [BA84] The garbage collector and its composition with a user program is regarded as a concurrent system with both processes working on a common shared memory. The collector uses a colouring (marking) technique to iteratively colour all accessible nodes black while leaving garbage nodes white. When the ....

M. Ben-Ari. Algorithms for on-the-fly garbage collection. ACM Toplas, 6, July 1984.

....a finite state version of the algorithm in the Stanford model checker Murphi, and we compare the result with the PVS verification. 1 Introduction In [18] Russinoff uses the Boyer Moore theorem prover to verify a safety property of a garbage collection algorithm, originally suggested by Ben Ari [1]. We will describe how the same algorithm can be formulated in the PVS verification system [16] and we demonstrate how the safety property can be verified. An earlier related experiment where we verified a communication protocol in PVS is reported in [11] The garbage collection algorithm, the ....

M. Ben-Ari. Algorithms for On-the-Fly Garbage Collection. ACM Toplas, 6, July 1984.

....an algorithm satisfying G2, usually a supplementary algorithm (typically of the mark and sweep type) is used to collect cyclic structures of garbage. In our application, however, cyclic structures of garbage objects do not occur, and a supplementary algorithm is not necessary. Mark and sweep [1, 10, 29, 30]. Collectors of the second type mark all reachable objects as such, starting from the roots and recursively marking all descendants of marked objects. In this way all reachable objects become marked eventually. The design of the marking algorithm is complicated by the possibility that references ....

....counts the active processes of th g th generation. When a hpas g; si message is received, ActCount[g] is decremented and ActCount[g 1] is increased by s, the number of newly reported activations of generation g 1. Initially a process p is either active with gen p = 1 or passive, ActCount[1] equals the number of active processes, ActCount[i] 0 for i 1, and no messages are underway. Theorem 3.5 The Generational termination detection algorithm is a correct termination detection algorithm. Proof. This result follows from the correctness of the generational reference counting ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Ben--Ari, M., Algorithms for On--the--fly Garbage Collection, ACM Trans. on Prog. Lang. and Systems 6 (1984) 333--344.

.... : 29 5 Model Checking in Murphi 33 6 Observations 39 A The PVS Formalization 42 B The Murphi Formalization 65 i Chapter 1 Introduction In [11] Russinoff uses the Boyer Moore theorem prover to verify a safety property of a garbage collection algorithm, originally suggested by Ben Ari [1]. We will describe how the same algorithm can be formulated in the PVS verification system [9] and we demonstrate how the safety property can be verified. An earlier related experiment where we verified a communication protocol in PVS is reported in [6] The garbage collection algorithm, the ....

....quantified assumptions when the PVS (inst ) command did not succeed in finding the right instantiations. Many of the lemmas needed manual assistance. The proof took 1.5 month of effort. Our proof follows [11] closely (except for the lemmas about auxiliary functions) which again follows [1]. Hence, the proof is in fact a mechanization of a handwritten proof. An important direction of research is to minimize the manual effort in such proofs, hence putting less imagination into the theorem proving. Model checking is an example of verification where no imagination is required since it ....

M. Ben-Ari. Algorithms for on-the-fly garbage collection. ACM Toplas, 6, July 1984.

..... 97 A.4.4 Final Refinement Theorem . 105 iii Chapter 1 Introduction 1. 1 The Problem In [12] Russinoff uses the Boyer Moore theorem prover to verify a safety property of a garbage collection algorithm, originally suggested by BenAri [2]. The safety property is formulated as a predicate P over the state space, and it is verified that this predicate is true in all reachable states. We will describe how the same algorithm can be formulated in the PVS verification system [10] and we demonstrate how the safety property can be ....

M. Ben-Ari. Algorithms for on-the-fly garbage collection. ACM Toplas, 6, July 1984.

....threads executing the user s program) Authors address: INRIA Rocquencourt, B. P. 105, 78153 Le Chesnay, France. E mail: Damien.Doligez inria.fr, Xavier.Leroy inria.fr. A number of concurrent collectors have been described in the literature, such as the concurrent markand sweep algorithm [11, 15, 5], which requires no synchronization with the mutators, at the price of a moderate overhead on the mutators. However, these designs seem unable to meet the memory demands of typical ML programs. ML programs tend to have high allocation rates, but many allocated objects have a short life span. This ....

....Caml Light system. 7 Related work The system described in this paper is related to two trends in research on garbage collection. The first trend deals with concurrent variants of the classical marksweep algorithm, with as little synchronization as possible between the mutator and the collector [15, 11, 5]. The emphasis here is on proving the correctness of the proposed algorithms, rather than on practicality and efficiency. To our knowledge, none of these designs has made its way into an actual run time system. There are good reasons to believe that collectors based on these designs would not be ....

M. Ben-Ari. Algorithms for on-the-fly garbage collection. ACM Trans. Prog. Lang. Syst., 6(3):333-- 344, 1984.

....of termination detection algorithms have been published in recent years, and many of those published before 1987 are listed in the bibliography in [20] As we showed in Section 4. 3, our sticky flag algorithm (which was also derived in [33] when applying to Ben Ari s garbage collection algorithm [4] a scheme that systematically transforms garbage collection algorithms into distributed termination detection algorithms) is similar to the termination detection algorithm by Dijkstra, Feijen, and van Gasteren [11] Because of its simplicity (messages need not be considered; a single flag is used ....

Ben-Ari, M. Algorithms for on--the--fly garbage collection. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 6 (1984), 333--344.

No context found.

Ben-Ari M (1984) Algorithms for on-the-fly garbage collection, ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems 6, 333-44.

No context found.

Ben-Ari M (1984) Algorithms for on-the-fly garbage collection, ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems 6, 333-44.

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC