Hi Ayan,

In the current scenario I guess you need to wait for the new releases,
which are expected soon.


On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 10:23 +0530, AYAN KUMAR HALDER wrote:
> Hi Amit,
> 
> I am using toolkit release version 0.5. dated 19.08.2011 for
> OMAP4/Pandaboard.  
> 
> If the toolkit is using some pre - supplied configuration, then how do
> I change that configuration.
> I want to know , how to get my executable working for Pandaboard as my
> final aim is to build a bare-metal
> application which will interact with some peripherals ( similar to
> device_service example)
> for which, I believe, changing the configuration is must,
> 
> Please help me to proceed further.
> 
> Regards,
> Ayan Kumar Halder
> 
>  
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 9:56 PM, Amit Mahajan
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>         Hi Ayan,
>         
>         Are you using the toolkit release?
>         
>         Your observations are correct and from your elf output it
>         seems like
>         system is working fine. Incase you are using some prebuilt
>         binary of
>         hypervisor(as is the case with toolkits), the contain
>         configuration is
>         pre-supplied to it and will not go above this settings I
>         think.
>         
>         
>         On Wed, 2012-07-18 at 20:50 +0530, AYAN KUMAR HALDER wrote:
>         >
>         > Hi Amit,
>         >
>         > I have checked the elf file  for "hello world" and confirmed
>         that
>         > there are no RWX pages
>         >
>         > I was debugging the python build script to see if it is able
>         to read
>         > the elf sections properly or not. I added some prints( to
>         > display adresses of various sections) in
>         > tools/pyelf/elf_section_info.py in
>         elf_loadable_section_info(). The
>         > following were the logs:-
>         > rw_sections_start 0xc0003000
>         > rw_sections_end 0xc0008000
>         > rx_sections_start 0xc0000000
>         > rx_sections_end 0xc0002190
>         >
>         > But while executing I got the following logs:-
>         >
>         >
>         > code0: Mapping 0x3000 bytes as RX from 0x84000000 physical
>         to
>         > 0xc0000000 virtual for project0
>         > code0: Mapping 0x2000 bytes as RW from 0x84003000 physical
>         to
>         > 0xc0003000 virtual for project0
>         >
>         > fault_ipc_to_pager: Sending ipc from 1 to 1,
>         > faulty_address=0xc0007ff8, faulty pc=0xc0000014
>         >
>         > tid=0x00000001
>         > Unhandled kernel data abort at address 0x00000008
>         > FAR:0x00000008
>         > PC:0xf000e380
>         > Unhandled kernel abort.
>         > Kernel panic.
>         > Halting system...
>         >
>         >
>         > I can see that the RX section has been mapped correctly for
>         0x3000
>         > bytes, but the RW section should have been mapped for 0x5000
>         bytes
>         > whereas it has been actually mapped for 0x2000 bytes. And
>         the faulty
>         > virtual address 0xc0007ff8 is within our range of
>         0xc0008000.
>         >
>         > Therefore, please help me to locate the script where the
>         mapping is
>         > defined.
>         > I tried to make some changes in linker.ld script( eg . +=
>         0x8000 in
>         > bss section ), but it did not make any difference.
>         >
>         > (Please find my final.elf for your reference. Please execute
>         it on
>         > Pandaboard to observe similar behavior ).
>         >
>         > Regards,
>         > Ayan Kumar Halder
>         >
>         > On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 10:24 PM, Amit Mahajan
>         > <[email protected]> wrote:
>         >         On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 20:14 +0530, AYAN KUMAR HALDER
>         wrote:
>         >         > Hi Amit,
>         >         >
>         >         > Thanks for the prompt and detailed explanation.
>         >         >
>         >         > I had the same understanding, but now I have
>         experienced a
>         >         different
>         >         > behavior with Pandaboard ES (OMAP- 4460).
>         >         >
>         >         > I have declared a global static variable as (in my
>         >         project) :-
>         >         > static char utcb[THREADS_TOTAL * ( 13 )]
>         >         L4_ALIGN(UTCB_SIZE);
>         >         > With this, my program got executed successfully.
>         >         >
>         >         > The logs were as follows:-
>         >         > code0: Mapping 0x3000 bytes as RX from 0x84000000
>         physical
>         >         to
>         >         > 0xc0000000 virtual for project0
>         >         > code0: Mapping 0x2000 bytes as RW from 0x84003000
>         physical
>         >         to
>         >         > 0xc0003000 virtual for project0
>         >         > In __l4_threadlib_init
>         >         > c0003100 = address of utcb ( starting address of
>         array )
>         >         > c0004e28  = address of &utcb + 1 ( last address of
>         array )
>         >         >
>         >         > Thus as we can see address accessed was 0xc0004e28
>         which is
>         >         within the
>         >         > permissible range of ( 0xc0003000 + 0x2000 =
>         0xc0005000 )
>         >         >
>         >         > When I modified it as follows:-
>         >         > static char utcb[THREADS_TOTAL * ( 14 )]
>         >         L4_ALIGN(UTCB_SIZE);
>         >         >
>         >         > The logs were as follows:-
>         >         > code0: Mapping 0x3000 bytes as RX from 0x84000000
>         physical
>         >         to
>         >         > 0xc0000000 virtual for project0
>         >         > code0: Mapping 0x2000 bytes as RW from 0x84003000
>         physical
>         >         to
>         >         > 0xc0003000 virtual for project0
>         >         > In __l4_threadlib_init
>         >         > c0003100 = address of utcb ( starting address of
>         array )
>         >         > c0004f28  = address of &utcb + 1 ( last address of
>         array )
>         >         >
>         >         > Thus as we can see address accessed was 0xc0004f28
>         which is
>         >         within the
>         >         > permissible range of ( 0xc0003000 + 0x2000 =
>         0xc0005000 )
>         >         >
>         >         > But When I modified it as follows:-
>         >         > static char utcb[THREADS_TOTAL * ( 15 )]
>         >         L4_ALIGN(UTCB_SIZE);
>         >         > It caused kernel panic
>         >         >
>         >         > The logs were as follows:-
>         >         > code0: Mapping 0x3000 bytes as RX from 0x84000000
>         physical
>         >         to
>         >         > 0xc0000000 virtual for project0
>         >         > code0: Mapping 0x2000 bytes as RW from 0x84003000
>         physical
>         >         to
>         >         > 0xc0003000 virtual for project0
>         >         > fault_ipc_to_pager: Sending ipc from 1 to 1,
>         >         > faulty_address=0xc0005060, faulty pc=0xc00016a8
>         >         > tid=0x00000001
>         >         > Unhandled kernel data abort at address 0x00000008
>         >         > FAR:0x00000008
>         >         > PC:0xf000e380
>         >         > Unhandled kernel abort.
>         >         > Kernel panic.
>         >         > Halting system...
>         >         >
>         >         > Here, the array had an address range of 0xc0003100
>         till
>         >         0xc0005028
>         >         > ( 0xc0004f28 + 100 ) which lies beyond the
>         permissible range
>         >         > 0xc0003000 to 0xc0005000 ( 0xc0003000 + 0x2000 -
>         as seen
>         >         from kernel
>         >         > logs).
>         >         >
>         >
>         >         Ok you need to check 2 things here:
>         >
>         >         1. Check the elf file of the hello world container
>         and do a
>         >         readelf on
>         >         it to make sure it is having correct number of RX
>         and RW
>         >         pages. It
>         >         should not have any RWX section.
>         >
>         >         2. If 1. looks fine, then the problem is in
>         Codezero's reading
>         >         of elf
>         >         sections at load time. These manipulations are done
>         in some
>         >         python
>         >         script under codezero/config. Find this script and
>         add some
>         >         prints in it
>         >         so see if it is manipulating container's section
>         properly.
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         >         --
>         >         Thanks,
>         >         Amit Mahajan
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         
>         
>         --
>         Thanks,
>         Amit Mahajan
>         
> 

-- 
Thanks,
Amit Mahajan


_______________________________________________
codezero-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.l4dev.org/mailman/listinfo/codezero-devel_lists.l4dev.org

Reply via email to