Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Make sure SM violation IRQ is served #2

Open
jovanbulck opened this issue Jun 28, 2017 · 1 comment
Open

Make sure SM violation IRQ is served #2

jovanbulck opened this issue Jun 28, 2017 · 1 comment
Assignees
@jovanbulck
Labels
bug

Comments

@jovanbulck
Copy link
Member

SM violation IRQ (for debug purposes) doesn't always reliably fire. The signal should probably be buffered in the front-end for the remainder of the currently executing instruction.
@jovanbulck jovanbulck added the bug label Jun 28, 2017
@jovanbulck jovanbulck self-assigned this Jun 28, 2017
@jovanbulck
Copy link
Member Author

Update. Upon an exec_violation when jumping to a non-SM entry address, the violating instruction is still executed. The memory backbone component properly blocks any memory read/write operations, but instructions such as sancus_disable that do not touch memory still execute normally.

Solution. Block Sancus instructions in the execution unit upon sm_violation signal.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@jovanbulck jovanbulck

Labels
bug
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
1 participant
@jovanbulck