RE: [uClinux-dev] Is supervisor/user mode is necessary for uCLinu x ?

From: Zhang Hong-W17904 (H.Zhang@motorola.com)
Date: Tue Jan 30 2001 - 20:46:36 EST


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Arlet Ottens [mailto:arlet@ladybug.xs4all.nl]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 7:36 PM
> To: uclinux-dev@uClinux.org
> Subject: Re: [uClinux-dev] Is supervisor/user mode is necessary for
> uCLinux ?
> 
> 
> Mahadev K Cholachagudda wrote:
> 
> > I have some experience with m68k-coldfire 5206e code. The 
> ColdFire do have
> > superuser/user mode.
> > 
> > But the Linux should provide the protections for the kernel. If say
> > application programmer writes an application which directly 
> update the
> > status of say interrupts, then the whole mechanism of 
> protection is lost.
> 
> This is going to be a problem, since uClinux doesn't use an 
> MMU (even on
> ports that have user/supervisor mode), and there's no memory 
> protection.
> Even if the user mode process can't change the interrupt 
> status directly, it
> could still overwrite kernel data structures, and crash your system.
> 
> Depending on your platform, it may be feasible to implement some form
> of memory protection in the uClinux kernel. For instance, if your CPU
> has support for user and supervisor memory spaces, you could protect
> the kernel from userspace interference. Although you may not 
> be able to
> protect userspace applications from each other.
> 
> Note that the kernel currently doesn't offer support for this kind
> of memory protection, so you need to add it yourself.
> 
So, what about the uClinux 2.4.X on these issues?

> -- 
> Arlet Ottens / Talent Store / Seattle Torn / Art Teen Lost
> Very funny, Scotty ... now beam down my clothes.
> This message resent by the uclinux-dev@uclinux.org list 
> server http://www.uClinux.org/
> 
This message resent by the uclinux-dev@uclinux.org list server http://www.uClinux.org/


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Sep 19 2002 - 13:19:28 EDT