On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 1:13 PM Sebastian Huber < sebastian.hu...@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. > [...] > >
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
