Static analysis is a powerful technique for bug detection in critical systems like operating system kernels. However, designing and implementing static analyzers is challenging, time-consuming, and typically limited to predefined bug patterns. While large language models (LLMs) have shown promise for static analysis, directly applying them to scan large codebases remains impractical due to computational constraints and contextual limitations. We present KNighter, the first approach that unlocks practical LLM-based static analysis by automatically synthesizing static analyzers from historical bug patterns. Rather than using LLMs to directly analyze massive codebases, our key insight is leveraging LLMs to generate specialized static analyzers guided by historical patch knowledge. KNighter implements this vision through a multi-stage synthesis pipeline that validates checker correctness against original patches and employs an automated refinement process to iteratively reduce false positives. Our evaluation on the Linux kernel demonstrates that KNighter generates high-precision checkers capable of detecting diverse bug patterns overlooked by existing human-written analyzers. To date, KNighter-synthesized checkers have discovered 70 new bugs/vulnerabilities in the Linux kernel, with 56 confirmed and 41 already fixed. 11 of these findings have been assigned CVE numbers. This work establishes an entirely new paradigm for scalable, reliable, and traceable LLM-based static analysis for real-world systems via checker synthesis.

Ensuring correctness is crucial for code generation. Formal verification offers a definitive assurance of correctness, but demands substantial human effort in proof construction and hence raises a pressing need for automation. The primary obstacle lies in the severe lack of data -- there is much less proof than code for LLMs to train upon. In this paper, we introduce SAFE, a novel framework that overcomes the lack of human-written proof to enable automated proof generation of Rust code. SAFE establishes a self-evolving cycle where data synthesis and fine-tuning collaborate to enhance the model capability, leveraging the definitive power of a symbolic verifier in telling correct proof from incorrect ones. SAFE also re-purposes the large number of synthesized incorrect proofs to train the selfdebugging capability of the fine-tuned models, empowering them to fix incorrect proofs based on the verifier's feedback. SAFE demonstrates superior efficiency and precision compared to GPT-4o. Through tens of thousands of synthesized proofs and the self-debugging mechanism, we improve the capability of opensource models, initially unacquainted with formal verification, to automatically write proof for Rust code. This advancement leads to a significant improvement in performance, achieving a 70.50% accuracy rate in a benchmark crafted by human experts, a significant leap over GPT-4o's performance of 24.46%. Large Language Models (LLMs) have recently exhibited impressive capabilities in code generation (Roziere et al., 2023; Guo et al., 2024; Lozhkov et al., 2024; Google, 2024). However, the correctness of generated code cannot be guaranteed. To tackle this issue, prior research (Chen et al., 2022; Zhang et al., 2024a; Huang et al., 2023) has explored assessing generated code by test cases, which sometimes are also generated by LLMs. Although helpful, testing cannot cover all possible program inputs; they can reveal the presence of bugs but cannot prove their absence (Dahl et al., 1972).

Generative AI has shown its values for many software engineering tasks. Still in its infancy, large language model (LLM)-based proof generation lags behind LLM-based code generation. In this paper, we present AutoVerus. AutoVerus uses LLM to automatically generate correctness proof for Rust code. AutoVerus is designed to match the unique features of Verus, a verification tool that can prove the correctness of Rust code using proofs and specifications also written in Rust. AutoVerus consists of a network of LLM agents that are crafted and orchestrated to mimic human experts' three phases of proof construction: preliminary proof generation, proof refinement guided by generic tips, and proof debugging guided by verification errors. To thoroughly evaluate AutoVerus and help foster future research in this direction, we have built a benchmark suite of 150 non-trivial proof tasks, based on existing code-generation benchmarks and verification benchmarks. Our evaluation shows that AutoVerus can automatically generate correct proof for more than 90% of them, with more than half of them tackled in less than 30 seconds or 3 LLM calls.

Bugs in operating system kernels can affect billions of devices and users all over the world. As a result, a large body of research has been focused on kernel fuzzing, i.e., automatically generating syscall (system call) sequences to detect potential kernel bugs or vulnerabilities. Syzkaller, one of the most widely studied kernel fuzzers, aims to generate valid syscall sequences based on predefined specifications written in syzlang, a domain-specific language for defining syscalls, their arguments, and the relationships between them. While there has been existing work trying to automate Syzkaller specification generation, this still remains largely manual work and a large number of important syscalls are still uncovered. In this paper, we propose KernelGPT, the first approach to automatically inferring Syzkaller specifications via Large Language Models (LLMs) for enhanced kernel fuzzing. Our basic insight is that LLMs have seen massive kernel code, documentation, and use cases during pre-training, and thus can automatically distill the necessary information for making valid syscalls. More specifically, KernelGPT leverages an iterative approach to automatically infer all the necessary specification components, and further leverages the validation feedback to repair/refine the initial specifications. Our preliminary results demonstrate that KernelGPT can help Syzkaller achieve higher coverage and find multiple previously unknown bugs. Moreover, we also received a request from the Syzkaller team to upstream specifications inferred by KernelGPT.

Compiler correctness is crucial, as miscompilation falsifying the program behaviors can lead to serious consequences. In the literature, fuzzing has been extensively studied to uncover compiler defects. However, compiler fuzzing remains challenging: Existing arts focus on black- and grey-box fuzzing, which generates tests without sufficient understanding of internal compiler behaviors. As such, they often fail to construct programs to exercise conditions of intricate optimizations. Meanwhile, traditional white-box techniques are computationally inapplicable to the giant codebase of compilers. Recent advances demonstrate that Large Language Models (LLMs) excel in code generation/understanding tasks and have achieved state-of-the-art performance in black-box fuzzing. Nonetheless, prompting LLMs with compiler source-code information remains a missing piece of research in compiler testing. To this end, we propose WhiteFox, the first white-box compiler fuzzer using LLMs with source-code information to test compiler optimization. WhiteFox adopts a dual-model framework: (i) an analysis LLM examines the low-level optimization source code and produces requirements on the high-level test programs that can trigger the optimization; (ii) a generation LLM produces test programs based on the summarized requirements. Additionally, optimization-triggering tests are used as feedback to further enhance the test generation on the fly. Our evaluation on four popular compilers shows that WhiteFox can generate high-quality tests to exercise deep optimizations requiring intricate conditions, practicing up to 80 more optimizations than state-of-the-art fuzzers. To date, WhiteFox has found in total 96 bugs, with 80 confirmed as previously unknown and 51 already fixed. Beyond compiler testing, WhiteFox can also be adapted for white-box fuzzing of other complex, real-world software systems in general.