[PATCH] Strict thread-stack isolation

[Utkarsh Rai]

On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 1:13 PM Sebastian Huber <
sebastian.huber at embedded-brains.de> wrote:

> Hello Utkarsh,
>
> if you look a the stuff you added to the score and compare it with
> something existing in the score, do you notice differences in the naming
> conventions and the code format? Have you looked at
>
> https://docs.rtems.org/branches/master/eng/coding.html
>
> ?
>

Yes, sorry, I realize I need to do a better job with the coding standard
and maintaining namespace consistency. I will rectify this.


> On 13/07/2020 18:33, Utkarsh Rai wrote:
> > - This is the complete set of changes for strict isolation of thread
> stacks.
> > - There needs to be a confiuration operation,(#if
> defined(USE_THREAD_STACK_PROTECTION) for simple configuration can be used)
> > - The stack attributes are allocated through malloc, this needs to be
> done through score unlimited objects.
> > ---
> >   bsps/arm/headers.am                           |   1 +
> >   .../include/bsp/arm-cp15-set-ttb-entries.h    |   7 +
> >   .../shared/cp15/arm-cp15-set-ttb-entries.c    |   3 +
> >   bsps/arm/xilinx-zynq/mmu/bsp-set-mmu-attr.c   |  72 +++++++++
> >   bsps/shared/start/stackalloc.c                |  20 ++-
> >   c/src/lib/libbsp/arm/xilinx-zynq/Makefile.am  |   5 +-
> >   cpukit/Makefile.am                            |   1 +
> >   cpukit/headers.am                             |   2 +
> >   cpukit/include/rtems/score/memorymanagement.h |  22 +++
> >   cpukit/include/rtems/score/stackmanagement.h  |  49 ++++++
> >   cpukit/score/cpu/arm/cpu.c                    |   3 +
> >   cpukit/score/cpu/arm/cpu_asm.S                |  22 ++-
> >   .../score/cpu/arm/include/rtems/score/cpu.h   |  20 +++
> >   cpukit/score/src/stackmanagement.c            | 143 ++++++++++++++++++
> >   14 files changed, 365 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >   create mode 100644 bsps/arm/include/bsp/arm-cp15-set-ttb-entries.h
> >   create mode 100644 bsps/arm/xilinx-zynq/mmu/bsp-set-mmu-attr.c
> >   create mode 100644 cpukit/include/rtems/score/memorymanagement.h
> >   create mode 100644 cpukit/include/rtems/score/stackmanagement.h
> >   create mode 100644 cpukit/score/src/stackmanagement.c
> >
> > diff --git a/bsps/arm/headers.am b/bsps/arm/headers.am
> > index 3d2b09effa..b1e86f3385 100644
> > --- a/bsps/arm/headers.am
> > +++ b/bsps/arm/headers.am
> > @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@ include_bsp_HEADERS +=
> ../../../../../bsps/arm/include/bsp/arm-a9mpcore-clock.h
> >   include_bsp_HEADERS +=
> ../../../../../bsps/arm/include/bsp/arm-a9mpcore-irq.h
> >   include_bsp_HEADERS +=
> ../../../../../bsps/arm/include/bsp/arm-a9mpcore-regs.h
> >   include_bsp_HEADERS +=
> ../../../../../bsps/arm/include/bsp/arm-a9mpcore-start.h
> > +include_bsp_HEADERS +=
> ../../../../../bsps/arm/include/bsp/arm-cp15-set-ttb-entries.h
> >   include_bsp_HEADERS +=
> ../../../../../bsps/arm/include/bsp/arm-cp15-start.h
> >   include_bsp_HEADERS += ../../../../../bsps/arm/include/bsp/arm-errata.h
> >   include_bsp_HEADERS +=
> ../../../../../bsps/arm/include/bsp/arm-gic-irq.h
> > diff --git a/bsps/arm/include/bsp/arm-cp15-set-ttb-entries.h
> b/bsps/arm/include/bsp/arm-cp15-set-ttb-entries.h
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 0000000000..39170927da
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/bsps/arm/include/bsp/arm-cp15-set-ttb-entries.h
> > @@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
> > +#include<bsp/arm-cp15-start.h>
> > +
> > +uint32_t arm_cp15_set_translation_table_entries(
> > +  const void *begin,
> > +  const void *end,
> > +  uint32_t section_flags
> > +);
> > \ No newline at end of file
> Why did you add this header file?
>

It was not meant to be included in the patch, this has crept in while I was
squashing the commits.


> > diff --git a/bsps/arm/shared/cp15/arm-cp15-set-ttb-entries.c
> b/bsps/arm/shared/cp15/arm-cp15-set-ttb-entries.c
> > index 507277dca1..f5d0494167 100644
> > --- a/bsps/arm/shared/cp15/arm-cp15-set-ttb-entries.c
> > +++ b/bsps/arm/shared/cp15/arm-cp15-set-ttb-entries.c
> > @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
> >
> >   #include <rtems.h>
> >   #include <libcpu/arm-cp15.h>
> > +#include <bsp/arm-cp15-set-ttb-entries.h>
> >   #include <bspopts.h>
> >
> >   /*
> > @@ -30,6 +31,8 @@
> >    * ARM DDI 0406C.b (ID072512)
> >    */
> >
> > +#define ARM_MMU_USE_SMALL_PAGES
> > +
>
> This is the wrong place to define this define. This is supposed to be a
> BSP option.
>
> >   static uint32_t set_translation_table_entries(
> >     const void *begin,
> >     const void *end,
> > diff --git a/bsps/arm/xilinx-zynq/mmu/bsp-set-mmu-attr.c
> b/bsps/arm/xilinx-zynq/mmu/bsp-set-mmu-attr.c
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 0000000000..978e35b86c
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/bsps/arm/xilinx-zynq/mmu/bsp-set-mmu-attr.c
> > @@ -0,0 +1,72 @@
> > +#include <bsp/arm-cp15-start.h>
> > +#include <bsp/arm-cp15-set-ttb-entries.h>
> > +#include <rtems/score/memorymanagement.h>
> > +#include <libcpu/arm-cp15.h>
> > +#include <rtems.h>
> > +
> > +#ifdef USE_THREAD_STACK_PROTECTION
>
> Who defines USE_THREAD_STACK_PROTECTION?
>
>
I have not yet decided on how to configure thread-stack protection for an
application.  The  ' #ifdef USE_THREAD_STACK_PROTECTION ' is a temporary
hack that I have been using to compile the code related to thread-stack
protection.


> [...]
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20200714/e58485b7/attachment-0001.html>