Transactional objects combine the performance of classical concurrent objects with the high-level programmability of transactional memory. However, verifying the correctness of transactional objects is tricky, requiring reasoning simultaneously about classical concurrent objects, which guarantee the atomicity of individual methods—the property known as linearizability—and about software-transactional-memory libraries, which guarantee the atomicity of user-defined sequences of method calls—or serializability. We present a formal-verification framework called C4, built up from the familiar notion of linearizability and its compositional properties, that allows proof of both kinds of libraries, along with composition of theorems from both styles to prove correctness of applications or further libraries. We apply the framework in a significant case study, verifying a transactional set object built out of both classical and transactional components following the technique of transactional predication ; the proof is modular, reasoning separately about the transactional and nontransactional parts of the implementation. Central to our approach is the use of syntactic transformers on interaction trees —i.e., transactional libraries that transform client code to enforce particular synchronization disciplines. Our framework and case studies are mechanized in Coq.

Today’s Internet services are often expected to stay available and render high responsiveness even in the face of site crashes and network partitions. Theoretical results state that causal consistency is one of the strongest consistency guarantees that is possible under these requirements, and many practical systems provide causally consistent key-value stores. In this paper, we present a framework called Chapar for modular verification of causal consistency for replicated key-value store implementations and their client programs. Specifically, we formulate separate correctness conditions for key-value store implementations and for their clients. The interface between the two is a novel operational semantics for causal consistency. We have verified the causal consistency of two key-value store implementations from the literature using a novel proof technique. We have also implemented a simple automatic model checker for the correctness of client programs. The two independently verified results for the implementations and clients can be composed to conclude the correctness of any of the programs when executed with any of the implementations. We have developed and checked our framework in Coq, extracted it to OCaml, and built executable stores.