linux-kernel - Re: [BUG] dmi_scan_machine uses uninitialized address on x86 / EFI

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 24 Feb 2009 13:38:42 -0800
From:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
CC:	Thomas Jourdan <tjourdan@...erfaceconcept.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>,
	Peter Jones <pjones@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [BUG] dmi_scan_machine uses uninitialized address on x86 / EFI

H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Thomas Jourdan wrote:
>> On x86/EFI platforms, if efi_enabled is true, the dmi_scan_machine function
>> fails, even if valid DMI table is present. In the setup_arch function,
>> efi_init is called after dmi_scan_machine. But this is efi_init which will
>> initialize the smbios address, needed by dmi_scan_machine.
>>
>> This leads to dmi_scan_machine ioremapping physical address 0, instead of
>> the address provided by the EFI system table. The following patch fixes the
>> problem.
>>
> 
> Hi Thomas,
> 
> What is the concrete manifestation of the bug (i.e. how critical is it?)
>  We are late in the 2.6.29-rc cycle, and this patch seems to have some
> risk associated with it.
> 
> Huang, Peter, Yinghai: any opinions?
> 
should be ok for 2.6.29

YH
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/