Files
LithosAnanake/proof/StarForth_Concurrent.thy
T

109 lines
4.7 KiB
Plaintext

theory StarForth_Concurrent
imports StarForth_Transition StarForth_Loop7_Heartrate StarForth_Loop3_Decay
begin
(* =========================================================================
StarForth_Concurrent — Non-Interference and Mutex Safety
SORRY-FREE. Every result here is fully proved from 2 axioms:
A1 heartbeat_exec_neutral (StarForth_Transition)
A4' word_physics_transparent (StarForth_Transition)
The exec_equiv quotient (≃) from StarForth_Transition is the common thread:
A1 says heartbeat_step is the identity in vm_state/≃.
A4' says word execution is a congruence law for ≃.
Together they make arbitrary word sequences independent of heartbeat timing.
======================================================================== *)
(* =========================================================================
Section 1: Single-word non-interference (proved from exec_after_n_heartbeats_eq)
======================================================================== *)
theorem heartbeat_noninterference:
"\<forall>n k vm.
data_stack (word_table (heartbeat_step ^^ k $ vm) n (heartbeat_step ^^ k $ vm))
= data_stack (word_table vm n vm)"
by (simp add: exec_after_n_heartbeats_eq)
theorem heartbeat_noninterference_rs:
"\<forall>n k vm.
return_stack (word_table (heartbeat_step ^^ k $ vm) n (heartbeat_step ^^ k $ vm))
= return_stack (word_table vm n vm)"
by (simp add: exec_after_n_heartbeats_eq)
(* =========================================================================
Section 2: Trace-level non-interference (proved by induction over ≃)
foldl_word_table_eq: if two initial states are exec-equivalent (≃), then
running any word sequence on each produces identical states. The proof is
structural: at each step word_physics_transparent (A4') gives FULL state
equality of the successors (not just exec-field agreement), so the remaining
foldl is trivially identical — no propagation of equivalence is needed.
heartbeat_trace_noninterference follows immediately by instantiating with
s1 = heartbeat_step ^^ k $ vm, s2 = vm, using heartbeat_n_exec_neutral.
○ CODE-MUST-MATCH: the inductive argument holds only if word_physics_transparent
holds for every word — see the audit protocol in StarForth_Transition.thy.
======================================================================== *)
lemma foldl_word_table_eq:
assumes "s1 \<simeq> s2"
shows "foldl (\<lambda>s n. word_table s n s) s1 ws
= foldl (\<lambda>s n. word_table s n s) s2 ws"
proof (induction ws arbitrary: s1 s2)
case Nil thus ?case by simp
next
case (Cons w ws)
(* A4' gives full state equality of the one-step successors *)
have heq: "word_table s1 w s1 = word_table s2 w s2"
by (rule word_physics_transparent [OF Cons.prems])
show ?case by (simp add: heq)
qed
theorem heartbeat_trace_noninterference:
"\<And> words vm k.
data_stack
(foldl (\<lambda>s n. word_table s n s) (heartbeat_step ^^ k $ vm) words)
= data_stack
(foldl (\<lambda>s n. word_table s n s) vm words)"
using foldl_word_table_eq [OF heartbeat_n_exec_neutral] by simp
(* =========================================================================
Section 3: Mutex safety (proved from lock_state algebra)
======================================================================== *)
definition concurrent_locks_safe :: "vm_state \<Rightarrow> bool" where
"concurrent_locks_safe vm \<longleftrightarrow>
(\<forall>t u. tuning_lock vm = LockHeld t \<longrightarrow> tuning_lock vm = LockHeld u \<longrightarrow> t = u) \<and>
(\<forall>t u. dict_lock vm = LockHeld t \<longrightarrow> dict_lock vm = LockHeld u \<longrightarrow> t = u)"
lemma mutex_exclusive:
"tuning_lock vm = LockHeld t \<Longrightarrow> tuning_lock vm = LockHeld u \<Longrightarrow> t = u"
by simp
lemma concurrent_locks_safe_trivial:
"concurrent_locks_safe vm"
by (simp add: concurrent_locks_safe_def)
lemma vm_step_preserves_lock_safety:
assumes "vm \<rightarrow>[e] vm'"
shows "concurrent_locks_safe vm'"
by (simp add: concurrent_locks_safe_def)
(* =========================================================================
Section 4: Word execution determinism under ≃ (corollaries of A4')
======================================================================== *)
lemma word_exec_deterministic:
assumes "s1 \<simeq> s2"
shows "data_stack (word_table s1 n s1) = data_stack (word_table s2 n s2)"
using word_physics_transparent [OF assms] by simp
lemma word_exec_rs_deterministic:
assumes "s1 \<simeq> s2"
shows "return_stack (word_table s1 n s1) = return_stack (word_table s2 n s2)"
using word_physics_transparent [OF assms] by simp
end