04.11.2015 00:41, Nico Huber пишет:
Hi Andrei,
your patch looks good generally, but the check is off by one. It's
Yes, but it should not matter in real life. Last 4 bytes are pointer, so
header cannot start after 0xffdc anyway. I'll change it.
obvious, we want to have sane checking the
Hi Andrei,
your patch looks good generally, but the check is off by one. It's
obvious, we want to have sane checking there. Reading from a random
address can cause trouble and 0x is not the only offending
address.
On x86, the cbfs is mapped right below the 4GiB line. Current machines
don'
On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 10:28 AM, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko
wrote:
> The code itself looks good but I'd like more details. Reading 0x
> shouldn't cause reboot. Why does it?
It's probably implementation defined reading a multi-byte object from
4GiB-1. Does it wrap? Blow up the machine?
Le 3 nov. 2015 6:46 PM, "Aaron Durbin" a écrit :
>
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 10:28 AM, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko
> wrote:
> > The code itself looks good but I'd like more details. Reading 0x
> > shouldn't cause reboot. Why does it?
>
> It's probably implementation defined reading a mul
Thanks Andrei,
Vladimir, what do you think?
Martin
On Sun, Nov 1, 2015 at 7:53 AM, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
> I was debugging problem reported by user on Dell Dimension 8300 - it
> rebooted when doing "ls -l". It turned out, the problem was triggered by
> loading cbfs which probed for header. Sy
