Search

Software failures caused by data race bugs have always been major concerns in parallel and distributed systems, despite significant efforts spent in software testing. Due to their nondeterministic and hard-to-reproduce features, when evaluating systems’ operational reliability, a rather long period of experimental execution time is expected to be spent on observing failures caused by data race conditions. To address this problem, in this paper, we make two contributions. First, this paper proposes stress testing with influencing factors, in which the system runs under certain workloads for a long time with controlled stress conditions to accelerate the occurrence of data race failures. Second, it explores and formulates mathematical relationship models between data races’ statistical characteristics of time to failure (TTF) or mean TTF (MTTF) and the influencing factors. Such relationship models are used for TTF/MTTF extrapolation under different operational conditions and are essential to reduce systems’ reliability evaluation time. The proposed method is empirically evaluated on six applications suffering from failures caused by real-world data race bugs. Through analysis of the experimental results, we obtain several important findings: First, the reduction in the manifestation time to data race failures achieved by controlling the influencing factors is statistically significant. Second, Power model is the best-fitting model of the relationship between the MTTF and the influencing factors. Third, Power Weibull distribution is the best-fitting probability distribution between the TTF and the influencing factors. Finally, the TTF/MTTF can be accurately estimated with the approach proposed in this paper. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Demand for highly reliable software is increasing day by day which in turn has increased the pressure on the software firms to provide reliable software in no time. Ensuring high reliability of the software can only be done by prolonged testing which in result consumes more resources which is not feasible in the existing market situation. To overcome this, software firms are providing patches after software release so as to fix the remaining number of bugs and to give better product experience to users. An update/fix is a minor portion of software to repair the bugs. With such patches, organizations enhance the performance of the software. Delivering patches after release demands extra effort and resources which are costly and hence not economical for the firms. Also, early patch release might cause improper fixation of bugs, on the other hand, delayed release may increase the chances of more failure during the operational phase. Therefore, determining optimal patch release time is imperative. To overcome the above issues we have formulated a two-dimensional time and effort-based cost model to regulate the optimum release and patch time of software, so that the total cost is minimized. Proposed model is validated on a real life data set. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Testing is a key activity of software development and maintenance that determines the level of reliability. Traceability is the ability to describe and follow the life of software artifacts, and has been promoted as a means for supporting various activities, most importantly testing. Traceability information facilitates the testing and debugging of complex software by modeling the dependencies between code and tests. Actively supplementing traceability to testing enables rectifying defects more reliably and efficiently. Despite its importance, the development of test-to-code traceability has not been sufficiently addressed in the literature, and even worse there is currently no organized review of traceability studies in this field. In this work, we have investigated the main conferences, workshops, and journals of the requirements engineering, testing, and reliability, and identified those contributions that refer to traceability topics. From that starting point, we characterized and analyzed the chosen contributions against three research questions by utilizing a comparative framework including nine criteria. As a result, our study arrives to some interesting points, and outlines a number of potential research directions. This, in turn, can pave the way for facilitating and empowering traceability research in this domain to assist software engineers and testers in test management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper we discuss the application of a range of techniques to the verification of mission-critical flight software at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory. For this type of application we want to achieve a higher level of confidence than can be achieved through standard software testing. Unfortunately, given the current state of the art, especially when efforts are constrained by the tight deadlines and resource limitations of a flight project, it is not feasible to produce a rigorous formal proof of correctness of even a well-specified stand-alone module such as a file system (much less more tightly coupled or difficult-to-specify modules). This means that we must look for a practical alternative in the area between traditional testing and proof, as we attempt to optimize rigor and coverage. The approaches we describe here are based on testing, model checking, constraint-solving, monitoring, and finite-state machine learning, in addition to static code analysis. The results we have obtained in the domain of file systems are encouraging, and suggest that for more complex properties of programs with complex data structures, it is possibly more beneficial to use constraint solvers to guide and analyze execution (i.e., as in testing, even if performed by a model checking tool) than to translate the program and property into a set of constraints, as in abstraction-based and bounded model checkers. Our experience with non-file-system flight software modules shows that methods even further removed from traditional static formal methods can be assisted by formal approaches, yet readily adopted by test engineers and software developers, even as the key problem shifts from test generation and selection to test evaluation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Random testing is a basic software testing technique that can be used to assess the software reliability as well as to detect software failures. Adaptive random testing has been proposed to enhance the failure-detection capability of random testing. Previous studies have shown that adaptive random testing can use fewer test cases than random testing to detect the first software failure. In this paper, we evaluate and compare the performance of adaptive random testing and random testing from another perspective, that of code coverage. As shown in various investigations, a higher code coverage not only brings a higher failure-detection capability, but also improves the effectiveness of software reliability estimation. We conduct a series of experiments based on two categories of code coverage criteria: structure-based coverage, and fault-based coverage. Adaptive random testing can achieve higher code coverage than random testing with the same number of test cases. Our experimental results imply that, in addition to having a better failure-detection capability than random testing, adaptive random testing also delivers a higher effectiveness in assessing software reliability, and a higher confidence in the reliability of the software under test even when no failure is detected. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Dynamic software updating (DSU) systems patch programs on the fly without incurring downtime. To avoid failures due to the updating process itself, many DSU systems employ timing restrictions. However, timing restrictions are theoretically imperfect, and their practical effectiveness is an open question. This paper presents the first significant empirical evaluation of three popular timing restrictions: activeness safety (AS), which prevents updates to active functions, con-freeness safety (CFS), which only allows modifications to active functions when doing so is provably type-safe, and manual identification of the event-handling loops during which an update may occur. We evaluated these timing restrictions using a series of DSU patches to three programs: OpenSSH, vsftpd, and ngIRCd. We systematically applied updates at each distinct update point reached during execution of a suite of system tests for these programs to determine which updates pass and which fail. We found that all three timing restrictions prevented most failures, but only manual identification allowed none. Further, although CFS and AS allowed many more update points, manual identification still supported updates with minimal delay. Finally, we found that manual identification required the least developer effort. Overall, we conclude that manual identification is most effective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The growing dependence of society on software systems places a high premium on their reliable operation. Moreover, the stringent reliability expectations imposed on these systems must be achieved despite their increasing size and complexity, and decreasing resources available for their development and maintenance. To mitigate these dual challenges, a systematic approach to guide the allocation of resources to the components of a software system is necessary. This paper presents an optimization framework which considers the contribution of each component to system reliability to determine the amount of effort to be allocated to each component, towards the ultimate objective of achieving the specified system reliability target with minimal effort. We assume that the contribution of a component to system reliability is governed by two factors: the system architecture, and the effort-reliability relationship of the component. This characterization is referred to as “architecture-based optimization” because it considers the system architecture explicitly in the effort allocation process. It is demonstrated that the architecture-based optimization framework outperforms other effort allocation strategies, including equal component weighting, and expert opinion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Testing is necessary to ensure software reliability and fidelity. However, testing activities are very expensive and difficult. Micro architectures, such as design patterns and anti-patterns, widely exist in object oriented systems and are recognized as influencing many software quality attributes. Our goal is to identify their impact on system testability and evaluate how they can be leveraged to reduce the testing effort while increasing the system reliability and fidelity. The proposed research aims at contributing to reduce complexity and increase testing efficiency by using micro architectures. We will base our work on the rich existing tools of micro architectures detection and code reverse-engineering. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With the growing size and complexity of software applications, traditional software reliability methods are insufficient to analyze inter-component interactions of modular software systems. The number of test cases may be extremely large for this application; therefore, it is hard for us to extensively test each software component given resource limitations. In this paper, we propose an adaptive framework of incorporating path testing into reliability estimation for modular software systems. Three estimated methods based on common program structures, namely, sequence, branch, and loop structures, are proposed to calculate the path reliability. Consequently, the derived path reliabilities can be applied to the estimates of software reliability. Some experiments are performed based on two real systems. In addition, the accuracy and correlation with respect to the experiments are investigated by simulation and sensitivity analysis. Experimental results show that the path reliability has a high correlation to the actual software reliability. For software with loop structures, a smaller loop number can be assigned to derive an acceptable estimation of path reliability. Further, the sensitivity analysis can be used to identify critical modules and paths for resource allocation. It can be concluded that the proposed methods are useful and helpful for estimating software reliability and can be adaptively used in the early stages of software development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, we propose two general frameworks for deriving several software reliability growth models based on a non-homogeneous Poisson process (NHPP) in the presence of imperfect debugging and error generation. The proposed models are initially formulated for the case when there is no differentiation between failure observation and fault removal testing processes, and then extended for the case when there is a clear differentiation between failure observation and fault removal testing processes. During the last three decades, many software reliability growth models (SRGM) have been developed to describe software failures as a random process, and can be used to evaluate development status during testing. With SRGM, software engineers can easily measure (or forecast) the software reliability (or quality), and plot software reliability growth charts. It is not easy to select the best model from a plethora of models available. There are few SRGM in the literature of software engineering that differentiates between failure observation and fault removal processes. In real software development environments, the number of failures observed need not be the same as the number of faults removed. Due to the complexity of software systems, and an incomplete understanding of software, the testing team may not be able to remove the fault perfectly on observation of a failure, and the original fault may remain, resulting in a phenomenon known as imperfect debugging, or get replaced by another fault causing error generation. In the case of imperfect debugging, the fault content of the software remains the same; while in the case of error generation, the fault content increases as the testing progresses. Removal of observed faults may result in the introduction of new faults. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Software testing is an important issue in software engineering. As software systems become increasingly large and complex, the problem of how to optimally allocate the limited testing resource during the testing phase has become more important, and difficult. Traditional Optimal Testing Resource Allocation Problems (OTRAPs) involve seeking an optimal allocation of a limited amount of testing resource to a number of activities with respect to some objectives (e.g., reliability, or cost). We suggest solving OTRAPs with Multi-Objective Evolutionary Algorithms (MOEAs). Specifically, we formulate OTRAPs as two types of multi-objective problems. First, we consider the reliability of the system and the testing cost as two objectives. Second, the total testing resource consumed is also taken into account as the third objective. The advantages of MOEAs over state-of-the-art single objective approaches to OTRAPs will be shown through empirical studies. Our study has revealed that a well-known MOEA, namely Nondominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm II (NSGA-II), performs well on the first problem formulation, but fails on the second one. Hence, a Harmonic Distance Based Multi-Objective Evolutionary Algorithm (HaD-MOEA) is proposed and evaluated in this paper. Comprehensive experimental studies on both parallel-series, and star-structure modular software systems have shown the superiority of HaD-MOEA over NSGA-II for OTRAPs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents a testing strategy designed to detect errors in the control flow of a computer program, and the conditions under which this strategy is reliable are given and characterized. The control flow statements in a computer program partition the input space into a set of mutually exclusive domains, each of which corresponds to a particular program path and consists of input data points which cause that path to be executed. The testing strategy generates test points to examine the boundaries of a domain to detect whether a domain error has occurred, as either one or more of these boundaries will have shifted or else the corresponding predicate relational operator has changed. If test points can be chosen within ∈ of each boundary, under the appropriate assumptions, the strategy is shown to be reliable in detecting domain errors of magnitude greater than ∈. Moreover, the number of test points required to test each domain grows only linearly with both the dimensionality of the input space and the number of predicates along the path being tested. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The theory of test data selection proposed by Goodenough and Gerhart is examined. In order to extend and refine this theory, the concepts of a revealing test criterion and a revealing subdomain are proposed. These notions are then used to provide a basis for constructing program tests. A subset of a program's input domain is revealing if the existence of one incorrectly processed input implies that all of the subset's elements axe processed incorrectly. The intent of this notion is to partition the program's domain in such a way that all elements of an equivalence class are either processed correctly or incorrectly. A test set is then formed by choosing one element from each class. This process represents perfect program testing. For a practical testing strategy, the domain is partitioned into subdomains which are revealing for errors considered likely to occur. Three programs which have previously appeared in the literature are discussed and tested using the notions developed in the paper. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article we introduce the problem of computer software reliability and discuss a probabilistic model for describing the failure of software. We suggest a procedure for estimating the parameters of the model and propose a stopping rule for debugging the software. We apply our procedures to some published data on software failures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: As the scale and complexity of software increases, the number of tests needed for effective validation becomes extremely large. Executing these large test suites is expensive, both in terms of time and energy. Cache misses are a significant contributing factor to execution time of software. We propose an approach that helps order test executions in a test suite in such a way that instruction cache misses are reduced. We also ensure that the approach scales to large test suite sizes. We conduct an empirical evaluation with 20 subject programs and test suites from the SIR repository, EEMBC suite, and LLVM Symbolizer, comparing execution times and cache misses with test orderings maximising instruction locality versus a traditional ordering maximising coverage and random permutations. We also assess overhead of algorithms in generating the orderings that optimise cache locality. Nature of programs and tests impact the performance gained with our approach. Performance gains were considerable for programs and test suites where the average number of different instructions executed between tests was high. We achieved an average execution speedup of 6.83% and a maximum execution speedup of 17% over subject programs with differing control flow between test executions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]