Subject: [ub] C provenance semantics proposal
From: Peter Sewell (Peter.Sewell_at_[hidden])
Date: 2019-04-02 03:16:15
Dear UB folk,
continuing the discussion from last year at EuroLLVM, the GNU Tools Cauldron,
and elsewhere, we (the WG14 C memory object model study group) now
have a detailed proposal for pointer provenance semantics, refining
the "provenance not via integers (PNVI)" model presented there.
This will be discussed at the ISO WG14 C standards committee at the
end of April, and comments from the community before then would
be very welcome. The proposal reconciles the needs of existing code
and the behaviour of existing compilers as well as we can, but it doesn't
exactly match any of the latter, so we'd especially like to know whether
it would be feasible to implement - our hope is that it would only require
minor changes. It's presented in three documents:
N2362 Moving to a provenance-aware memory model for C: proposal for C2x
by the memory object model study group. Jens Gustedt, Peter Sewell,
Kayvan Memarian, Victor B. F. Gomes, Martin Uecker.
This introduces the proposal and gives the proposed change to the standard
text, presented as change-highlighted pages of the standard
(though one might want to read the N2363 examples before going into that).
N2363 C provenance semantics: examples.
Peter Sewell, Kayvan Memarian, Victor B. F. Gomes, Jens Gustedt, Martin Uecker.
This explains the proposal and its design choices with discussion of a
series of examples.
N2364 C provenance semantics: detailed semantics.
Peter Sewell, Kayvan Memarian, Victor B. F. Gomes.
This gives a detailed mathematical semantics for the proposal
In addition, at http://cerberus.cl.cam.ac.uk/cerberus we provide an
executable version of the semantics, with a web interface that
allows one to explore and visualise the behaviour of small test
programs, stepping through and seeing the abstract-machine
memory state including provenance information. N2363 compares
the results of this for the example programs with gcc, clang, and icc
results, though the tests are really intended as tests of the semantics
rather than compiler tests, so one has to interpret this with care.
Peter (for the study group)
SG12 list run by email@example.com