From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.43) id 1EHlji-0001lj-6B for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 20 Sep 2005 13:16:54 -0400 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1EHljZ-0001gS-3e for grub-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 20 Sep 2005 13:16:45 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1EHljS-0001bB-3j for grub-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 20 Sep 2005 13:16:38 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EHljQ-0001Zm-Df for grub-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 20 Sep 2005 13:16:36 -0400 Received: from [212.85.152.101] (helo=kotoba.storever.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1EHlgj-0003cB-1I for grub-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 20 Sep 2005 13:13:49 -0400 Received: from ASSP-nospam (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by kotoba.storever.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 179AE3C000E61 for ; Tue, 20 Sep 2005 21:32:23 +0200 (CEST) Received: from 127.0.0.1 ([127.0.0.1] helo=ip6-localhost) by ASSP-nospam ; 20 Sep 05 19:32:22 -0000 From: "Yoshinori K. Okuji" Organization: enbug.org To: The development of GRUB 2 Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 19:13:45 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.7.2 References: <42FF3097.7030904@nic.fi> <200509192100.37584.okuji@enbug.org> <432F4599.3020108@nic.fi> In-Reply-To: <432F4599.3020108@nic.fi> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200509201913.45556.okuji@enbug.org> Subject: Re: vesafb terminal for testing. X-BeenThere: grub-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: The development of GRUB 2 List-Id: The development of GRUB 2 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 17:16:48 -0000 On Tuesday 20 September 2005 01:11 am, Vesa J=E4=E4skel=E4inen wrote: > Perhaps you mixed this with vbeinfo code itself? Because in > grub_vbe_probe (in video/i386/pc/vbe.c) there has been grub_memcpy to > copy this information from scratch to local static variable > (controller_info) and then if caller provided non NULL pointer, it would > also be copied to caller's variable. And as this information is now > copied in static variable controller_info it can be used and cached for > later usage. No. It copies only the *pointers* but not the data. > That is a bit odd I might say. Do you have any more details about this > problem? What exactly is wrong? Is there any way to reproduce this? I don't know. I hope he can comment on this. Okuji