[Imprint][Data Privacy Statement][E-Mail]

View long theorem info. View the proof. Back to main index. View the specification. View theorem base summary, View theorem base listing, the used properties by spec, the dependency list, the symbol table,

Proof step 50 from proof inv-create (previous step)

fs1[ri1[inodekey(m)]].directory, fs1[ri1[inodekey(m)]].inode?, ro.inodes?, fo.inodes?, file-node-cons(fs1, ri1), log-cons(log0, fs1), orphans-cons(fs1, ri1, ro), replay-cons-strong(fs1, ri1, ro, fi, fo, log0), ri-inj(ri1), ri-inj(fi), ubifs-cons(fs1, ri1, ro, fi, fo, log0), inodekey(m) ∈ ri1, ri1[inodekey(m)] ∈ fs1, fs1[ri1[inodekey(m)]].nlink ≠ 0 ∨ m = ROOT_INO ⊦ adr1 = adr2, adr1 = adr3, adr2 = adr3, n = 0, adr3 ∈ fs1, adr2 ∈ fs1, adr1 ∈ fs1, inodekey(n) ∈ ri1, inodekey(n) ∈ fo, dentrykey(m, str) ∈ ri1, inodekey(m) ∈ ro, ubifs-cons (fs1[adr1, inodenode(inodekey(m), md0, true, fs1[ri1[inodekey(m)]].nlink, fs1[ri1[inodekey(m)]].nsubdirs, fs1[ri1[inodekey(m)]].size + 1)] [adr2, dentrynode(dentrykey(m, str), n) ] [adr3, inodenode(inodekey(n), md, false, 1, 0, 0) ], ri1[inodekey(m), adr1][dentrykey(m, str), adr2][inodekey(n), adr3], ro, fi, fo, ((log0 + adr1 ') + adr2 ') + adr3 ') ∧ replay-cons-strong (fs1[adr1, inodenode(inodekey(m), md0, true, fs1[ri1[inodekey(m)]].nlink, fs1[ri1[inodekey(m)]].nsubdirs, fs1[ri1[inodekey(m)]].size + 1)] [adr2, dentrynode(dentrykey(m, str), n) ] [adr3, inodenode(inodekey(n), md, false, 1, 0, 0) ], ri1[inodekey(m), adr1][dentrykey(m, str), adr2][inodekey(n), adr3], ro, fi, fo, ((log0 + adr1 ') + adr2 ') + adr3 ') ∧ file-node-cons (fs1[adr1, inodenode(inodekey(m), md0, true, fs1[ri1[inodekey(m)]].nlink, fs1[ri1[inodekey(m)]].nsubdirs, fs1[ri1[inodekey(m)]].size + 1)] [adr2, dentrynode(dentrykey(m, str), n) ] [adr3, inodenode(inodekey(n), md, false, 1, 0, 0) ], ri1[inodekey(m), adr1][dentrykey(m, str), adr2][inodekey(n), adr3]) ∧ orphans-cons (fs1[adr1, inodenode(inodekey(m), md0, true, fs1[ri1[inodekey(m)]].nlink, fs1[ri1[inodekey(m)]].nsubdirs, fs1[ri1[inodekey(m)]].size + 1)] [adr2, dentrynode(dentrykey(m, str), n) ] [adr3, inodenode(inodekey(n), md, false, 1, 0, 0) ], ri1[inodekey(m), adr1][dentrykey(m, str), adr2][inodekey(n), adr3], ro)

User applied rule case distinction

And obtained the following new goals

Proof step 51:
fs1[ri1[inodekey(m)]].directory, fs1[ri1[inodekey(m)]].inode?, fo.inodes?, ro.inodes?, file-node-cons(fs1, ri1), log-cons(log0, fs1), orphans-cons(fs1, ri1, ro), replay-cons-strong(fs1, ri1, ro, fi, fo, log0), ri-inj(fi), ri-inj(ri1), ubifs-cons(fs1, ri1, ro, fi, fo, log0), ri1[inodekey(m)] ∈ fs1, inodekey(m) ∈ ri1, fs1[ri1[inodekey(m)]].nlink ≠ 0 ∨ m = ROOT_INO ⊦ adr1 = adr3, adr1 = adr2, adr2 = adr3, n = 0, ubifs-cons (fs1[adr1, inodenode(inodekey(m), md0, true, fs1[ri1[inodekey(m)]].nlink, fs1[ri1[inodekey(m)]].nsubdirs, fs1[ri1[inodekey(m)]].size + 1)] [adr2, dentrynode(dentrykey(m, str), n) ] [adr3, inodenode(inodekey(n), md, false, 1, 0, 0) ], ri1[inodekey(m), adr1][dentrykey(m, str), adr2][inodekey(n), adr3], ro, fi, fo, ((log0 + adr1 ') + adr2 ') + adr3 '), inodekey(m) ∈ ro, dentrykey(m, str) ∈ ri1, inodekey(n) ∈ fo, inodekey(n) ∈ ri1, adr1 ∈ fs1, adr2 ∈ fs1, adr3 ∈ fs1
Proof step 87:
fs1[ri1[inodekey(m)]].directory, fs1[ri1[inodekey(m)]].inode?, fo.inodes?, ro.inodes?, file-node-cons(fs1, ri1), log-cons(log0, fs1), orphans-cons(fs1, ri1, ro), replay-cons-strong(fs1, ri1, ro, fi, fo, log0), ri-inj(fi), ri-inj(ri1), ubifs-cons(fs1, ri1, ro, fi, fo, log0), ri1[inodekey(m)] ∈ fs1, inodekey(m) ∈ ri1, fs1[ri1[inodekey(m)]].nlink ≠ 0 ∨ m = ROOT_INO ⊦ adr1 = adr3, adr1 = adr2, adr2 = adr3, n = 0, replay-cons-strong (fs1[adr1, inodenode(inodekey(m), md0, true, fs1[ri1[inodekey(m)]].nlink, fs1[ri1[inodekey(m)]].nsubdirs, fs1[ri1[inodekey(m)]].size + 1)] [adr2, dentrynode(dentrykey(m, str), n) ] [adr3, inodenode(inodekey(n), md, false, 1, 0, 0) ], ri1[inodekey(m), adr1][dentrykey(m, str), adr2][inodekey(n), adr3], ro, fi, fo, ((log0 + adr1 ') + adr2 ') + adr3 '), inodekey(m) ∈ ro, dentrykey(m, str) ∈ ri1, inodekey(n) ∈ fo, inodekey(n) ∈ ri1, adr1 ∈ fs1, adr2 ∈ fs1, adr3 ∈ fs1
Proof step 111:
fs1[ri1[inodekey(m)]].directory, fs1[ri1[inodekey(m)]].inode?, fo.inodes?, ro.inodes?, file-node-cons(fs1, ri1), log-cons(log0, fs1), orphans-cons(fs1, ri1, ro), replay-cons-strong(fs1, ri1, ro, fi, fo, log0), ri-inj(fi), ri-inj(ri1), ubifs-cons(fs1, ri1, ro, fi, fo, log0), ri1[inodekey(m)] ∈ fs1, inodekey(m) ∈ ri1, fs1[ri1[inodekey(m)]].nlink ≠ 0 ∨ m = ROOT_INO ⊦ adr1 = adr3, adr1 = adr2, adr2 = adr3, n = 0, file-node-cons (fs1[adr1, inodenode(inodekey(m), md0, true, fs1[ri1[inodekey(m)]].nlink, fs1[ri1[inodekey(m)]].nsubdirs, fs1[ri1[inodekey(m)]].size + 1)] [adr2, dentrynode(dentrykey(m, str), n) ] [adr3, inodenode(inodekey(n), md, false, 1, 0, 0) ], ri1[inodekey(m), adr1][dentrykey(m, str), adr2][inodekey(n), adr3]), inodekey(m) ∈ ro, dentrykey(m, str) ∈ ri1, inodekey(n) ∈ fo, inodekey(n) ∈ ri1, adr1 ∈ fs1, adr2 ∈ fs1, adr3 ∈ fs1
Proof step 119:
fs1[ri1[inodekey(m)]].directory, fs1[ri1[inodekey(m)]].inode?, fo.inodes?, ro.inodes?, file-node-cons(fs1, ri1), log-cons(log0, fs1), orphans-cons(fs1, ri1, ro), replay-cons-strong(fs1, ri1, ro, fi, fo, log0), ri-inj(fi), ri-inj(ri1), ubifs-cons(fs1, ri1, ro, fi, fo, log0), ri1[inodekey(m)] ∈ fs1, inodekey(m) ∈ ri1, fs1[ri1[inodekey(m)]].nlink ≠ 0 ∨ m = ROOT_INO ⊦ adr1 = adr3, adr1 = adr2, adr2 = adr3, n = 0, orphans-cons (fs1[adr1, inodenode(inodekey(m), md0, true, fs1[ri1[inodekey(m)]].nlink, fs1[ri1[inodekey(m)]].nsubdirs, fs1[ri1[inodekey(m)]].size + 1)] [adr2, dentrynode(dentrykey(m, str), n) ] [adr3, inodenode(inodekey(n), md, false, 1, 0, 0) ], ri1[inodekey(m), adr1][dentrykey(m, str), adr2][inodekey(n), adr3], ro), inodekey(m) ∈ ro, dentrykey(m, str) ∈ ri1, inodekey(n) ∈ fo, inodekey(n) ∈ ri1, adr1 ∈ fs1, adr2 ∈ fs1, adr3 ∈ fs1

Rule argument

pos: right 12

Proof step 50 from proof inv-create (previous step)

User applied rule case distinction

And obtained the following new goals

Rule argument

Additional information