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.

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

Services do not unmap IOVECS #19

Open
brianq-ti opened this issue Dec 5, 2024 · 6 comments
Open

Services do not unmap IOVECS #19

brianq-ti opened this issue Dec 5, 2024 · 6 comments
Assignees
Labels
bug Something isn't working release/2.1.x Target branch is 2.1.x

Comments

@brianq-ti
Copy link
Contributor

If existing Crypto and Attestation services are used as connection-based services with MM_IOVECS, input vecs are not unmapped after usage which results in panic upon the next call processing.

@adeaarm adeaarm self-assigned this Dec 5, 2024
@adeaarm
Copy link
Contributor

adeaarm commented Dec 5, 2024

Thanks for raising this on the mailing list. The original design for the Crypto and Attestation service was for them to be stateless services, but I appreciate that different integrations might want to interface with the service in a stateful manner, and there should be nothing in the service itself that should prevent this. So I will cherry pick the patches that fix this issue on mainline, once they have been merged.

@nicola-mazzucato-arm
Copy link
Contributor

Proposed fix: https://review.trustedfirmware.org/q/topic:%22mm-invec-unmap-crypto-att%22
From the email thread within the mailing list, @brianq-ti confirmed that the set provides a fix for this issue.

Thanks

@nicola-mazzucato-arm
Copy link
Contributor

nicola-mazzucato-arm commented Dec 6, 2024

There's an outstanding outcome w.r.t. to automatic unmapping that should be carried out by the framework, as stated in the FF-M-v1.1 spec, section 5.2.4:
The framework unmaps an input or output vector either in response to an unmapping call from the RoT Service, or automatically when message processing is completed.
This second part of the statement is not implemented and shall be tracked in #20

@nicola-mazzucato-arm
Copy link
Contributor

@adeaarm adeaarm added bug Something isn't working release/2.1.x Target branch is 2.1.x labels Dec 29, 2024
@nicola-mazzucato-arm
Copy link
Contributor

@brianq-ti
Copy link
Contributor Author

brianq-ti commented Jan 6, 2025 via email

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working release/2.1.x Target branch is 2.1.x
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants