All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>
Cc: "Jeremy Fitzhardinge" <jeremy@goop.org>,
	"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@elte.hu>, "Rafał Miłecki" <zajec5@gmail.com>,
	"Alan Jenkins" <alan-jenkins@tuffmail.co.uk>,
	"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] x86: check for and defend against BIOS memory corruption
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 10:03:57 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <48B82BFD.5030807@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0808290817190.21494@blonde.site>

Hugh Dickins wrote:
> 
> hpa introduced the 64k idea, and we've all been repeating it;
> but I've not heard the reasoning behind it.  Is it a fundamental
> addressing limitation within the BIOS memory model?  Or a case
> that Windows treats the bottom 64k as scratch, so BIOS testers
> won't notice if they corrupt it?
> 

I should point out that I have seen one particular bug quite a few times 
poking around with boot loaders: the BIOS accesses memory at an 
otherwise valid address, but with the segment base set to either zero or 
0x400 instead of whatever it should have been.

	-hpa

      parent reply	other threads:[~2008-08-29 17:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-08-28 19:52 [PATCH RFC] x86: check for and defend against BIOS memory corruption Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-08-29  1:49 ` Yinghai Lu
2008-08-29  3:28   ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-08-29  9:25     ` Alan Cox
2008-08-29 10:13       ` Rafał Miłecki
2008-08-29 10:06         ` Alan Cox
2008-08-29 10:24         ` Hugh Dickins
2008-08-29 11:54           ` Rafał Miłecki
2008-08-29 12:09             ` Alan Jenkins
2008-08-29 13:21               ` Hugh Dickins
2008-08-29 16:30                 ` Rafał Miłecki
2008-08-29 17:39                 ` Rafał Miłecki
2008-09-04 19:42                   ` Rafał Miłecki
2008-09-04 20:23                     ` Hugh Dickins
2008-09-04 23:04                       ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-09-06 18:09                         ` Ingo Molnar
2008-08-29 14:08           ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-08-29 14:18       ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-08-29 20:31     ` Kasper Sandberg
2008-08-30  1:15       ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-08-29  6:20 ` Rafał Miłecki
2008-08-29  6:45   ` Ingo Molnar
2008-08-29  7:21     ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-08-29  7:30       ` Ingo Molnar
2008-08-29  8:02         ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-08-29  7:22   ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-08-29  8:14 ` Hugh Dickins
2008-08-29 14:48   ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-08-29 17:20     ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-09-08 11:35     ` Hugh Dickins
2008-09-08 17:16       ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-09-08 19:14         ` Hugh Dickins
2008-09-08 19:45           ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-08-29 17:02   ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-08-29 17:03   ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=48B82BFD.5030807@zytor.com \
    --to=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=alan-jenkins@tuffmail.co.uk \
    --cc=hugh@veritas.com \
    --cc=jeremy@goop.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=zajec5@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.